Don't Forecast The Election

Last week, and before I left for South Dakota for a vacation and escape from the election nonsense, an email from a neighbor showed-up asking for me to make sense of an October Market Recap he had received from his financial guy.  This was a lay-up for me and I notified my pal that I would be happy to oblige - after I had returned from my ringneck-chasing getaway.  

I emailed him last evening as my last task before going to bed bone-tired.  What follows is a distillation of what I shared:

Neighbor...

What you received from Mr. So And So, CFP® is a rather detailed recap of the investment market's out-performance for YTD 2024.  It is nicely summarized and annotated with supporting details.

Contrary to some of the political rhetoric we've been subjected-to in the run-up to the election is the fact that the US economy is on a tear in most all of the sectors that matter.  Inflation has returned to normal and I paid $2.77 last week at the Brussels BP for a tank of unleaded regular.  You needn't look any further beyond the same observations and additional stats your guy provided.  None of that data is imaginary and the markets reflect it.  You, myself and others similarly situated in the 'ownership class' (retired owners of stocks, bonds and real estate with little if any debt) benefit greatly from an economic cycle such as this.  Emancipated from raising and educating our children our focus turns-back to children, grandchildren and great-grandchildren - but without the demands of a day job.

Getting back to the markets, and pointing out something your financial guy did not address, is an interesting implication for tomorrow's election.  When the S&P 500 Index rises in the final three months before the election the incumbent party typically remains in office.  Conversely, a drop in the index has historically indicated that the opposition will claim victory.

In 12 out of the 15 presidential elections since 1926 the ruling party has benefited from a strong stock market performance in the three months leading up to the election and went on to win.  That is an 83% streak.  

While a streak such as this would signal a Harris win; a streak is nothing more than a streak.  Streaks can be broken and I happen to believe that this election is too close to call.  Even the betting markets are evenly divided tonite.

If I was still in the day job, and was communicating with my clients, I would be telling them something on this order:  'It is important to be mindful that the outcome of the election (whether it suits your personal politics or not) is not a reason to react emotionally.  That invites investment mistakes.  If you don't like the outcome of this election, there is a high probability you will be pleased with the mid-term elections in 2026.  This is because the party that loses the race for the presidency this year will likely win the House in two years putting a halt to the new President's legislative agenda.  That's just the way things happen to play-out most of the time. '

I went on the explain that polling suggests that neither party will hold a super-majority.  In other words there will be divided government much as the Founders intended.  This will require compromise.

So, as we watch the returns tonite we should remain mindful that our Constitution has survived 235 years.  This will not be the last election and if the people dislike the policies they get; they'll get around to changing them eventually.   Blah, blah, blah.

I closed with an admonition on a subject (I have blogged about many times) - that being the federal debt and deficit.  The budgets under both Trump and Biden have manifested unprecedented deficits.  Given the reality of record high employment and our country not being at war this aberration absolutely requires attention in the years ahead.

What I did not share is my skepticism over either candidate rising to this task.  So time will tell.

All I gotta say is it has been a terrific game to watch for the last 16 weeks.  Sudden Death Overtime?  Who knows?

Sometimes elections, investment markets and football, are a roll of the dice.

See you all on the flip side....

Skin In The Game

So here we are; several months since Joe Biden abdicated the throne and Vice President Harris and Governor Walz have turned the election campaign on it's head.  If you watch the polls the democrats have turned the tables in several battle ground states and possibly reversed the trend in others and nationally.  What I would give to be a fly on the wall in Trump or Harris campaign HQ.  But let's not get over our skis -  is this a sugar high, a honeymoon or an implosion?  No way to know for sure.  Besides,  polls have been sketchy the last couple-three national elections; and I happen to believe that the outcome remains a tossup.  So I want to speak to the subject of gambling, or wagering.  

I've touched-upon this subject from time to time; sometimes from the POV of a financial guy and sometimes outright humor.  Back in the first week of June I took a stab at a topic I had been reading-up on and listening about; a subject that I thought was maybe gonna gain some traction - that of actually wagering on US Elections.  With every passing week it seems to be gaining traction now that we have a real competitive campaign.

For some time government regulators with oversight on Wall Street have been trying to clamp down on growing election wagering in the US.  With a completely reconfigured presidential race a tsunami of trading on this fall's election has taken-off.  At the time of the publication of this post, traders (gamblers) favor Harris over Trump.

PredictIt, formerly a largely academic pursuit and now off-shored was witness in July to its busiest wagering volume reaching roughly 120 million contracts - a spike of more than 500% over June.  $1.1 billion has been bet on crypto-based Polymarket since June, according to Dune Analytics, and 88% of that has been political bets on the U.S. election.

Consequently, this has the increased attention of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) who has proposed rule-making that would expressly outlaw wagering of this sort with scattered support in the US Senate.

As a recovering financial guy with almost forty years in the wealth management biz I've seen more than my share of feeding frenzies in the equity, fixed-income, commodities, futures and other derivatives markets; and market bubbles, more often-than not, end badly.  After-which seasoned veterans, put on their boots, roll-up their sleeves, slip-on their autopsy gloves and sift thru the bloody detritus of mostly novice online traders who got themselves slaughtered chasing phantom profits.

Markets always correct.

Nevertheless, none of this is outlawed or banned.  Financial markets are regulated and there is ample opportunity for the unguided to squander their savings on dreams, brass rings or Pumpkins and Mice.  The CFTC needn't ban wagering on election outcomes as much as they might regulate them with reasonable guardrails just like any other market. 

The UK has grappled with their own tempest in a teapot with the revelation that some conservative members of parliament got caught placing bets on the timing of their recent snap election.  Did it impact the July 4th outcome?  Who knows?  Considering the level of outrage when this got found-out it's entirely possible.  Should politicians be barred from betting on elections?  Or allowed to do so at their own political peril?  

A week and a half ago, a federal judge cleared the way for Americans to place bets on the outcome of congressional elections via a prediction-market startup.  A ruling that may potentially expand further legalized wagers on elections in this country.

Wagering requires bettors to put their money where their mouth is.  Betting markets may be useful when politics are chaotic.  With skin in the game facts displace misinformation.  

We got a game-on folks....