Sorry!! The article you are trying to read is not available now.
Thank you very much;
you're only a step away from
downloading your reports.

Jeff Saut: Why a Dow Theory Sell Signal Never Happened

By

Understanding the only conditions that make one possible.

PrintPRINT

Editor's Note: The following article was written by Raymond James Chief Investment Strategist, Jeff Saut. It has been reproduced with permission for the benefit of the Minyanville community.

Last Monday, my email inbox was slammed with questions about Dow Theory. Those questions were kindled by some alleged pundit who appeared on CNBC and declared that a Dow Theory "sell signal" had been rendered. While it's true that there are numerous practitioners of Dow Theory, over the years I've learned that many of them don't interpret the theory the way I was taught.

Charles Dow began publishing the Wall Street Journal in 1889. Considered a very astute stock market observer, Dow wrote a number of editorials wherein the concept of Dow Theory originated. Those theories were expanded on by S.A. Nelson, in collaboration with Charles Dow, in a series of Wall Street Journal editorials titled, "The ABCs of Stock Speculation."

At the end of those quips resided a footnote that read "Dow Theory." Shortly after Dow's death, William P. Hamilton became editor of the Wall Street Journal and wrote hundreds of similar editorials, leading to his epic book The Stock Market Barometer. It was Hamilton who first wrote about the "confirmation principal" between The D-J Industrials (DJIA) and The D-J Transports (DJTA), which to me, is the bedrock of Dow Theory.

Following Hamilton's death in 1930, his student, Robert Rhea, began publishing a market letter titled "Dow Theory Comment." Rhea "called" the bottom of the stock market in July of 1932, as well as the subsequent downturn of 1937. Rhea died in 1939, leaving Dow Theory fallow until the 1940s when the great Dow Theorist George Schaefer resurrected it. To me, these folks were the "expanders" of Charles Dow's original stock market observations. And to my knowledge, the only market maven of today that really understands and adheres to the brilliant work of those Dow Theorist icons is Richard Russell of Dow Theory Letters fame.

While I could certainly respond as to why there was NO "sell signal" last Monday, Dick Russell explained the situation in his always-excellent letter dated October 26, 2009 (the text in parentheses are my inserts). To wit:

The secret of the direction of the great primary trend of the market lies in the secondary reaction and what happens AFTER a secondary reaction. A secondary reaction usually takes three weeks to three months in duration while correcting one-third to two-thirds of the previous move. Since the March low, we have yet to experience a true secondary reaction. And I'm wondering whether we could be on the edge of a secondary reaction now. Following a secondary (reaction), if BOTH Averages (Industrials and Transports) rise to new highs, the primary trend is taken to be bullish. Following the lows of a secondary reaction, there will be a rally. If (that) rally fails to take both Averages to new highs, and the Averages then turn down and break to new (reaction) lows, the primary trend is taken to be as bearish. Secondary reactions often start with one of the Averages sinking while the other Average continues to the upside.


Well said, Dick Russell. I, therefore, told my callers: "How can you have a sell-signal when we haven't even experienced a downside secondary reaction since the March lows?" Indeed, you need a downside reaction, which "sets" the reaction lows, followed by a rally. If that rally fails to make a new reaction high, and subsequently breaks below the aforementioned reaction lows, then (and only then) will we have a Dow Theory "sell signal," at least as I understand Dow Theory.

< Previous
No positions in stocks mentioned.
The information on this website solely reflects the analysis of or opinion about the performance of securities and financial markets by the writers whose articles appear on the site. The views expressed by the writers are not necessarily the views of Minyanville Media, Inc. or members of its management. Nothing contained on the website is intended to constitute a recommendation or advice addressed to an individual investor or category of investors to purchase, sell or hold any security, or to take any action with respect to the prospective movement of the securities markets or to solicit the purchase or sale of any security. Any investment decisions must be made by the reader either individually or in consultation with his or her investment professional. Minyanville writers and staff may trade or hold positions in securities that are discussed in articles appearing on the website. Writers of articles are required to disclose whether they have a position in any stock or fund discussed in an article, but are not permitted to disclose the size or direction of the position. Nothing on this website is intended to solicit business of any kind for a writer's business or fund. Minyanville management and staff as well as contributing writers will not respond to emails or other communications requesting investment advice.

Copyright 2011 Minyanville Media, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
PrintPRINT
 
Featured Videos

WHAT'S POPULAR IN THE VILLE