This banking scandal is awful… even for Wells Fargo

I guess none of this should surprise me anymore.

Our old friends at Wells Fargo are involved in yet another banking scandal. And this one is really bad… people wrongfully lost their homes and ended up on the street.

But before I get into the details of this particularly atrocious mishap, let’s have a quick recap of Wells’ “greatest hits.”

Back in April, Wells was hit with a $1 billion fine for selling 570,000 clients auto insurance they didn’t need and also charging mortgage borrowers erroneous fees.

By the bank’s own estimates, as many as 20,000 of those clients may have had their cars repossessed as a result of their inability to pay for the insurance Wells Fargo illegally stuck them with.

On the topic of repossessing vehicles, last November, the bank came under fire for illegally repossessing vehicles owned by members of the military.

Then in October, Wells Fargo got grilled by federal regulators after recommending investment products that were “highly likely to lose value.” The bank also pushed tons of customers into higher-fee retirement accounts that were bad for customers but more lucrative for the bank.

That same month, the bank fessed up to “erroneously” charging late fees to more than 100,000 borrowers, even though the delays were the bank’s fault.

In 2016, employees at some of Wells Fargo’s California branches got busted for selling sensitive customer info, like Social Security numbers, to identity thieves.

And in late 2016 and throughout 2017, Wells Fargo had its notorious “fake account” scandal, where its employees opened extra accounts for millions of customers so they could hit their sales goals and earn a bonus.

And then there’s the time Wells Fargo froze my account for sending a simple wire transfer.

I don’t know what else to say about Wells Fargo (and basically every other big bank) anymore… other than I’m outraged with their behavior.

Consider Wells Fargo’s latest scandal…

This week, the bank said a “computer glitch” caused 545 of its customers to lose their homes.

The “glitch,” according to papers the bank filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, caused the bank to incorrectly deny 870 loan modifications (around 60% of which went into foreclosure).

Basically, people asked the bank to change their mortgage to make it more affordable, and requests that should have been approved weren’t… with the process taking months before the borrower got the final “no.”

Seriously?

“Oh… sorry about that. Sorry you lost your house, your family and your job. Our bad… computer glitch, you know how it goes. Real sorry.”

CBS interviewed one of the victims, a guy named Jose Aguilar.

Jose fell behind on his payments after trying to fix a black mold problem in his home. He asked Wells to change the mortgage to lower his payments. While waiting for Wells to process his request, he fell further behind until the house ultimately went into foreclosure.

He and his wife split up. He had to move into a friend’s basement with his son.

Then, three years later, he got a letter from Wells Fargo saying, wait for it:

“Dear Jose Aguilar, we made a mistake… we’re sorry.”

I’m sure Jose was relieved Wells Fargo was sorry after literally ruining his life (they did give him a $25,000 check… which obviously doesn’t come close to making up for the mistake).

Once again I’ll ask… how does anyone actually do business with Wells Fargo anymore? These people are outright criminals (if you or I committed any of the acts above, we’d be behind bars).

And it’s not just Wells Fargo. Pretty much every major bank in the world has been found guilty at some point of some type of fraud.

But people still trust these criminals with their money.

The public has been institutionalized to believe you have to hold your money with a big bank.

But in reality, you have so many other choices.

Instead of holding money in a bank account, you can earn 100x more interest buying short-term Treasury Bills. You can hold physical cash or gold.

There are options to crowdfund loans of every type.

You also don’t have to trust these banks with your retirement (in fact, I hope you don’t). They limit your investment options and saddle you with erroneous, high fees for nothing.

With a little effort, you can take control of your retirement and take your money out of the hands of the major financial institutions.

If you qualify, you can open a solo 401(k) – it’s a cheap and flexible structure that allows you contribute tens of thousands of dollars each year and invest in all kinds of assets (even real estate and private equity).

You can also borrow money from your retirement account under certain circumstances.

Self-directed IRAs are also a great option (though they’re a bit costlier and less flexible).

It’s important to understand, as always, you have options… you just have to do a little more work in order to stop the abuse from Wells Fargo and the like.

Source

from Sovereign Man https://ift.tt/2REiCoO
via IFTTT

Trump Says Approval Rating Would Be 50% Higher Without Mueller’s ‘Presidential Harassment’

As he does most mornings now, President Trump criticized Special Counsel Robert Mueller and his Russia collusion probe ‘witch hut’ in a tweet Thursday morning. Implying that Mueller has continued his probe for purely political reasons, Trump claimed that his approval rating would be 50% higher without Mueller (this despite the fact polls have shown that almost nobody is paying attention to Mueller any more).

Trump accused Mueller of “Presidential Harassment”, and suggested his approval rating would be 75%, instead of 50%, if Mueller’s Russia probe wasn’t distracting from the Trump administration’s many accomplishments (including tax cuts, regulatory rollbacks and higher military spending).

“Without the phony Russia Witch Hunt, and with all that we have accomplished in the last almost two years (Tax & Regulation Cuts, Judge’s, Military, Vets, etc.) my approval rating would be at 75% rather than the 50% just reported by Rasmussen. It’s called Presidential Harassment!”

Trump stepped up his attacks on Mueller in the days before Trump’s former attorney Michael Cohen pleaded guilty to charges of lying to Congress in exchange for agreeing to cooperate in Mueller’s probe.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2E1MaJ0 Tyler Durden

Why Buy Gold Now? Because Of The “I Don’t Knows”…

Authored by Simon Black via SovereignMan.com,

From 2000 through 2012, the price of gold increased every year, rising from around $280 an ounce to nearly $1,700. It was an unprecedented run.

Then, in 2013, gold took a nose dive, losing over 27% of its value.

It was widely reported that the Swiss National Bank, the former bastion of monetary conservatism, lost $10 billion that year just on its gold holdings.

As you probably know, central banks hold a portion of their reserves in gold. The practice goes back to when central banks actually had to have gold on hand to trade in and out of paper money (or even trade for goods and services).

And central banks still hold reserves in gold today, even though they don’t need it to transact like they used to.

So that begs the question, did the Swiss National Bank actually lose $10 billion? It still had every ounce of gold in its vaults. And gold, after all, ismoney.

Plus, the SNB wasn’t holding gold to speculate…

Today, central banks hold gold as a hedge against fiat money. These are the guys with their fingers on the printing press… so they know exactly the effect they have on money.

And right now, banks are buying up gold hand over fist. Central banks currently hold 20% of all the gold ever mined—33,000 metric tons.

And JPMorgan Chase says they’ll buy another 650 tons this year and next.

Why?

Gold is for the I don’t knows.

And right now, there are a LOT of I don’t knows.

Markets have been going crazy over the past few months.

After a record bull run for stocks, we are now seeing massive volatility with the Dow regularly jumping 500+ points in a single day. Just yesterday, the Dow fell a whopping 800 points.

And there’s plenty of reasons for market to be worried today. For one, we’re 10 years in to a raging bull market… and it’ getting long in the tooth.

Plus, the Fed is raising interest rates. And when the price of money gets more expensive, people get a little tighter with it. That means it’s tougher for businesses and individuals to borrow. All things equal, higher rates mean lower prices.

Before last week, Fed Chairman Powell said rates were “well below” where they should be. And the markets reacted negatively.

Then, last week, after seeing how fragile markets were, Powell said rates are “just below” where they should be.

Just that one word difference sent markets soaring. But the joy was short lived.

There’s also the trade war with China, intensified by the Trump administration tariffs.

And then at the summit in Buenos Aries last week, China and the USA suddenly came to an agreement. They will halt the tariffs for 90 days for a three-month truce in the trade war. That sent markets soaring.

Then people read some tweet from Trump and worried the tariffs might be back on… markets dumped.

If there is one thing markets hate, it is uncertainty. And there’s plenty of uncertainty to go around today.

And while we’re seeing these late-cycle swings in the market, gold is as steady as ever…

While the DOW dips and climbs by hundreds of points, gold is still hanging out just below $1,250 an ounce. And it really hasn’t made any major moves up or down since 2013.

Yet today, an ounce of gold has about the same purchasing power as it had 1,100 years ago… talk about steady.

So while every other asset is still at or near all time highs, gold is relatively cheap.

Gold has held its ground during all this market volatility.

That is exactly how you want insurance to act. It holds steady in the face of craziness, even selling for a discount when everything else is as expensive as it ever has been.

It makes more sense to buy something cheap, that no one is excited about, while people clamber for exciting but massively overvalued stocks like Tesla and Netflix.

Since 2008 this massive monetary experiment of quantitative easing has sent stocks and assets to dizzying, unsustainable highs.

We think this experiment is coming to an end. The day of reckoning is close.

Stocks are up and down, trade wars are on and off, interest rates could keep soaring, or level off…

What do you do for the I don’t knows?

You get some cheap gold while you still can.

And by the way, while gold is on sale, silver is an even better deal.

In ancient times, the price ratio between gold and silver was about 15:1, meaning an ounce of gold was worth about 15 ounces of silver.

But over the past decades, this ratio has been closer to 50:1—an ounce of gold sold for 50 times what an ounce of silver sold for.

Today, that ratio is about 85:1.

To be fair, this could mean gold is overvalued, not that silver in undervalued.

But when gold has the same purchasing power as a millennium ago… when it has stayed steady the past seven years and grew every year of the decade before that…

It’s a safe bet that gold goes up, and silver does too, possibly even more than gold.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2KYByw0 Tyler Durden

US Factory Orders Tumble Most In 15 Months

But, but, but…. ISM Manufacturing jumped?!!

US Factory orders tumbled in October – dropping 2.1% MoM (worse than expected), the biggest drop since July 2017…

Worse still, September’s data was downwardly revised to just +0.2%.

Furthermore the final durable goods orders data dropped 4.3% MoM (much worse than the 2.4% drop expected)…

All of which is sending warnings about the US economy…

“Capex is the No. 1 story,” said David Woo, head of global rates and foreign exchange strategy at Bank of America Corp. “There are hundreds of data points coming out every month but that’s the one that I watch,” and bond traders should too.

Is this the same US economy that has “never been better”? That The Fed was so exuberant about just a month ago?

 

via RSS https://ift.tt/2QiqXlE Tyler Durden

US Services Sector Dips On Weak Employment (Or Surges Back Near Record Highs)

Following Manufacturing PMI’s drop, US Services PMI dipped modestly (though beat expectations). However, under the covers is a big problem as ’employment’ plunged to its lowest reading since June 2017

Additionally, from Markit, is the fact that November saw the weakest rise in composite new orders in 13 months.

And then there is ISM’s data – which for Manufacturing was 180 degrees from Markit’s.

ISM Manufacturing upticked in November, and so did ISM Services!

So there you have it America – Markit says Manufacturing and Services dropped, ISM says they rebounded to near-record highs

WTF!!

The non-manufacturing index rose to 60.7, an Institute for Supply Management survey showed Thursday. That compared with estimates for a decline to 59. The advance was led by business activity and new orders, while a gauge of inventories rose for a third month.

So ISM sees new orders rising but Markit sees it plunge?

However, ISM’s report also indicated that continuing trade tensions and easing global growth are affecting service providers, a trend weighing on investors’ perceptions of the economic outlook. Export orders decelerated by the most since May while a measure of imports rose the most since March.

Commenting on the PMI data, Chris Williamson, Chief Business Economist at IHS Markit said:

“… and continuing to add jobs in impressive numbers. Although some cooling in the rate of job creation was seen in November, the surveys are still pointing to payrolls growing at monthly rate of around 185,000.

“The surveys therefore add to evidence that the domestic economy remains in good health, generating balanced growth across both manufacturing and services and increasingly outperforming other major economies.

“However, while new business growth remained encouragingly resilient, it has eased to the lowest in over a year as demand showed some signs of softening, linked partly to growing concerns over trade wars, slower global demand growth, rising political uncertainty and tighter financial conditions. Such concerns have also dampened business expectations about the year ahead, adding to signs that growth may have peaked, though any slowing in growth looks likely to be only modest.”

And finally, Williamson notes that

“The PMI surveys paint a picture of an economy growing at a solid annual rate of 2.5% so far in the fourth quarter…”

Take your pick America!

via RSS https://ift.tt/2EhlIMI Tyler Durden

“He’s Barack Obama, But White” – The Manufacturing Of Beto O’Rourke

Authored by Mike Krieger via Liberty Blitzkrieg blog,

Although I haven’t paid close attention to Beto O’Rourke, he’s been on my radar for a couple of years after noticing certain media outlets had anointed him a “rising Democratic star.” One of my principal rules of political analysis is whenever you hear mass media proclaim an obscure politician a “rising star,” it typically means that individual has been deemed acceptable by the entrenched oligarchy and is being groomed as a promising puppet.

In fact, the first time O’Rourke came into my news orbit it felt like I was being sold a box of cereal by Madison Avenue. After reading an illuminating article by Ziad Jilliani earlier today in Current Affairs, it appears my intuition was correct.

The first paragraph tells you a lot about what the sorts of people who like Beto, like about him.

Beto O’Rourke—a three-term Congressman from El Paso, Texas who recently failed to unseat Texas Republican Senator Ted Cruz—is suddenly one of the hottest names in Democratic Party politics. The once-obscure representative is on the lips of many as a presidential contender. “All the guy would have to do is send out an email to his fundraising base…and he raises $30 million,” one anonymous Democratic bundler told Politico. “That has totally changed the landscape for tier 1 guys, because now Bernie and Warren, now they have competition. It completely changes the game if Beto runs. And he should run…He’s Barack Obama, but white.”

Notice how the emphasis on why he’s considered attractive centers around an ability to quickly grab a lot of money and his superficial attributes. Precisely what you’d expect from a Democratic bundler, but it’s still hilarious how these hacks think a “white Obama” is what this country’s hungering for.

From there, I learned several things about Beto. First, he supported Obama on the TPP trade deal, a corporate giveaway even Hillary Clinton had to back away from during her presidential campaign because it was so unpopular. Second,  Clinton dead-enders and Wall Street Democrats appear particularly enthused about his political prospects. For instance:

“He’s game changing,” Robert Wolf, a former top executive at the UBS investment bank and Democratic mega-donor known to raise Wall Street cash for candidates, told Politico…

“We are big Beto fans,” the Clintonite think tank Third Way’s Matt Bennett told NBC during his Senate run. “He’s not with us on every single thing, but his main campaign themes have been very close to what we think a national narrative should be. 

Can you imagine these types ever talking that way about Sanders or Trump? Of course not, which tells you Beto’s just a smooth-talking neoliberal technocrat in training. A guy who will always defer to corporate power and who actually reminds me more of France’s Emmanuel Macron than Barack Obama. Macron was another bizarre elitist creation marketed as a savior from the populist hordes on the French political right and left.

I learned a few other things as well. For starters, Beto’s married to the daughter of a billionaire real estate developer. He also doesn’t have much of a backbone. After getting torched by donors for criticizing Israel, he reversed course and has never dared take such a politically tenuous position again.

O’Rourke, on the other hand, was born into a wealthy Texas political family, attended Columbia University, and has a business background in Internet start-ups. (O’Rourke’s criminal charges in his 20s may also be relevant: The son of a judge and county commissioner, he was not prosecuted for an incident in which allegedlyfled the scene of a drunken crash. There is no evidence that his father actually intervened, but the justice system has a tendency to give wealthy white Ivy Leaguers second chances that others do not get.) He is married to the daughter of billionaire real estate developer William D. Sanders (“the richest man in El Paso”)—whose development plan in downtown El Paso O’Rourke vigorously championed, against the protests of many local residents. During his run for Senate, his disclosures showed that O’Rourke’s assets are somewhere in the range of $3.5 to $16 million, thanks to rental and commercial real estate as well as his wife’s trust fund.

So what’s going on here? From my seat, I think corporate/Wall Street Democrats are becoming increasingly concerned that Bernie Sanders is going to run again (I think he will), and they’re terrified by his continued widespread popularity nationally. I think a narrative is being carefully crafted, and a candidate meticulously manufactured, to create a perception of a young, progressive and charismatic alternative to the populist and cantankerous Sanders. While this sounds comforting, the reality is Beto appears to be your typical neoliberal Macron type of guy, or if you care to be generous, a “white Obama.”

Considering my view that 2020 will be just as populist a political environment as 2016 (if not more so), an empty suit candidate like O’Rourke just won’t cut it. In fact, of all the people being tossed around as potential 2020 candidates on the Democratic side, I think Sanders is by far the one with the best chance to beat Trump.

*  *  *

If you liked this article and enjoy my work, consider becoming a monthly Patron, or visit our Support Page to show your appreciation for independent content creators.

via RSS https://ift.tt/2Um47aT Tyler Durden

Chinese Gov’t May Have Left “Fingerprints” They Were Behind Massive Marriott Hack

The Chinese government is apparently sophisticated enough to hack into Marriott’s reservation system, yet – just like the Russian “hack” of the DNC – reportedly left behind evidence of “hacking tools, techniques and procedures” pointing to Beijing as the culprit, according to Reutersciting three anonymous sources with knowledge of a private internal investigation. 

The hack which began four years ago exposed the records of up to 500 million customers in the Starwood hotels reservation system – now owned by Marriott, and “suggests that Chinese hackers may have been behind a campaign designed to collect information for use in Beijing’s espionage efforts and not for financial gain.” 

Along with the news that Huawei’s CFO was arrested at the behest of the US, the timing of this announcement certainly puts a damper on whatever headway Trump and his administration have been making on trade with Beijing. In fact, as Reuters conveniently points out: 

If investigators confirm that China was behind the attack, that could complicate already tense relations between Washington and Beijing, amid an ongoing tariff dispute and U.S. accusations of Chinese espionage and the theft of trade secrets. –Reuters

Wait, it could have been anybody?

Reuters notes in the fourth paragraph that while China is the prime suspect in the case, “the sources cautioned it was possible somebody else was behind the hack” since “other parties had access to the same hacking tools, some of which have previously been posted online.” 

Further complicating matters is the fact that “investigators suspect multiple hacking groups may have simultaneously been inside Starwood’s computer networks since 2014,” according to one of the sources. 

In short, Reuters’ headline reads: “Clues in Marriott hack implicate China” while their article then admits it literally could have been anyone

We also know from the WikiLeaks “Vault 7” release of CIA hacking tools that the US government, among others, has the ability to misdirect attribution to foreign actors by leaving behind the “fingerprints” of the groups that the attack techniques were stolen from. 

After Marriott disclosed the new development on Friday, US and UK regulators hopped into action, launching probes into the case. 

Compromised customer data included names, passport numbers, addresses, phone numbers, birth dates and email addresses. A small percentage of accounts included scrambled payment card data, said Kim.

The hack began in 2014, shortly after an attack on the U.S. government’s Office of Personnel Management (OPM) compromised sensitive data on tens of millions of employees, including application forms for security clearances.

White House National Security advisor John Bolton recently told reporters he believed Beijing was behind the OPM hack, a claim first made by the United States in 2015.  –Reuters

So for those still following, John Bolton thinks Beijing hacked the US Government’s Office of Personnel Management – ergo, per Reuters, China hacked Marriott too. Then again, the Marriott case appeared similar to previous hacks conducted by the Chinese government, according to Robert Anderson – former senior FBI Assistant Director of counterintelligence under Mueller.

“Think of the depth of knowledge they could now have about travel habits or who happened to be in a certain city at the same time as another person,” said Anderson – now a principal with the Chertoff Group – founded by Michael Chertoff who co-wrote the PATRIOT act and served as former US Secretary of Homeland Security. “It fits with how the Chinese intelligence services think about things. It’s all very long range,” Anderson added. 

Michael Sussmann, a former senior Department of Justice official for its computer crimes section, said that the long duration of the campaign was an indicator that the hackers were seeking data for intelligence and not information to use in cyber crime schemes. –Reuters

“One clue pointing to a government attacker is the amount of time the intruders were working quietly inside the network,” said Sussman. who added “Patience is a virtue for spies, but not for criminals trying to steal credit card numbers.”

via RSS https://ift.tt/2QBGCf6 Tyler Durden

Trader Who Correctly Called Tuesday’s Crash Lays Out What Happens Next

Having correctly predicted the “breaking point” trigger for the S&P’s Tuesday plunge – which incidentally coincided with the 200DMA – at which CTAs would collectively puke, Nomura’s head cross-asset quant Charlie McEllgiott, is back with a note slamming his critics (apparently those who failed to be right decided to deflect their lack of added value by criticizing the Nomura strategist), while also mapping out what’s next for the market should the current risk waterfall continue.

First, we go right to McElligott’s well-deserved victory lap, in which he steamrolls his “quant” critics, and writes that he received a number of pass-along notes yesterday from around the Street “which questioned the validity accuracy of our CTA model ‘deleveraging’ call from Tuesday, which again “nailed” the S&P futures level where the market would come under significant notional selling pressure (as well as Russell and Nasdaq “trigger” levels as well).”

What he is saying is simple: Wall Street is perplexed by how he could get it so right, and all the other “experts” did not, and is accusing the Nomura quant of a lucky one-time fluke. Needess to say, McElligott will have none of it, and highlights that as part of the sellside criticism of his take, there were “mis-categorizations/inaccuracies” on a number of fronts which need to be highlighted:

  • Misinformation as to the notional size of the selling which we estimated vs what was reported
  • Inaccuracies of the AUM scale of the CTA universe and position sizing / leverage allocation therein
  • Whether this “trigger” was a “deleveraging” of a long (size reduction of the long which it was) vs outright “shorting”(which was misreported / misinterpreted by some)
  • Omissions / lack-of-context surrounding macro- and positioning- / performance- catalysts which I’ve been documenting in recent notes that actually “kicked off” the move to said trigger levels
  • A general lack-of-awareness as to the make-up of the model–i.e. that we incorporate 2w, 1m, 3m, 6m and 12m windows to capture the broad-spectrum of CTA lookback periods across the trend universe
  • No context as to the incredible accuracy of the model—not just via the success that the tool has had in identifying “market inflections,” but with regards to our CTA replication model’s incredible track-record vs benchmark

Not satisfied with the evisceration of his most vocal critics, the man who is rapidly emerging as the true quant “Gandalf” writes that in light of “the incredible task of prognosticating 58 unique cross-asset futures contracts as our QIS team’s model does—and inherent requirements of trade direction / sizing / leverage of course—the index replication model is brilliantly accurate on performance-matching vs the index”, to wit:

  • Since 2016, the model has exhibited an average deviation from benchmark of just 54bps, with a median deviation from benchmark of 48bps
  • Over the incredibly volatile last 6m both from a cross-asset realized volatility- and CTA performance- perspective, the average deviation of the replication model from benchmark is just 56bps, with the median deviation from benchmark being 58bps

And his crushing parting words at his desperate-for-publicity-and-page-views critics:

In the absence of viable alternative theories being presented from elsewhere with regards to the extreme and ‘price-insensitive’ -action and explosive futures volume on the sell-down—as well as an awareness that many competing CTA models on the Street grossly oversimplify to just a few of the larger asset futures and apparently do nothing more than incorporate a “VWAP breakeven” and / or simple “moving-average” logic—I feel more confident than ever in our TRANSPARENT model—especially as we alone have our performance historically tracked versus benchmark.

Having dispatched with a cohort of jealous wannabe quants, McElligott then focuses on the reason behind last night’s flash crash “gap down” in equities, and – as he did earlier this week – notes that upcoming deleveraging levels in the S&P are now at risk of becoming outright shorts from systematic funds. He explains why:

  • Once those few brave macro funds who were fortunate enough to have performance in order to play for ‘Equities Upside’ around Powell / G20 event risk then began to monetize their trades immediately out of the gates Monday, in-turn created an avalanche of both large notional delta for sale as well as outright futures selling which clearly outsized buy demand flows
  • This “real” flow from fundamental / discretionary universe into very poor year-end liquidity then conspired with the latest cross-asset confirmation of the “end-of-cycle” growth-scare which picked-up Monday and Tuesday—this time from US front-end inversions across a number of curves and “corroborated” the slowdown / recession-type pricing which has already been made evident in US Equities “cyclical” sectors over the past few months
  • As monetization then triggered simple ‘stop-losses’ in light of the rapidly deteriorating risk-sentiment, we then hit the selling levels for the recently re-accumulated “Max Long” in SPX from CTA trend universe (who added $22B last week and another $16B+ on Monday this week to start Tuesday “Max Long”)
  • In light of the well-flagged “tight ranges” for systematic CTA buy- and sell- trigger levels from this year’s “chop trade” across the spectrum of horizon windows we track, this meant that despite again turning “Max Long” that we remained dangerously proximate to “deleveraging” levels which would in-turn “flip” both 3m- and 1m- horizons back from “long” to “short” around 2764 (cutting from +100% Long” to 82.5 to 65 to 47 to 30 to ultimately just 22% long as of the Tuesday close after clubbing through 2711)

So with the danger of an even more aggressive flush looming as systematic funds unwind what little remains of their long exposure and turn short, and in light of these newest “gap moves”, the Nomura strategist notes that we are again near significant levels within reach across our asset spectrum. Of biggest note: it appears that when the S&P opens there may be another violent flush of selling, as CTAs turn from fractionally long to “max short” below 2,664. Incidentally, we are currently trading below this key level.

Here are all the other key market levels of note:

  • SPX +22% long, would be selling and getting max short under 2664.10 (-21.2bil), buying over 2769.54 to get 68.8% long (+8.2bil), and max long over 2809.59 (+5.4bil)
  • Russell -100% short,  buying over 1577.23 to get +53.2% long and max long over 1660.75
  • NDX +22% long, selling under 6424.00 (-14.2bil), buying over 7170.08 +68.8% long, and max over 7184.96
  • Eurostoxx -100% short, buying over 3231.73 -68.8%(+21.8bil), and flip to long over 3407.34 +53.2%and max long 3425.53
  • Nikkei -100% short, buying over 22,069 to flip and get long 22% (+54.6bil) and more buying over 22,094.5 to get +53.2% long (+14bil) and max long over 22,556.05 (+21bil)
  • HSCEI -68.8% short, should have sold last night to get max short under 10,663.82 (-2.2bil), buying over 11,034.22 (+8.8bil) and max long over 11,719.37 (+3.4bil)
  • US 10yr bonds -29.1% short, selling under 119.0369 (-17.2bil) and max short under 117.9431 (-23.4bil) buying over 122.6506 to get max long
  • EURUSD -100% short, buying / covering over 1.1401 to get to -89.9% short (+5.2bil), more buying over 1.1667 to get to -32.2% short, and flip to long and max long over 1.1895
  • USDJPY +100% long, should be selling today under 112.8644 to get to +89.9% long (-5bil), more selling under 110.4334 (-28bil) and flip to short and max short under 109.1255
  • GBPUSD -100%, buying / covering over 1.2784 to get to -89.9% (+4bil) and more buying over 1.3054 (+23.2bil) and flip to long 1.3428 to max long
  • USDCNH, +32.2% long, buying over 6.9081 (+4.2bil) and max long over 6.9427 (+800mil) selling under and max short under 6.4302 (-10.2bil)
  • WTI -16.2% short, should be max short under 51.4357 (-1.2bil) and holds -16.2% over 51.4462, smaller buying over 59.8621 to go -3.1% short (+200mil) and max long over 62.9969 (+1.4bil)
  • Gold +3.1% long, buying over 1284.19 +89.9% (+1.2bil) and max long over 1305.58 (+200mil), selling and max short under 1195.17 (-1.6bil)

via RSS https://ift.tt/2AVr9wI Tyler Durden

It’s Not Just Stocks That Are Tumbling…

Treasury yields are extending their recent collapse with 10Y blowing through 2.90% to its lowest yield since August (and pressuring critical support for the bond bears)…

 

The near-record spec short in bonds is really starting to worry…

 

And if stocks are right – treasury yields have a long way to fall!!

via RSS https://ift.tt/2RFLwVG Tyler Durden