————————————————————————————
As the New DOW
Becomes of Age
On November 1, 1999 the Dow Jones underwent major restructuring. Microsoft, Intel, Home Depot, and SBC Communications replaced chevron, Goodyear, Sears, and Union Carbide respectively. Reorganizations of such magnitude are rare, and this one was even more special because it resulted in the introduction of an important technology bias in the Dow stocks. It is for this reason that I often referred to this revamp as a possible “mutation” of the Dow into a different “species”.
Experimental evidence for a species mutation is any
observation of a major deviation from natural growth curves (S-curves) that the
species may be following. For the DOW the daily share volume and dollar value have
been growing along such S-curves, see Exhibit 3, and we indeed observe that
following November 1, 1999 the data seem at odds with the S-curve (purple line)
that the dollar value had been following up to that time.
Exhibit
3. The data (black line) have been
smoothed by a 10-day moving average to eliminate extreme spikes). A sharp
change in the trend begins on November 1, 1999 (red line) when the new DOW came
into existence.
But by now, the new DOW has already been in
existence for more that 1200 days, and this provides us with sufficient data to
try and analyze this new species. In Exhibit 4 we see an expanded view of the
graph from Exhibit 3 but beginning only on November 1, 1999.
The
data are amenable to an S-curve description but it is a downward-pointing
S-curve! There are fluctuations but indisputably the red line in Exhibit 4 does
better justice to the data than the purple line in Exhibit 3 over the same
period of time. Similarly with the share volume, see Exhibit 5.
Exhibit
4. Dollar value data and S-curve fit
for the period 1-Nov-1999 to today. Once again the data have been smoothed by a
10-day moving average. It appears that following some resettlement downward,
the dollar value has finally stabilized.
Exhibit
5. Dollar value data and S-curve fit
for the period 1-Nov-1999 to today. Once again the data have been smoothed by a
10-day moving average. The general trend is rather flat. The red curve is an
S-curve but it represents a very small step downward.
An interesting observation in Exhibit
5 is that the evolution of the share volume is practically constant. I remind
the reader that this is the true volume in the sense that corrections
have been made for all splits. The fact that it is so flat is not surprising.
It simply indicates that the amount of real company pieces that
exchange hands every day is rather constant, and that all the market movement
is linked to movement in prices.
We can now forecast the evolution of
the new DOW by taking the ratio of the two curves from Exhibits 4 and 5. The
answer is the blue line in Exhibit 6.
Exhibit 6. Data on the weighted DJIA (yellow line) and the forecast (blue line) as described in the text. The actual DJIA (black line) and long-term forecast (red line) are also shown for the sake of comparison.
The future of the new DOW is
forecasted as a horizontal line. This is in rough agreement with the long-term
forecast of Exhibit 1, also shown in Exhibit 6 as a red line. The 700-hundred
point difference between the two forecasts is not due to the mutation in
question but rather to the fact that the weighted DJIA, that I am forecasting,
has been lying significantly below the DJIA for some time now, consequence of
investors’ preference for small-price stocks. But this is somewhat of a fad. We
have seen in the past investors’ popularity swing to higher-price stocks.
Treating the DOW as a species born on November 1,
1999 predicts a flat evolution for the future, if at some 700 points higher
than the today’s levels. The obvious question is: For how long is this flatness
going to last?
I have a rule of thumb concerning the validity of
quantitative forecasts based on historical data: Never project a forecast
further in the future than the length to the historical window on which it is
based. In other words, we cannot count on the DOW to remain flat for more than
another couple of years.