The Incredible Story Of 2009…So Far

Published in Company Comment on 1 July 2009

It has been one of the most eventful six-month periods in stock market history. The FTSE 100 is 'only' down 4%, but it could have been so much worse.

We're half way through the year. And what a six months it has been. In terms of the stock market, you could split it into two halves…pre-March 9 and post-March 9.

The Bust

The FTSE 100 started the year at 4,434, having fallen a portfolio-wrecking 31% in 2008. At the time, many pundits were predicting a good year for the markets, their theory largely going along the lines of "the markets have fallen so far in 2008, and valuations are so low, that 2009 must see a rebound".

But, amongst others things, they failed to take into account the irrationality of the markets. As individual stocks and markets plunged to new depths, the old John Maynard Keynes quote "the market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent" was never truer.

Companies and investors alike were learning this lesson the hard way. Individuals who were using leverage to juice their investment returns quickly found using borrowed money to buy shares cuts both ways. Some people were completely wiped out. Mixing greed with over-confidence is a dangerous wealth-destroying cocktail.

Hedge funds were forced sellers as a) banks cut off their lines of credit and b) investors rushed to redeem their money as they were panicked into seeking a safe haven for their money.

Highly indebted companies like Punch Taverns (LSE: PUB), Taylor Wimpey (LSE: TW) and Yell (LSE: YELL) also found out about the perils of over-leverage. Debt works well when it is freely available and cheap. Many CEOs, egged on by bonus-focused investment bankers, took the opportunity to make ever-ambitious acquisitions. But when the music stopped and refinancing options evaporated, investors were dealt a quick and incredibly painful lesson.

Not Much To Like About March

What is it about the month of March? I remember March 2003 very vividly. The dot com bust reached its crescendo in March 2003, with the FTSE 100 plunging to a low of 3,287. It had reached its all time peak of 6,930 on the last day of last century.

March 2009 might also go down in history as the bottom of the sub-prime/credit-crisis/global financial crisis. The FTSE 100 sunk to an intra-day low of 3,461 on 9 March 2009. It had peaked for this particular cycle at 6,754 in July 2007.

At the time, you could feel the pure manic and fear. Stock markets were in freefall, and it appeared nothing could stop them falling further. Anyone attempting to pick the market's bottom was left looking completely foolish and comprehensively wrong. I tried doing it in October last year, and although I was relatively close, I was wrong.

90% Of People Were 100% Wrong

At least I'm not alone. I love recalling how, in the midst of the major market panic in March 2009, 90% of the people who voted in this poll thought the FTSE 100 would fall to 3,200 or below.

To date, precisely 90% of the people were 100% wrong. It's an amazing statistic, and once again proves that a) following the crowd can be wealth destroying and b) many investors too easily fall into the trap of investing through the rear view mirror.

The Boom

I don't recall there being a precise catalyst during the day on 9 March that stopped the rot. Maybe some stocks just got so cheap that people felt compelled to buy them. Maybe it was the US banks, particularly Citigroup, saying they were trading profitably, even though they were still writing off huge losses from their past days of lending hubris. Maybe it was just a little bit of confidence, finally, that the end of the financial world was not nigh.

Whatever it was, by hook or by crook, the market started its recovery. By the day after April Fool's Day, the FTSE 100 was back above 4,000. So much for the 90% of people who thought it would fall below 3,200, and the 20% of people who thought it would fall below 2,500!

The post March peak for the FTSE 100 came on 7 May at 4,521. Around that time, the top 10 bounce back stocks from the FTSE 350 included Barclays (LSE: BARC), Enterprise Inns (LSE: ETI), Debenhams (LSE: DEB) and Royal Bank Of Scotland (LSE: RBS) -- all seen as complete and utter dogs in the March 2009 meltdown. Some dogs can have their day.

In the end, the FTSE 100 finished the first half of the year at 4,249, down an unremarkable 4.2% on the year, but up 23% since the March lows. It was certainly a tale of two halves.

The Future

So where to from here? Have we seen the market bottom? Might those 90% of people end up being right? Is inflation coming or are we set for a Japanese-style decade of deflation? Will the green shoots of recovery turn into giant oak trees or end up turning into brown twigs of despair?

All those answers and more tomorrow in my 'Four Predictions For The Rest Of 2009'.

More on the economy and the markets:

> If you're in the market for buying and selling shares, consider opening an online broker account with The Motley Fool's Share Dealing Service. You can buy and sell shares in real time for a flat rate of just £10. Click here to find out how you can open an account for free today. There is no obligation to trade.

> Bruce Jackson does not have an interest in any of the companies mentioned in this article.

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

PrinceoftheHi11s 01 Jul 2009 , 2:33pm

I may be pessimistic, BUT!!!. I keep asking myself just: how much exposure to the ex-Soviet Block countries do the Banks have. This area i fear has been over invested in on credit. Can they handle another Sub-Prime kind of disaster. I feel that because this whole recession, depression, or complete financial cock up, is Worldwide that we have not yet reached the bottom. I wonder how well the Banks Stocks will do then!!
In this country: the Government should invest in Construction before the Motor Industry.There are enough cars around or maybe someone has not been looking at all the car sales parks. Construction drives the whole economy from gigantic structures that provide wages--to the little Housewife who wants a little shelf putting up with the wages her construction worker brings home. All made by someone else. What hope for us!!!!!! AAAAHHHH!!!

Pedros143 01 Jul 2009 , 4:58pm

I agree with "princeofhills". This government seems to be totally out of touch with what business actually runs the economy. Cars remain a luxury item. In a recession people do not buy luxury items. We have thousands of people without homes or jobs and all they can do is give money to the Automotive industry who will absorb it into their respective home countries.
Wake up Labour and start supporting British industry that put you in power benefits for everybody.. Look to Construction, roads,houses, hospitals, schools.

biosh 01 Jul 2009 , 5:14pm

"In this country: the Government should invest in Construction before the Motor Industry"

I absolutely agree. The so-called support for the motor industry cost us a lot of money but was illusory anyway. True we have to keep major industries going because it's those employees who will spend the money to reduce the impact of a recession.

Construction is a much better thing to spend public money on because you've got a product that will actually be worth something and can be sold. Fund the building of more council houses in a recession I say!!

Partly to blame for the bad debt is rapidly rising house prices and the subsequent unmanageably large mortgages people took on. Talk of abolishing stamp duty to help first-time buyers is also nonsense because, if there is a shortage of housing stock, sellers will simply increase the price by the saved stamp duty (I would)! The only way to make housing more affordable is to make more available so that we stop the insane house price inflation. The only way to do that is to make more available. So why not spend public money on a real resource like council houses?

Fingered 01 Jul 2009 , 9:29pm

Bruce, I look forward to the predictions. Have you thought of re-running the pol to see how many investors are now looking for a FTSE above 4500?

Fingered 01 Jul 2009 , 9:34pm

pol = poll

Fingered 01 Jul 2009 , 9:40pm

......my guess is 90%

Fingered 01 Jul 2009 , 9:50pm

PrinceoftheH1ss.........Eurozone banks and Financial institutions are exposed to such countries. Particularly for example Austria with the Ukraine. If a trans-Eurozone fault line opens up here with sovereign debt defaults........mmmh, that'll get interesting.

jonesjeff 01 Jul 2009 , 10:14pm

The government should invest in as little as possible, because they have no understanding of economics or finance.

Also, they need to reduce the regulation & taxation burden on manufacturing, as without a healthy manufacturing sector, we are doomed to run a balance of trade deficit & therefore get relatively poorer year by year.

AuditorGeneral 01 Jul 2009 , 11:07pm

Here we go again.. advertising for The Motley Fool Share DEaling or Champion shares again..

Mind you, the shares that were commended to have been winners with hindsight, namely RBS and Barclays, were consistently ignored and unrecommended by Motley and their share recommendations. Thank God I didn't sign up with these blokes, otherwise I'd lose my cool profit of £130k!

Too much self-advertising at the end of each article, mate. And for something that doesn't work at all!

seriousmoneyFool 02 Jul 2009 , 12:25am

Re "Auditor General" There is nothing worse than people blowing their own trumpet. Are you sure that you made £130k, or was it closer to £13?
Anybody with that kind of foresight on banking shares would not be remotely interested in reading articles by the Fool let alone contributing to it.

AuditorGeneral 02 Jul 2009 , 8:13am

I don't read the articles, I just skim down noticing the shares they recommend and discourage, and then see that they always make mention of their share dealing or champion share thingy at the bottom.

It seems nowadays that their articles are just full or words that are unnecessary speak, and seems that their ulterior motive is to have an article with a catchy headline (which is not much addressed by the article itself) in order to slot in advertising their share dealing thing at the bottom. They might as well slap 'advertisement' on top!

The worst thing is their articles have truly watered down to a waste of words without much value. Especially meeting the value suggested by their eye-catching subject title. I'm not the only one noticing this, mate. There are quite a number of people seeing this as well. Perhaps the others care to share?

RobinnBanks 06 Jul 2009 , 12:26am

AuditorGeneral should at least do the author the courtesy of reading the article before criticising it. I read his comment but found it ambiguous at best, and its difficult to understand why he wastes his time "not reading" these articles after his great success in the markets.

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as http://www.fool.co.uk as opposed to www.fool.co.uk.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.