Coronavirus or Correction?
Curious what the opinions are of people who know far more than me about the stock market whether the impact of the coronavirus has been overstated in the decline of the global stock market. Has the market overshot fundamentals and the markets are in a correction phase or is fear purely driving the decline?
I hate the beer but damn do the bottles and commercials look good.
Hot take
Well it really comes down to what happens next. If the virus declines in spreading or we have vaccine news you will likely see a rally next week . Otherwise a bit more dropping either way now I would start researching what you want to buy and monitor the virus news if it does not get worse be looking to buy. If it is worse continue to hold cash slowly buying in on the way down. With a hedge on as you get larger positions. Once we get confirmed good news exit the hedge for the most part
Real question is, does this expose a bubble--albeit a small one--given how fast the selloff occurred? WSJ called it "unprecedented", because of the short 6 days it took to get to full broad market correction, and it's already being compared to 2008.
the S&P is back to where it was 4 months ago, Oct 2019...we can go a LOT lower
"CNBC AND BLOOMBERG HAVE FLASHING RED LIGHTS, OMG SELL IT ALL
KRAMER IS HAVING A STROKE! OMG GO BITCOIN, GO PRECIOUS METALS AAAAA"
I do find it amusing how quickly stronger heads do not prevail in these situations. As ironnchef, pointed out, this isn't really being put into perspective. While I am sure there is a corrective nature to this, it doesn't help that half of the analysts and talking heads out there run around like chickens without heads
I am not a trader. I actively manage my own sliver of trading dollars and am absolutely not an expert.
BUT...
God damn is the media annoying. Along with everyone else with the tiniest bit of expertise trying to sound important and effectuating panic in the marketplace. These dudes finally ge the lime light and cannot shut up.
My interpretation is the actual long-term effects of the corona virus are being blown out of proportion but it doesn't really matter.
Can't compare with August 2019, that was a period marked by weak economic prints, weak business sentiment, China-US trade war escalation, Brexit uncertainty and so on. This time, all those issues were resolved (partly, at least relative to Aug 19), almost everything signals a bullish view except this viral outbreak. Its like comparing a company's stock price with one it had it in the past when the outlook/fundamentals were multiples worse, same price could be expensive then but cheap now. The fact that S&P is the same price as Aug 19 is a good entry point.
The coronavirus does have fundamental impacts through weakening tourism, impact on service sectors with lower foot traffic, knock on impacts from lowered Chinese growth and towns going on lockdown. Whether this leads to a 10 to 20 pct drop is debatable. We should bear in mind that the Greenspan put is not dead...
Seems like this is more of a market structure issue than the corona virus. We have been doing versions of this for the past few years.
I think it comes down to two factors the rise of quant funds and multi managers. Trading signals and on discretionary having tight risks limits while the active long only community and bank prop desks have declined. Add in ctas having to sell 100 of billion in equities due to trend following strategies. Traders risks limits cause them to puke Fast. Then you don’t have the big active funds with dry powder to step in. The more traditional hedgies judged on factors and vol too. It’s an environment where 5% declines snow ball fast. Forces that would stabilize the market can’t react in 36 hours. Powell just made comments today. People who might want to buy the market cheaper too slow to come into the market faster than traders get margin calls.
I remember when major banks could go under and the market could be stable. My guess we get some stimulus next week and some dip buyers have time to evaluate over the weekend and do there homework on names they would want to buy.
Exactly right. Between algos, factor funds and trend chasers, we’ve got a lot of people all more or less pushing each other in the same direction.
Most definitely not giving financial advice but I think the above mentioned structural things made the downswing violent and upswing should also be magnified.
Also, more medium term, people are gonna calm a bit on the virus. Not that it’s not a big deal but media has been pushing the panic button extra hard. Can’t tell you how many noobs in my life all of a sudden learned the word “supply chain” and can’t stop saying it.
What the Hell Happened to Hedge Funds? Is the hedge fund over? Are hedge funds on their way to decline?
I mean you’d hope the hedge funds hedged that’s what they do
Coronavirus
Why not both at the same time, triggered by coronavirus fears? I feel like the overall panic is exaggerated. Coronavirus likes cold and dry environment, so soon (2-4 months) this problem should dissapear, but I wouldn't invest right now as the overall market can drop soon due to the 'real correction'.
Numerous epidemiologists have indepedently modeled the virus peaking in early March (ie. now) and then tapering off over the month of March. That means that the rate of new cases starts to decline rapidly as the weather warms, and then starts to dissipate as patients already affected start to recover. Coronaviruses as a class don't do as well in warmer weather generally (ie. spring and summer). Peak fear however should last a fair bit longer, as the market will take more time to absorb, but since market has now reacted decisively negative, there may be a long opportunity as the market has failed to price in the nearly-certain near-term end of the virus.
Source? I see a few sources from a month ago but nothing more recent than that.
Fair enough. My info is a few weeks old. May be out of date and no longer relevant.
I did just coincidentally just receive the following, so hope it helps:
"Since many of you donated here is WHO Trip briefing abstract: >>>. The WHO sent 25 international experts to China and here are their main findings after 9 days
The WHO has sent a team of international experts to China to investigate the situation, including Clifford Lane, Clinical Director at the US National Institutes of Health. Here is the press conference on Youtube and the final report of the commission as PDF after they visited Beijing, Wuhan, Shenzhen, Guangzhou and Chengdu. Here are some interesting facts about Covid that I have not yet read in the media:
When a cluster of several infected people occurred in China, it was most often (78-85%) caused by an infection within the family by droplets and other carriers of infection in close contact with an infected person. Transmission by fine aerosols in the air over long distances is not one of the main causes of spread. Most of the 2,055 infected hospital workers were either infected at home or in the early phase of the outbreak in Wuhan when hospital safeguards were not raised yet.
5% of people who are diagnosed with Covid require artificial respiration. Another 15% need to breathe in highly concentrated oxygen - and not just for a few days. The duration from the beginning of the disease until recovery is 3 to 6 weeks on average for these severe and critical patients (compared to only 2 weeks for the mildly ill). The mass and duration of the treatments overburdened the existing health care system in Wuhan many times over. The province of Hubei, whose capital is Wuhan, had 65,596 infected persons so far. A total of 40,000 employees were sent to Hubei from other provinces to help fight the epidemic. 45 hospitals in Wuhan are caring for Covid patients, 6 of which are for patients in critical condition and 39 are caring for seriously ill patients and for infected people over the age of 65. Two makeshift hospitals with 2,600 beds were built within a short time. 80% of the infected have mild disease, ten temporary hospitals were set up in gymnasiums and exhibition halls for those.
China can now produce 1.6 million test kits for the novel coronavirus per week. The test delivers a result on the same day. Across the country, anyone who goes to the doctor with a fever is screened for the virus: In Guangdong province, far from Wuhan, 320,000 people have been tested, and 0.14% of those were positive for the virus.
The vast majority of those infected sooner or later develop symptoms. Cases of people in whom the virus has been detected and who do not have symptoms at that time are rare - and most of them fall ill in the next few days.
The most common symptoms are fever (88%) and dry cough (68%). Exhaustion (38%), expectoration of mucus when coughing (33%), shortness of breath (18%), sore throat (14%), headaches (14%), muscle aches (14%), chills (11%) are also common. Less frequent are nausea and vomiting (5%), stuffy nose (5%) and diarrhoea (4%). Running nose is not a symptom of Covid.
An examination of 44,672 infected people in China showed a fatality rate of 3.4%. Fatality is strongly influenced by age, pre-existing conditions, gender, and especially the response of the health care system. All fatality figures reflect the state of affairs in China up to 17 February, and everything could be quite different in the future elsewhere.
Healthcare system: 20% of infected people in China needed hospital treatment for weeks. China has hospital beds to treat 0.4% of the population at the same time - other developed countries have between 0.1% and 1.3% and most of these beds are already occupied with people who have other diseases. The most important thing is firstly to aggressively contain the spread of the virus in order to keep the number of seriously ill Covid patients low and secondly to increase the number of beds (including material and personnel) until there is enough for the seriously ill. China also tested various treatment methods for the unknown disease and the most successful ones were implemented nationwide. Thanks to this response, the fatality rate in China is now lower than a month ago.
Pre-existing conditions: The fatality rate for those infected with pre-existing cardiovascular disease in China was 13.2%. It was 9.2% for those infected with high blood sugar levels (uncontrolled diabetes), 8.4% for high blood pressure, 8% for chronic respiratory diseases and 7.6% for cancer. Infected persons without a relevant previous illness died in 1.4% of cases.
Age: The younger you are, the less likely you are to be infected and the less likely you are to fall seriously ill if you do get infected:
Age % of population % of infected Fatality 0-9 12.0% 0,9% 0 as of now 10-19 11.6% 1.2% 0.1% 20-29 13.5% 8.1% 0.2% 30-39 15.6% 17.0% 0.2% 40-49 15.6% 19.2% 0.4% 50-59 15.0% 22.4% 1.3% 60-69 10.4% 19.2% 3.6% 70-79 4.7% 8.8% 8.0% 80+ 1.8% 3.2% 14.8% Read: Out of all people who live in China, 13.5% are between 20 and 29 years old. Out of those who were infected in China, 8.1% were in this age group (this does not mean that 8.1% of people between 20 and 29 become infected). This means that the likelihood of someone at this age to catch the infection is somewhat lower compared to the average. And of those who caught the infection in this age group, 0.2% died.
Gender: Women catch the disease just as often as men. But only 2.8% of Chinese women who were infected died from the disease, while 4.7% of the infected men died. The disease appears to be not more severe in pregnant women than in others. In 9 examined births of infected women, the children were born by caesarean section and healthy without being infected themselves. The women were infected in the last trimester of pregnancy. What effect an infection in the first or second trimester has on embryos is currently unclear as these children are still unborn.
The new virus is genetically 96% identical to a known coronavirus in bats and 86-92% identical to a coronavirus in pangolin. Therefore, the transmission of a mutated virus from animals to humans is the most likely cause of the appearance of the new virus.
Since the end of January, the number of new coronavirus diagnoses in China has been steadily declining (shown here as a graph) with now only 329 new diagnoses within the last day - one month ago it was around 3,000 a day. "This decline in COVID-19 cases across China is real," the report says. The authors conclude this from their own experience on site, declining hospital visits in the affected regions, the increasing number of unoccupied hospital beds, and the problems of Chinese scientists to recruit enough newly infected for the clinical studies of the numerous drug trials. Here is the relevant part of the press conference about the decline assessment.
One of the important reasons for containing the outbreak is that China is interviewing all infected people nationwide about their contact persons and then tests those. There are 1,800 teams in Wuhan to do this, each with at least 5 people. But the effort outside of Wuhan is also big. In Shenzhen, for example, the infected named 2,842 contact persons, all of whom were found, testing is now completed for 2,240, and 2.8% of those had contracted the virus. In Sichuan province, 25,493 contact persons were named, 25,347 (99%) were found, 23,178 have already been examined and 0.9% of them were infected. In the province of Guangdong, 9,939 contacts were named, all found, 7,765 are already examined and 4.8% of them were infected. That means: If you have direct personal contact with an infected person, the probability of infection is between 1% and 5%.
Finally, a few direct quotes from the report:
"China’s bold approach to contain the rapid spread of this new respiratory pathogen has changed the course of a rapidly escalating and deadly epidemic. In the face of a previously unknown virus, China has rolled out perhaps the most ambitious, agile and aggressive disease containment effort in history. China’s uncompromising and rigorous use of non-pharmaceutical measures to contain transmission of the COVID-19 virus in multiple settings provides vital lessons for the global response. This rather unique and unprecedented public health response in China reversed the escalating cases in both Hubei, where there has been widespread community transmission, and in the importation provinces, where family clusters appear to have driven the outbreak."
"Much of the global community is not yet ready, in mindset and materially, to implement the measures that have been employed to contain COVID-19 in China. These are the only measures that are currently proven to interrupt or minimize transmission chains in humans. Fundamental to these measures is extremely proactive surveillance to immediately detect cases, very rapid diagnosis and immediate case isolation, rigorous tracking and quarantine of close contacts, and an exceptionally high degree of population understanding and acceptance of these measures."
"COVID-19 is spreading with astonishing speed; COVID-19 outbreaks in any setting have very serious consequences; and there is now strong evidence that non-pharmaceutical interventions can reduce and even interrupt transmission. Concerningly, global and national preparedness planning is often ambivalent about such interventions. However, to reduce COVID-19 illness and death, near-term readiness planning must embrace the large-scale implementation of high-quality, non-pharmaceutical public health measures. These measures must fully incorporate immediate case detection and isolation, rigorous close contact tracing and monitoring/quarantine, and direct population/community engagement."
THIS IS NOT A CORRECTION!!!!
Market is wise instead over panicking. People underestimated damage of coronavirus. What happened in US is exactly what happened in China a month ago. Trump administration can manage the situation better if he start to test more cases earlier. But instead “don’t test don’t tell” increased community ineffection and cause innocent people dead. This can be avoided if US CDC start to test earlier. This spread quickly and sneakily. In China, a girl’s mother dead, then her father dead and finally herself dead. Isn’t that scary? Ask ourselves, we don’t want that happened to us right? Market is not panicked, market is expressing that they don’t trust what Trump administration had done for coronavirus. Markets don’t believe coronavirus is under control and implied it will only get worse in US. More cases and more death will happen because of incompetency of US CDC. Markets knows the best!
This is bullshit. Markets are falling all around the world, not only in USA.
Yes all market is down but not all market down like US. Take a look if Chinese A shares market if you act more responsibly, virus can be contained. Market won’t go up if people don’t have enough confidence. Many people are underestimated how contagious and how deadly this virus this is. This is not a large size flu!
I mentioned this in another thread, but the lethality of the virus just isn’t there for most people. Every person who has died in Italy is between 63-90 and/or had another health condition.
The case rate fatality for those under 50 is like .3% and that includes folks in China when there weren’t a lot of resources. For me this implies an actual mortality of below .1% for people below the age of 50 easily, which is less than 1/1000 people.
I think this thing continues more or less on the same path for a few weeks and dies out in the spring, though it will re-emerge next year but everyone should be better prepared.
Corona virus is a non-issue. Central bank actions, and high valuations are infinitely more worrisome.
For some context. Have you ever heard of Asian Flu? Probably not. Killed 70k Americans and between 1-4 million world wide. Anyone genuinely think Covid19 will get this bad? No. No one talks about Asian flu anymore because it was a non-issue in the long run.
As of this morning, more people have recovered from Covid19 than are currently infected. Death rates for those under 50 and with no pre existing conditions is pretty much 0. People are panicking over nothing. Wash your hands, dont touch your face, stay home if youre sick. Its not difficult. I have literally never been more bullish in my investing career (~7.5yrs) than I was friday afternoon.
How did that turn out for ya! Hahahahaha
Corona virus is still a non-issue. The fear around it is an issue. The government mandating peopl stay home is an issue. The irrational fear of young people thinking theyre going to die is an issue. Tell me how many deaths there are in the US. Has it exceeded 70k? Is it even on track to do it?
Ive been buying the whole way down and Im satisfied with the prices Ive paid. In 30 years no one will even remember the virus.
Update?!?!?
Still bullish. Still buying. Happily doing so. :)
Read above for why.
what does everyone think about the UST 10-year rate falling below 1%? Next stop 0 or expect a return to previous experience rates in the not too distant future?
Way too early to trade. But inflation is now possible. Feds been fighting inflation and tightening for a decade. They’ve thrown in the towel on fighting inflation. We can go a lot higher in yields. To get highs yields you have to excessively ease. And this is the first time I’ve ever seen the fed ease like this. Since the crisis they have only eased policy when fighting deflation. Now easing with 3.3% unemployment. It’s the right move to ease but there’s a real chance they stay low too long now.
The above comments are way too complacent about covid. Normal flu mortality is BS like the New Hampshire case who went to a private function dinner after being told he was positive. At that R0 we need to track down at least 70% of contacts to extinguish exponential spread.
Exactly. The lackluster response by the current admin is partially responsible for the general level of fear in the market. Though I'd argue that investors aren't fearful as much as they are cautious.
Investors have Tina. This might last one year before everyone’s been vaccinated/exposed. Fed will go to zero. So even if earnings are a disaster your discount rate is 0%. Then normalized earnings in 2021.
Granted market can freak out. But touch to get too bearish when whatever the sp500 earnings are they will trounce a 0% yield.
You are still overstating the coronavirus relative to the flu. This can’t be stated enough: the denominator of coronavirus includes people much more likely to be seeking serious medical treatment.
For the flu, cases are mathematically modeled, and likely deaths from the flu are actually counted. So for 2017-18 you had 61k deaths and 45m of estimated instances in the US. This is a death rate of .13% - a bad flu season - and also not “less than .1%”.
When you look at death rates in South Korea, where they are prompting many people to get tested rather than waiting, you’ve got a death rate of .6% - roughly 4x as bad as previous flu seasons, not “50 times”. But testing is still skewed even in this situation. Age demographics are also an important consideration (SK trends older).
Obviously this still needs to shake out, but anything under 1% range - which data from SK suggests - puts this in the range of being 3x-10x than your typical flu season. Certainly bad, and something to be taken seriously, but no, the world will likely not stop because of this.
Based on what evidence? The statistics on outcomes for covid are based on empirical studies not modelling. Your second statement is wrong. I gave a range of mortality rates, of which the lower bound is from 3 with the highest rates of asymptomatic testing- princess diamond, cross-sectional study of 3000 doctors working at wuhan, south korea. For mortality rates they come out at >1%, >0.5%, >0.7% respectively. This is without correcting for the many that have not yet recovered which means mortality will only trend higher. You are talking about countries like Italy where 5% is possibly due to not picking up asymptomatic and milder cases. But the first two data points we know the exact number of exposed population.
Again, where are your sources? Here is one of many published and peer-reviewed articles showing that flu is https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2007.119933
In fact, it is much lower than this because as you say community spread is mathematically modeled. However, the mathematical modelling actually assumes the a significantly lower percentage of community infections than what is borne out by serological surveys in the community. This means that the percentages shown by mathematical models of influenza spread are upper bounds, so 0.1% as the very high end of influenza mortality. FWIW, I've seen studies placing seasonal influenza at 0.01-0.05%.
This is false, the mortality rate has been progressively trending higher. You cannot make a point-in-time estimate of mortality when the vast majority of their infected have not recovered (
I think the market overshot the fundamentals on the upside a while ago...
There was a coronavirus discussion nearly a month ago but somehow I could not find it anymore. I guess administrators of WSO should really rethink their policies.
And thanks brokers for all the margin calls we are having
Government should suspend market and only reopen it after virus is contained. Traders can be dead given they have to come to work even though virus is spread in NYC. Cuomo responsibly urged people to work from home while my company, one of biggest banks in the country still ask everyone to work. Everyone will be better off if market is suspended.
President Trump will be happier if he saw less breaking new from stock market. Sales and trading professionals will be safer if they don’t have to take subway. How can everyone realize US is not doing enough in fighting virus especially NYC. If this virus is not contained and spread widely then this will be our city’s APOCALYPSE!!!! Under no circumstance market is more important than people’s life.
SUSPEND MARKET AND LET TRADERS WORK FROM HOME!!!
Don’t risk our lifes! Together we can fight virus but only if we act now!
Why would you need to suspend the market? Just do your job remote
Why would you need to suspend the market? Just do your job remote
Traders aren’t allowed to work from home due to compliance reason
It’s the Coronavirus: basically unwarranted panic is driving the markets down. China’s exports being closed off had little effect on the US. However, the US should still try to make trade deals that rely less on China.
If WTI drops below $30, how long can Russia, or more so Rosneft, hang tight?
3 months or so? Thinking there'll be more panic drops--but ending into q2 shit should slowly rebound. When does it rip? Kind of did today but that was relatively speaking from what happened Monday.
Saudi Arabia can hang forever. But Russia? I think that's the true test.
Shitty WTI will kill some industries.
oil and gas is going to struggle and put pressure toward a recession, Corona will just drive this home....but just my view, at least if things stay as is
Well I think this travel ban is gonna fuck shit up
I wonder who wins my fantasy NBA league now
Looking back through this thread, it would seem that a few of you are rather foolish. I started my career as a trader during the 2008 financial crisis. My first day on the floor was the day Lehman collapsed. This feels a bit like that. The problem this time isn't starting in the banks, but there will be real impacts on the economy from this virus. I wrote my first graduate thesis on currency crises and bank runs--essentially the economics and psychology of panics.
This is a panic.
For those of you who think you're cleverer than the markets and that this threat and reaction are overblown, I want you to ask yourself why you think that. This virus will probably push the global economy into a recession. At the very least, the US is likely to slip into recession in the first two quarters of this year. The consumer was strong going into this crisis, but that won't be enough to hold off a recession. The leisure and hospitality industries in the US account for about 15% of GDP. Even a 20% slowdown in those sectors would amount to a 3% drop in GDP, but the US doesn't grow at 3%, so that's immediately recessionary. Perhaps you haven't noticed, but they've cancelled or postponed the NHL, NBA and MLB seasons. March Madness is cancelled. SXSW is cancelled. Most large conferences and concerts are being cancelled. Italy is on complete lock down. France has closed all schools. Japan closed all schools. Eventually, we are going to close our schools.
This event is going to be a severe hit to the economy. The number just don't lie. The US hasn't tested many people. The disease is already spreading here. The true number of cases is almost surely much, much higher than the current number of confirmed cases here. For some people, it won't be that bad, but for people in their 60s, 70s and 80s, this disease is dangerous. The hospitalization rates for people with pre-existing conditions and the elderly is high. The US has fewer hospital beds per capita than South Korea, Japan, China or Italy. Italy is on total lock down and their health system is on the brink of collapse because their system (which has more hospital beds per capita than ours) can't cope with the sudden massive influx of deeply sick patients.
What do you think is going to happen here? Our hospital system is less equipped to handle a large surge in patients than any of the other countries I listed above. We have roughly 1 million hospital beds in the US in total for a population of 330 million. At any given time, about 68% of those beds are already filled with existing patients with other conditions, so we have about 300K beds open. If only 1% of the US population gets the virus, that's 3.3 million people. If 10-15% require hospitalization as in other countries, that's 330K-495K beds. We just don't have that many. And we have about half that many respirators. To be clear, that's if only 1% of the population gets the disease. That scenario isn't likely. It's far more likely that without truly drastic measures, far more than 1% of people will contract the virus here. It's already here and spreading. We just haven't been testing for it.
In 2009, the H1N1 flu infected 60 million Americans. That's roughly 20% of all Americans. There were 274K hospitalizations and 12,500 deaths. If you think the US gets out of this with only 3.3 million people being infected--well, I think that's wishful thinking. The 274K hospitalizations from swine flu were handled by the health system because they were spread over 8 months. If our health system had to absorb that many cases all at once, it would bring it to the brink of collapse--just like what we're seeing in Italy.
I hope I'm wrong, and I hope this doesn't get as bad as I think it will. But this looks pretty bad from where I'm sitting, and I've seen a panic before. Prepare yourselves.
if/when this scenario plays out: will food supply chains be impacted?
I don't think so.
No. This is not a supply chain problem. Gov will safeguard using military if necessary. people panic shop is quite literally the most stupid thing to do right now. We don't have adequate testing scrimmaging in packed aisles is probably the worst thing you can do right now.
What was your experience like entering the industry in 2008? Did you go back to school or have you been working since? I am summering in IB this summer and am curious how this will affect full-time associate hiring next year.
Hiring in 2008 and 2009 was a bloodbath. The kids that recruited in all the years since then have absolutely no idea what a downturn looks like. I doubt this will have the same long-lasting impacts as the financial crisis, but this could get pretty bad if we don't act now and in big ways. The Fed has already fired its cannon. I'm sure they'll do some more quantitative easing to flatten the yield curve, but monetary stimulus can't do much here.
This is why you can't run trillion dollar deficits in boom times. We will need a massive fiscal stimulus if we don't want to print a negative GDP figure for the year. I'm thinking $1T-$2T. And with decreased economic activity, those idiotic tax cuts will mean government tax revenues will take a hit too, so the $1T deficit we already had will balloon as well.
Anyway, you didn't ask for another rant on imprudent fiscal policy, so I'll answer your question more directly--it will probably impact hiring. How much depends on how long this thing lasts and how bad it gets. We are in the first or second inning of a baseball game that might go into extra innings. There are too many unknowns right now, and when companies don't have sufficient insight into their business needs, they tend to stop hiring. They probably won't cancel the analyst or associate programs at the banks or consultancies, though. Most of the programs at banks come out of HR's budget, not your team's. And those budgets were set a couple months ago, so you're probably fine.
That said, if this thing is more protracted or harder-hitting than any of us would like, everything is on the table. During the crisis, some of the banks massively under-hired for their analyst and associate classes then attempted to poach kids from other banks. Goldman had a hush-hush round of interviews for analysts at other banks in the summer of 2009, about 3 months after the equity market lows. They were hiring for just about every desk on the trading floor in London. The point is that even firms like Goldman overshoot.
All in, recruiting during any sort of downturn is shit. The bigger the downturn the more shit it is. There are a lot of studies that point to lower lifetime earnings for kids graduating into bear markets. This certainly qualifies. But if you're one of the guys who manages to land a return offer in this sort of environment, you'll be far better off than your cohort. Part of the reason I got so much responsibility and experience early in my career was simply because I survived. Look around the Street for analysts who started in '08 or '09. They're rare. Those analyst classes were decimated, but so were the associate classes. And the VPs and Directors are just REALLY expensive to keep around when revenues are down, so many times, they get the ax first. As a result, I never reported to an associate, VP or director and did a lot of things I otherwise wouldn't have had the chance to do. I guess in that respect, so long as you're the one who survives, there is a sliver of opportunity to be had.
It is always easier to create panic than to create optimism. Funds are buying while retail investor are selling. Create some panic to retail investors force them sell off then hedge funds and asset management enter market with more money to take advantage from retail investors.
This is the opposite of what’s been happening for a while now, and retail has actually outperformed institutional for a few years. Retail is currently buying the dip while systematics are deleveraging. My guess is we chop and go lower still
Biologically, this is just the beginning of the virus. When it comes to economics and psychology.. we know how well psychiatrists and economists have that down to an exact science, nothing to worry about!
I am not qualified to give advice
Ipsum repellat provident eos blanditiis ipsum voluptatem corporis. Quas omnis magni rerum autem totam vero. Facere quia est dignissimos sed. Aut nihil cum modi magnam nostrum consequuntur qui deleniti. Est ipsam temporibus veritatis assumenda aut explicabo.
Soluta ad corrupti vitae. Iste occaecati delectus velit consequatur nesciunt sequi id. Nam voluptas esse qui inventore magni. Exercitationem sed dolorem esse tenetur animi ipsum. Illum culpa qui cum est ad quia. Ratione sint voluptates sit. Animi nostrum autem ad consequatur qui.
Qui minus nostrum cumque vitae culpa. Rerum molestiae perspiciatis dicta minima sit itaque. Dolorem omnis sint excepturi unde quibusdam velit qui. Eum error sint dignissimos ea.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...
Omnis omnis aut fugit. Qui natus exercitationem est consequatur vitae libero deleniti voluptates. Natus ut laudantium est. Velit sed maiores dolore blanditiis est facere.
Necessitatibus corporis et sunt doloribus omnis enim qui. Quo id in aut officia nihil commodi. Inventore eum modi et sapiente. Quaerat nesciunt sunt cumque voluptatem quas necessitatibus ea.
Est sit ipsum quaerat ipsum nobis. Aut sunt qui impedit. Sed rem ea est quia. Ea autem omnis illo eos voluptatum sed sed.
Harum accusantium earum eius nihil doloremque animi. Enim facere error ut error similique praesentium. Rerum reprehenderit rem error. Delectus recusandae nostrum ut vel quo aut eum at.
Eveniet fugiat eum est non quia. Repellendus atque eaque dolorem laboriosam nihil. Aut aut quod et. Ab sed et perspiciatis vitae quia debitis recusandae.