Connect with us

Finance

Why the Dow is in such a historic funk and how concerned you should be

Published

on

Traders work on the floor at the New York Stock Exchange on Dec. 10, 2024.

Brendan McDermid | Reuters

The Dow Jones Industrial Average has been declining for nine straight days, heading for its longest losing streak since February 1978. What is going on and how concerned should investors be?

First off, let’s explain which stocks are driving the losses.

The biggest laggard in the 30-stock Dow during this losing streak has been UnitedHealth, which has contributed to more than half of the decline in the price-weighted average over the past eight sessions. The insurer has plunged 20% this month alone amid a broad sell-off in pharmacy benefit managers after President-elect Donald Trump’s vow to “knock out” drug-industry middlemen. UnitedHealth is also going through a tumultuous period with the fatal shooting of Brian Thompson, the CEO of its insurance unit.

And then there’s a rotation going on with investors selling out of the cyclical names in the Dow that initially popped on Trump’s reelection. Sherwin-Williams, Caterpillar and Goldman Sachs, all stocks that typically gain when the economy is revving up, are each down at least 5% in December, dragging down the Dow significantly. These names all had a big November as they were seen as beneficiaries of Trump’s deregulatory and pro-economy policies.

The Dow, largely comprised of blue-chip consumer discretionary and industrial names, is widely viewed as a proxy for overall economic conditions. The extended sell-off did coincide with renewed concerns about a weaker economy in light of a small jump in jobless claims data last week. However, investors still remain quite optimistic about the economy for 2025 and see nothing on the horizon like the stagflationary period of the late 1970s.

Most investors are shrugging it off

There are many reasons to believe the Dow’s historic losing streak is not a source for major concern and just a quirk of the price-weighted metric that’s more than a century old.

First and foremost, the Dow anomaly comes at a time when the broader market is still thriving. The S&P 500 hit a new high on Dec. 6 and sits less than 1% from that level. The tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite just reached a record on Monday.

Meanwhile, while the length of Dow’s sell-off is alarming, the magnitude is not the case. As of Tuesday midday, the average is only down about 1,582 points, or 3.5% from the closing level on Dec. 4, when it first closed above the 45,000 threshold. Technically, a sell-off of 10% or greater would qualify as a “correction” and we are far from that.

The Dow was first created in the 1890s to model a regular investor’s portfolio — a simple average of the prices of all constituents. But it could be an outdated method nowadays given its lack of diversification and concentration in just 30 stocks.

“The DJIA hasn’t reflected its original intent in decades. It is not really a reflection of industrial America,” said Mitchell Goldberg, President of ClientFirst Strategies. “Its losing streak is more of a reflection of how investors are gorging themselves on tech stocks.”

The Dow price-weighted nature means that it’s not capturing the massive gains from megacap stocks as well as the S&P 500 or the Nasdaq. Although Amazon, Microsoft and Apple are in the index and are all up at least by 9% this month, it’s not enough to pull the Dow out of the funk.

Many traders believe the retreat is temporary and this week’s Federal Reserve decision could be a catalyst for a rebound especially given the oversold conditions.

“This pullback will be the pause that refreshes before a reversal higher to close 2024,” said Larry Tentarelli, chief technical strategist and founder of the Blue Chip Daily Trend Report. “We expect buyers to come in this week … Index internals are showing oversold readings.”

— CNBC’s Michelle Fox, Fred Imbert and Alex Harring contributed reporting.

Continue Reading

Finance

China’s EV race to the bottom leaves a few possible winners

Published

on

Continue Reading

Finance

Stocks making the biggest moves midday: WOOF, TSLA, CRCL, LULU

Published

on

Continue Reading

Finance

Swiss government proposes tough new capital rules in major blow to UBS

Published

on

A sign in German that reads “part of the UBS group” in Basel on May 5, 2025.

Fabrice Coffrini | AFP | Getty Images

The Swiss government on Friday proposed strict new capital rules that would require banking giant UBS to hold an additional $26 billion in core capital, following its 2023 takeover of stricken rival Credit Suisse.

The measures would also mean that UBS will need to fully capitalize its foreign units and carry out fewer share buybacks.

“The rise in the going-concern requirement needs to be met with up to USD 26 billion of CET1 capital, to allow the AT1 bond holdings to be reduced by around USD 8 billion,” the government said in a Friday statement, referring to UBS’ holding of Additional Tier 1 (AT1) bonds.

The Swiss National Bank said it supported the measures from the government as they will “significantly strengthen” UBS’ resilience.

“As well as reducing the likelihood of a large systemically important bank such as UBS getting into financial distress, this measure also increases a bank’s room for manoeuvre to stabilise itself in a crisis through its own efforts. This makes it less likely that UBS has to be bailed out by the government in the event of a crisis,” SNB said in a Friday statement.

‘Too big to fail’

UBS has been battling the specter of tighter capital rules since acquiring the country’s second-largest bank at a cut-price following years of strategic errors, mismanagement and scandals at Credit Suisse.

The shock demise of the banking giant also brought Swiss financial regulator FINMA under fire for its perceived scarce supervision of the bank and the ultimate timing of its intervention.

Swiss regulators argue that UBS must have stronger capital requirements to safeguard the national economy and financial system, given the bank’s balance topped $1.7 trillion in 2023, roughly double the projected Swiss economic output of last year. UBS insists it is not “too big to fail” and that the additional capital requirements — set to drain its cash liquidity — will impact the bank’s competitiveness.

At the heart of the standoff are pressing concerns over UBS’ ability to buffer any prospective losses at its foreign units, where it has, until now, had the duty to back 60% of capital with capital at the parent bank.

Higher capital requirements can whittle down a bank’s balance sheet and credit supply by bolstering a lender’s funding costs and choking off their willingness to lend — as well as waning their appetite for risk. For shareholders, of note will be the potential impact on discretionary funds available for distribution, including dividends, share buybacks and bonus payments.

“While winding down Credit Suisse’s legacy businesses should free up capital and reduce costs for UBS, much of these gains could be absorbed by stricter regulatory demands,” Johann Scholtz, senior equity analyst at Morningstar, said in a note preceding the FINMA announcement. 

“Such measures may place UBS’s capital requirements well above those faced by rivals in the United States, putting pressure on returns and reducing prospects for narrowing its long-term valuation gap. Even its long-standing premium rating relative to the European banking sector has recently evaporated.”

The prospect of stringent Swiss capital rules and UBS’ extensive U.S. presence through its core global wealth management division comes as White House trade tariffs already weigh on the bank’s fortunes. In a dramatic twist, the bank lost its crown as continental Europe’s most valuable lender by market capitalization to Spanish giant Santander in mid-April.

Continue Reading

Trending