logo
Trump and the dollar are doing something we saw just before the October 1987 stock market crash

Trump and the dollar are doing something we saw just before the October 1987 stock market crash

Yahoo5 days ago
This past week has been strong for the U.S. Dollar Index DXY — its best since October 2022, in fact. It's a far cry from the first half of this year, when the index lost almost 11% — the worst first-half return on record since the index was created in the early 1970s.
Looking back, you might think that the weak dollar was good for U.S. stocks, given the S&P 500's SPX total return of 6.2% during this recent period of dollar decline. But the U.S. stock market has also performed spectacularly in years when the dollar was unusually strong. So maybe the dollar's movements don't matter to dollar-based investors.
'I told him that wouldn't fly': My 90-year-old mother's adviser pushed her to change her beneficiaries. What is going on?
Social Security wants to make a change that would cause 3.4 million more people to have to visit its field offices
'I worked at 14, had an 8.8% mortgage rate and drove used cars': Did boomers really have it easier than millennials?
Or just maybe, if the Federal Reserve lowers U.S. interest rates aggressively — as the Trump administration wants — and the dollar declines sharply as a result, the stock market could react adversely.
It's happened before: in October 1987.
To gain more insight, I first measured the dollar index's track record as both a coincident and as a leading indicator of the S&P 500's earnings per share.
I came up mostly empty when investigating the dollar's potential as a coincident indicator. As measured by a statistic known as r-squared, trailing-year changes in the dollar index since 1973 have been able to explain or predict just 1% of contemporaneous changes in the S&P 500's earnings per share. A reason for this near-zero r-squared is that the relationship between trailing-year changes in the dollar and EPS has varied widely. Depending on the five-year period since 1973, the correlation between the two is as high as 0.44 or as low as minus 0.83.
What about the dollar as a leading indicator? I next looked to see if the dollar's trailing-year rate of change is correlated with EPS's subsequent growth rate. But I reached a similar conclusion as before. Take a look at the chart below. It plots the correlation between the dollar's trailing 12-month change and the subsequent 12-month growth rate of the S&P 500's EPS for each five-year period since the 1970s. Notice that the correlation is not stable.
In the mid-1990s and again in the period leading up to the 2008 global financial crisis, the correlation was strongly positive — meaning that a stronger dollar led to faster EPS growth. In contrast, the correlation was strongly negative in the 1980s and the early aughts. Over the entire period since the early 1970s, DXY's trailing 12-month changes were able to explain just 0.4% of the subsequent 12-month growth rates of the S&P 500's EPS (as measured by r-squared).
Read: A short squeeze is lifting the U.S. dollar versus the euro
In both cases, there does not appear to be a statistical basis for concluding that a falling dollar will be either good or bad for dollar-denominated investors in U.S. stocks.
But there is a non-statistical basis for concern: an ominous parallel with the financial environment that prevailed in the weeks leading up to the October 1987 stock-market crash. On that day — Black Monday — the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA dropped 22.6% in a single session.
Though there many factors that led to the 1987 crash, a plunging U.S. dollar at the time was a major cause. So it's possible that in extreme situations, a falling dollar in fact should command investors' attention.
Prior to Black Monday, the dollar index was 7% lower than at the beginning of 1987. What seemed to particularly worry investors was that the Reagan administration was actively pushing for an even lower dollar. Then-Treasury Secretary James Baker was jawboning the Federal Reserve to aggressively reduce interest rates, with the avowed intention of both boosting the economy and causing the dollar to decline even further.
Barron's editor Randall Forsyth, in his history of the 1987 crash, writes that Baker's comments in the week before Black Monday 'were intended to push the dollar lower against the [German] mark and other currencies. A weaker dollar was preferable to higher interest rates, which Baker saw as a threat to the U.S. economic recovery, especially with the 1988 election looming. Markets responded by dumping stocks… The prospect of a currency war made risk assets, especially pricey stocks, too risky.'
The parallels with the current financial and political climate are concerning. Stocks are even more overvalued now, and once again a combative presidential administration is aggressively pressuring the Fed to reduce interest rates. Needless to say, lower rates would almost certainly push the dollar down even further against foreign currencies.
Of course, the 1987 stock-market crash is just one data point, so by no means is there a guarantee that history will repeat. But history rhymes — and in this case that is a scary prospect.
Mark Hulbert is a regular contributor to MarketWatch. His Hulbert Ratings tracks investment newsletters that pay a flat fee to be audited. He can be reached at
More: Dissenting Fed governors? That could be telling for interest rates, says this analyst.
Also read: Dollar index moves to two month high after euro and yen slide
Amazon's stock is falling, as this trend from earnings has investors worried
Will your spouse automatically inherit your 401(k)?
Don't blame Jerome Powell — or the Fed — if you can't afford to buy a house right now
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

China's SMIC says Trump tariffs did not cause expected 'hard landing'
China's SMIC says Trump tariffs did not cause expected 'hard landing'

Yahoo

time17 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

China's SMIC says Trump tariffs did not cause expected 'hard landing'

By Che Pan and Joe Cash BEIJING (Reuters) -China's top foundry SMIC's co-CEO said on Friday that U.S. tariff policy had not resulted in the "hard landing" that the company was initially worried about and that strong domestic demand will keep its production capacity tight until October. Zhao Haijun, co-CEO of Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp (SMIC), told a post-earnings call that the company is not consulting with customers regarding U.S. President Donald Trump's 100% tariff plan on chip imports but expects the impact could be smaller due to contingency plans that had been made after tariffs were announced in April. China raised additional duties on U.S. goods to 125% in April after Trump effectively raised tariffs on Chinese goods to 145%. Trump said on Wednesday the United States will impose a tariff of about 100% on imports of semiconductors, although that will not apply to companies that are manufacturing in the U.S. or have committed to do so. SMIC was blacklisted by the U.S. commerce department in 2020. China is the dominant market for SMIC, accounting for 84% of its revenue in the second quarter, unchanged from the first quarter, while the U.S. contributed 12.9%, slightly up from 12.6%. SMIC's second-quarter revenue rose 16.2% year-on-year to $2.2 billion. Its profit attributable to owners of SMIC declined 19.5% to $132.5 million, missing analysts' estimates of $183.35 million, according to LSEG data. SMIC's Hong Kong-traded shares were down more than 5% on Friday. Zhao said the previous rounds of tariffs resulted in less than 10% of cost increases at its overseas customers. "After these past few months, everyone has either stocked up enough inventory for this year and next year, or found other suppliers," Zhao said, "So I think the impact will become even smaller." Zhao said SMIC's production capacity remains insufficient and would remain tight until October due to robust demand from domestic substitution.

China's SMIC says Trump tariffs did not cause expected 'hard landing'
China's SMIC says Trump tariffs did not cause expected 'hard landing'

CNBC

time19 minutes ago

  • CNBC

China's SMIC says Trump tariffs did not cause expected 'hard landing'

China's top foundry SMIC's co-CEO said on Friday that U.S. tariff policy had not resulted in the "hard landing" that the company was initially worried about and that strong domestic demand will keep its production capacity tight until October. Zhao Haijun, co-CEO of Semiconductor Manufacturing International Corp, told a post-earnings call that the company is not consulting with customers regarding U.S. President Donald Trump's 100% tariff plan on chip imports but expects the impact could be smaller due to contingency plans that had been made after tariffs were announced in April. China raised additional duties on U.S. goods to 125% in April after Trump effectively raised tariffs on Chinese goods to 145%. Trump said on Wednesday the United States will impose a tariff of about 100% on imports of semiconductors, although that will not apply to companies that are manufacturing in the U.S. or have committed to do so. SMIC was blacklisted by the U.S. commerce department in 2020. China is the dominant market for SMIC, accounting for 84% of its revenue in the second quarter, unchanged from the first quarter, while the U.S. contributed 12.9%, slightly up from 12.6%. SMIC's second-quarter revenue rose 16.2% year-on-year to $2.2 billion. Its profit attributable to owners of SMIC declined 19.5% to $132.5 million, missing analysts' estimates of $183.35 million, according to LSEG data. SMIC's Hong Kong-traded shares were down more than 5% on Friday. Zhao said the previous rounds of tariffs resulted in less than 10% of cost increases at its overseas customers. "After these past few months, everyone has either stocked up enough inventory for this year and next year, or found other suppliers," Zhao said, "So I think the impact will become even smaller." Zhao said SMIC's production capacity remains insufficient and would remain tight until October due to robust demand from domestic substitution.

Japan says US promises to fix double tariff oversight
Japan says US promises to fix double tariff oversight

CNBC

time19 minutes ago

  • CNBC

Japan says US promises to fix double tariff oversight

The U.S. government on Thursday promised to amend a presidential executive order to remove overlapping tariffs on Japanese goods, Tokyo's trade negotiator said, after talks in Washington to fix what he called a "regrettable" oversight. In those discussions, Ryosei Akazawa urged U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent to ensure that a 15% levy agreed last month on Japanese imports was not stacked on goods, such as beef, that are subject to higher tariffs. They explained they would amend a July 31 presidential order, which included a no-stacking provision for the European Union but not Japan, and also refund excess duties collected, Akazawa said. Lutnick and Bessent also said Trump would lower auto tariffs to 15% from 27.5% in a separate executive order, in line with the trade agreement reached by the two countries last month. "Frankly, I did not expect to be visiting the U.S. again so soon after my last trip," said Akazawa, who has travelled to Washington nine times since April. The U.S. Treasury and Commerce Department did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the meetings with Akazawa. The further clarity on U.S. tariffs as well as strong corporate earnings pushed Japan's broad Topix index to a record over the key psychological mark of 3,000 points. Much of what Akazawa negotiated in July during his previous visit to Washington, including directly with Trump, was never put into a signed document. That created confusion in Tokyo and fears that some Japanese companies could face higher tariffs than anticipated. Prime Minister Shigeru Ishiba has been criticised by his opponents for not crafting a joint statement with Trump on the trade deal. Ishiba, who is under pressure from some in his party to step down after last month's upper house election loss, said he chose not to do so to speed the agreement's implementation. To clinch the trade deal, the Japanese premier agreed to raise investment in the U.S. by as much as $550 billion through government-backed loans and guarantees for projects that benefited both countries. Trump later compared that to a baseball player's signing bonus that Washington could invest as it liked. Akazawa declined to say whether he discussed the investment pledge with Lutnick and Bessent. Japan "will continue to maintain close communication with the U.S. side at various levels," the government said in a statement.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store