Market Bottomed For Now, Bigger Bubble Crash Awaits (Uncut) 03-08-2025

Market Bottomed For Now, Bigger Bubble Crash Awaits | Milton Berg

So we have the oscillator telling you the market might bottom and you have the five-day value telling you the market may bottom. These are the historical instances where you see this combination of a market low and the five-day value raised in one and a half years. And as you can see, in many of these cases, either at a low or near a low, market bottom just on this day.

So I don’t want to go through all of these, but generally with at a low or near a low and you want to buy in weakness. So the weakness you see here now may be a good time to buy. Tremendous volatility in the equities and risk asset markets this week as Trump executed tariffs.

And we’re going to be talking about whether or not this correction is a start of something bigger. Our next guest has compared Trump’s election to Reagan’s win in the early 80s. And back then Reagan’s victory was followed by a significant market correction after some time.

And so we’re going to revisit this theme and whether or not there’s going to be a parallel now to the early 1980s. He is Milton Berg, founder of MB Advisors. Last time we were on the show, Milton, you and I was November 6th, just around the election time.

Welcome back to the show, Milton. Yes, David, good to see you again. Good to see you.

This is what’s going on in the markets. And I’ll let you talk about your analysis right after I share my screen here. The S&P is down about six and a half percent from the beginning of March, actually just over the last couple of days.

And the question is whether or not this slight pullback by the order of five, six percent, which is the most we’ve seen in months, is the beginning of a larger correction or if this is just noise? In other words, the market’s overreacting to tariffs news this week. I’ll let you respond to that. OK, David, let’s take one step at a time.

Back in November, November 6th, the day of the election, I pointed out the day of the election, I pointed out a lot of euphoria and people were assuming the market’s going to head much higher. I pointed out that in 1980, when Ronald Reagan was elected, the market gained another 8 percent, 9 percent in 17 days. And then you had a bear market, which took the S&P down 27.11 percent.

I said it’s quite possible you see the same type of action now. This is the update. This is the Russell 2000, not the S&P 500.

The Russell 2000 surge on election day and it peaked 13 days later and now is down more than 15 percent. So that’s an area of euphoria during an election for a great president. Ronald Reagan was a great president.

He had David Stockman as budget director. His job was to cut the budget into lower inflation. And we have Donald Trump, who has Scott Besant as his treasury secretary and he has this doge, which is trying to lower the inflation rate, lower budget spending, lower inflation.

So the reality is we had euphoria. The market peaked 13 days later and the Russell is down some 14, some 15 percent currently. So we think that the euphoria really was just the end of the market.

It was setting up the market peak. We’re in a long topping process that began actually last July. But at this point, we really think that the trend is down.

But that does not mean the market is not bottoming currently for at least a short term rally. Let’s face it, after the Russell is down over 15 percent and now the S&P 600 is down more than 16 percent, even in a bear market, you can expect a retracement rally, sometimes more than 50 percent, which would mean a gain of eight or nine percent in the S&P 600. So we’re not discounting the idea that it may be a rally.

And we have evidence actually that this selling we saw in the last few days will lead to a short term rally. We ourselves are 53 percent short in our recommended portfolio, but we’re on the lookout for a bottom. And we just wrote things to our clients yesterday, which I’d like to share with you.

First of all, I’d like to show you a chart. This is a chart of our oscillator. This is an 18 indicator oscillator.

It uses sentiment, it uses breath, it uses volume, and uses short term moves of interest rates, very short term moves in interest rates. As you can see, the oscillator currently at yesterday’s close is at levels back to where it was in October of 2022 after a bear market. So there’s something going on underlying the market.

I call this either a crash or trade or below. As we know, before a stock market crash, say 1929, say 1987, say China and Hong Kong historically, the market is first very oversold. And then ultimately it crashes and the oversold doesn’t hold the market.

And either the market is going to bottom now, because after all, the S&P is only down 6%. Nasdaq is only down some 9% or 10%. We’re way oversold in our oscillator.

So normally you’d think that we’re headed for a trade unless we’re headed for a crash. It’s very difficult to say we’re headed for a crash at this moment, and let me tell you why. When the crash takes place, people generally aren’t expecting a crash.

People generally are very, very complacent. And they just think, oh, it’s just the beginning of a regular correction. That’s what happened in 1987.

That happened again in 1929. And generally, this is how crashes work. The first 10%, people are quite complacent.

And then the market crashes. And the current market is not complacent at all. As we know, the Investor Intelligence Survey investor sentiment is at the levels that causes bottoms even in bear markets, first of all.

Secondly, let’s look at this. This is a necessity for a market low. We look at five-day volume on the New York Stock Exchange.

When five-day volume on the New York Stock Exchange is at at least 1.5-year high, which we had this week, five-day volume on the New York Stock Exchange was at a new 375-day high, that is a prerequisite for a low. Most important lows in the market occur either coincident with a high five-day volume or within 20 days of high five-day volume. Anyway, as you see from this arrow, we haven’t seen that since the lows in October of 2022.

We had a five-day New York Stock Exchange volume, highest in 375 days, which is a bullish factor in itself. These red arrows show the bottoms of great bear markets, which occur associated with the five-day volume at its highest level in 1.5 years. I learned about this when I was still in college.

I remember in October of 1974, I was watching TV. And an analyst got on and said, the market’s going to crash because the five-day volume was out of record. And I thought that made a lot of sense.

But ultimately, that was actually the week at the bottom. So that’s where I learned early on that a spike in volume is not necessarily a sign of a crash. It’s actually usually a sign of some sort of a turning point or a breakout.

So in this situation, we have to give the benefit of the doubt. It might be a turning point, meaning it might be a short-term low. We calculated every time the S&P declined more than 5%.

And on its low day, the five-day volume was the greatest in 1.5 years. We’re going back to 1957. And in most of the instances, it was a time to buy.

If you look at this column here, further decline to low, it tells you how much the market declined after you had this combination of the market making a corrective low of more than 5%. And five-day volume is greatest in 1.5 years. And it’s not a buy signal.

But in most of the instances, you’re going to buy stocks. And I’ll go through the chart. These green arrows tell you where it made sense to buy stocks.

And these red arrows told you where it made sense to sell stocks. So just based on history alone, if you don’t have a buy, you’re saying we’re in a great bear market, you’d have to say that the fact that we saw the five-day volume greatest in 1.5 years, especially with the S&P only down from 5%, 6% at the time, you’d have to say that most likely the market’s going to be bottom here. So we have the oscillator telling you the market might bottom.

And you have the five-day volume telling you the market might bottom. And I’m going to go through this very quickly. These are the historical instances where you saw this combination of a market low and the five-day volume greatest in 1.5 years.

And as you can see, in many of these cases, either at a low or near a low. This is a 9% rally, short-term rally within the end of a bear market. This case was another 11% rally at the end of a bear market.

But most cases, either at a low, as you can see, or near a low. This is October 19, 1987. This is April 4, 1994, and the Fed surprisingly raised rates.

The market bottomed just on this day. So I don’t want to go through all of these. But generally, either at a low or near a low, and you want to buy in weakness.

So the weakness you see here now may be a good time to buy. Again, we’re still 53% short. We’re not buying on this weakness because we know, in the back of our heads, we saw evidence of a major market top occurring.

And we’re thinking maybe we’re just going to get a rally off this corrective low and then a further decline. So we’re not ready to cover our shorts. On the other hand, this is exactly December 21, 2018, again, one day before the low.

So this is one reason to think market might be bottomed. Then we added to that another indicator. Besides the New York Stock Exchange volume was the greatest in 350 days, but the S&P 600, the small cap index, had its greatest 10-day rate of change in 350 days as well.

We did a study of all market bottoms, both short-term bottoms and long-term bottoms, and we broke it into quadrants. We broke it into quarters. And we found that 94% of the time, the strongest downside momentum takes place in the last quarter of the decline.

So for example, if the market’s declining for a one-year bear market, the greatest momentum to the downside would take place in the last quarter of that year. But so too in any decline. Generally, the panic takes place at the low.

The panic doesn’t take place at the high. So by virtue of the fact that the S&P 600 peaked back in November, and its 10-day rate of change now was the weakest in 350 days, not back in November, is another reason to suggest we might be at a low. And what we did is we combined the instances in the past where the five-day volume was the greatest in 350 days.

The S&P is at a low, on a day of low. And the S&P 600 10-day rate of change was the weakest in 350 days. As you can see, 120 days later, the market was up 100% of the time.

90 days later and 60 days later, the market was up 100% of the time with a median gain of 10%, 13%, and 17%. We did the same thing looking at the Russell 2000 when its 10-day rate of change is below 9%. And in this case, again, 60, 90, 120, 60, 90 days, the market was up 100% of the time.

120 days later, 93% of the time. But in any event, on a percentage basis, you’re seeing bullish action now. You’re not seeing bearish action.

I don’t want to go through all of these now. Let’s go one more at the end, which is the 10-day rate of change of the S&P 600 is the weakest in, we did it already. Okay.

So the Russell 2000 10-day rate of change is the weakest in 350 days, not just down 9%. And in this case, 120 days later, the median gain was 24%. So just based on history, you’d have to expect that what we’re seeing now is actually the panic that takes place at the end of the low rather than something that takes place before a crash.

On the other hand, we do know that before a crash, you see strong oversold readings. So we’re not ready to cover our shorts. But based on probability, we have to say we’re probably bottoming at this time.

Okay. And we said the oscillators tell you you’re probably bottoming at this time. Okay.

Do your indicators, Milton, do your indicators tell you if we’re bottoming at this time, what the upside could be from here? Yeah, that’s an excellent question. And this is the situation. We had major evidence that the market was at a final high going back from July to February.

In other words, there were indications one after another, the market was a final major high, meaning it will decline a minimum of 19%. We saw many, many indications. On the other hand, no index declined 19%.

And the greatest you see now is the S&P 600 down 16 or 16.5%. So most likely, if we get a rally now, it could be very, very strong. It could be a 5% rally or 10% rally in the small caps. It could be the S&P going back to a minor new high.

But at this point, we have no reason to believe that the rally will void all of the negative items we saw over the past six months. So I’d say likely for a short-term rally. Now, if you recall, and you can’t recall, but if you study history, in 1929, after the first 10% decline in the Dow, it rallied some 8% over a two-day period.

And in 1987, after the first 7% or 8% decline, it retraced and rallied something like 5%. And the NDX actually made a new high on October 6, 1987, while the rest of the market was not making new highs. So it’s possible you’re an oversold low here.

It’s possible the market is making, I mean, the volume is telling you that, the sentiment is telling you that, the oscillator is telling you that. So it could be a nice sharp rally. It may last two days, five days, 10 days.

It may take some indices back up to above the previous highs on a minor basis. But at this point, I don’t think that we’re going to see continuation of the bull market, regardless of the fact that statistically, as I showed you in some of these instances, the median gain 120 days later was 20%, 25%. We’re just looking for turning points.

It’s more difficult to project how high or how low you go, but it’s much easier to find turning points. Let’s look at, I answered that question. Yeah.

Okay. Well, sure. Looking at the top, why did we think there might be a market top? Why do you think this may be the last, the rally into December or November, December, January, February may be the last of the rally.

So I’m talking on a technical basis. We have to get to a fundamental basis as well, because what’s going on in the economy, what’s going on with tariffs and with Trump is certainly very, very significant. But I first focus on the technicals rather than fundamentals, because fundamentals could steer you wrong.

Very often fundamentals tell everybody the same thing, tell everybody to get out of the market, and the technicals tell you to get into the market, which is what you’re seeing now. People who are selling the market are selling it because of tariffs, selling it because of cutting government spending, and so on and so forth. But the reality is, since everybody sees it, everybody’s selling, since everybody’s selling, it may be a time for a short-term low.

But let’s get to what we saw, which is something very fascinating. And that is the NASDAQ going back to December. Remember, we thought there’s a topping process that began in July in the stocks, but say November, December at the election, the topping process.

This is the chart of the NDX on a bar chart basis, intraday ups and downs, going back to early December. As you’ll notice, you have an upside gap right here, an upside gap here, three upside gaps here, four upside gaps. An upside gap means people are trying to push the market higher, sentiment is such that they’re willing to buy the market at a higher price than the high of the previous few days.

And they’ve done it six times, and they weren’t able to get the market to a major high, had a minor new high, about a half a percent above this high. And on the way down, we’ve only seen one gap to the downside. Usually, when you’re going to see a final low, you’re going to see a gap to the downside, a few gaps to the downside at the final low.

You haven’t seen that yet, despite this decline. That’s one of the reasons I think the decline may continue. But this is a reason to think that this is a very serious top.

When the market is attempting through gaps to make new upside highs, these gaps are coming with very high readings, very high sentiment at the top. And therefore, we think that this may be a major top. This is on a more technical basis.

So we see that as well. Another thing we’re not seeing is the five-day put call ratio really hasn’t gotten an extreme. Usually, at a market low, even a short-term low, not only does five-day volume show an extreme, not only the five or ten-day rates of change show an extreme, you usually see an extreme buying in puts.

So the put call ratio on a five-day basis is really at an average level. It’s not an extreme level. So that’s another reason to think that maybe this low won’t hold.

This is something I disagree with. I just want to show it because many people that I speak to are fooled by this. This is a chart by one of the Electrowave firms.

I guess it’s copyrighted. So it’s a chart by Electrowave International. And basically, they’re trying to show that this is normal market valuation.

They’re combining the dividend yield and the book value. So this is what it was from 1927 until 1988 within this range. And we’re here right now at the end of 2024.

And they’re claiming, well, in a normal market, you’re going to get back to this level. There’s going to be a crash. They’re looking for the market down 90% at the bottom of the next bear market.

The problem is book values are totally irrelevant. Anyone who studies economics or balance sheets or accounting knows that the numbers of book values are stale. If someone bought a property in 1950 for a million dollars, it’s now worth $40 million.

It’s still on the books at $1 million. So the book value does not increase corresponding with the actual increase in the value of a company. Same thing with dividends.

Dividends, of course, are an important measure of a stock market’s value. But over the last decade or so, dividends are no longer as important as they used to be because many companies, rather than issuing dividends, buy back their stock. So this chart is a baloney chart.

I know many people are saying, we’ve got to get a crash because based on book values and based on dividends, the market is way overvalued. Yeah, based on this chart, it’s way overvalued. But the chart makes absolutely no sense in my opinion.

And I wouldn’t do anything based on this chart. On the other hand, there’s another chart put out by John Hussman. And John Hussman has been a bearer since 2010.

But that’s because he’s a value investor. And stocks are way above historical value since 2010. But this is a nice chart of price-to-sales in the Information Technology Index.

In other words, let’s not blame the high valuation because they’re now technology stocks. Looking at technology stocks themselves, the price-to-sales ratio is far greater than it was at the 2000 peak and far greater than it was at the 2021 peak at 9.9 times sales. So I think this is a legitimate chart.

There’s no reason I mean, profit margins have increased to such an extent that the typical PE ratio for information technology stocks should be 9.9 times sales. This is a legitimate stock suggesting we’re in a bubble. I don’t like to say that we are in a bubble.

I say we could be in a potential bubble for many, many reasons, including the fact that our economy really has been running on government spending and record government spending and on record debt. And record government spending and record debt, when you combine it together, really causes bubbles before it causes a crash, before it causes a depression or recession. So I think this is a valid reason to think that the market is starkly overvalued, but the previous chart was not a valid reason.

There may be a discrepancy, at least in my head. How can we be bottoming when the market is also in a bubble? Can you just explain that? Certainly, certainly. First, I pointed out that in the bubble of 1929, the bubble didn’t start in September 29.

The bubble started in 1927. So even within a bubble, market could rally and decline and rally and decline. Secondly, even if we’re in a crash process right now, even at the top of the S&P in February is the final top.

And even if we’re down 50% within three months, you’re still going to see short-term rallies within that decline. And I’m just pointing out evidence that we might be short-term. I say I’m still short.

I don’t see enough evidence. But there is evidence to suggest, based on history, that the likely outcome of the current decline is, if you buy now with the current decline, likely outcome is you’ll be able to sell at higher prices before that crash takes place, even if it does take place, or before that bear market takes place, even if it does take place. And that’s basically what I’m showing.

Again, I myself, we are still recommending to be short. We generally don’t cover shorts on a day of a low. We generally wait one, two, three days after a low to see a follow-through on a technical basis, which gives us more evidence that the low is in.

I’m just suggesting the fact that we saw a five-day record volume, a five-day volume greatest in over two years in the S&P 500, the New York Stock Exchange, with the S&P only down 5% or 6%. It suggests that people are panicking. Now, people panic generally at lows.

They generally don’t panic before the low. But again, if there’ll be a crash, like even in 1929, by the way, the volume didn’t increase until the two days of the crash. Prior to that, volume was below where it was in March of the previous year.

So I just say this volume indicator that we’re looking at and the fact that our oscillator is at levels that stop bear market lows, and the fact that the Invested Intelligence survey of newsletters is very bearish, it suggests at least a short-term low. What I’m saying is, if you’re not out of the market yet, I want to give advice. If you’re not out of the market yet, don’t think you have to sell today because the market is down as much as it is.

And if you’re going to short the market, don’t think you have to short today. You could wait for a week or two weeks later and be able to short at a higher level. So then if you already did get out of the market, or if you’re not in the market yet, should you be buying? A short-term trader should buy, but most people who watch your show and most people who are involved in the stock market are not short-term traders.

There are some professionals who are short-term traders. Retail people generally, if they try to be short-term traders, are not successful. I’m suggesting the following.

If you have institutional investors watching your program or if you have sophisticated investors watching your program, it’s quite possible we’re in a bear market and the highs will not be exceeded. It’s possible we’ll see a minor new high, but the likely evidence is that we’ll see much lower lows before this is over. But the current low that you’re seeing is not likely to be a continuation.

It’s likely there’ll be a break and the market will rally back before the market continues lower based on the evidence that I see it, and that would mean to buy any weakness you see, including today’s weakness. I see. So when you say that we’re in a bear, when you say that, okay, so the bottom is in the short term, but when you say that we’re in a bear market, how do you define a bear market? Good question, David.

When I got into this business, there’s no such thing as 10% means a correction and 20% means a bear market. The market’s down 20%. The bear market began the day of the top.

The bear market doesn’t begin when the market’s down 20%. It’s just that newscasters who don’t know much about the market, I don’t mean guys like you, David, I mean people who just have to write about the market, not knowing anything, need a definition. A bear market is a market that’s going to decline significantly, and a correction is a market that’s going to decline less significantly.

In both situations though, the correction started at the top and the bear market started at the top. So when I say we’re in a bear market, I’m saying that the top we saw in February is the start of a bigger move than we’ve seen so far, and it could be down 20%, 30%, 40%, 50% before it’s over. We don’t know.

I don’t wait till it’s down 20% to call it a bear market because I call it a bear market now because now’s the time to prepare for that bear market and to put your mindset to understand that it’s possible that ultimately it’ll be down from 20% or 25% or more. I’m trying to give you the way we deal with the markets as traders and as institutional investors rather than strictly having answers to any will be up. Let’s say my time horizon is longer than one week, so I’m not a short-term trader.

I want to hedge against what you’re just talking about, this bear market that we’re in. I want to get the short-term bounces, but at the same time, I want to hedge my downside. Do you recommend? I would suggest a typical investor should be out of the market now.

I’d say a typical investor should be out of the market now. Yes. What if I were to just employ some- There’s more evidence that a top has taken place than evidence that a final bottom is taking place.

We talked about, yeah, that’s what I’d say. Even this bottom here escalator, it doesn’t have to be a final bottom. We could rally back up 4%, 5%, 6% or 8% of the S&P 600.

Maybe the NDX or the S&P makes another minor new high and we come back down. This doesn’t tell you the extent of any rally. It tells you the likelihood of a rally.

Does it make sense to perhaps be long in the markets right now, but maybe I’ll buy a long day to put option? If somebody is long in the market today, I would not tell them to sell. If somebody asks me, I’m long in the market, do I sell? I’d say, don’t sell today. Now, if you’re a retail investor who has to call his broker or takes him four days to sell his portfolio, nothing to wait for.

If you’re really worried only about the long-term, I think people should be cautious now and out of the market, better put your money in T-bills or better put your money even to T-bonds because I’m bullish on bonds at this moment. I can’t ask you for something that people on my side of business never do. I can’t give you an exact projection.

I can’t give you exact recommendation. I can tell you what I’m doing. I’m still 53%.

I have been 69% short. I have been lightening up. I went down from 69% to 53% short.

I would like to buy short on weakness. Today is not a day. Potentially, I would cover shorts, but usually, usually the models we built give us strong, robust buy signals, usually between three and seven days after a low rather than the day of the low.

Now, it’s a day of a low, day of a corrective low, and most in this year. I want to get to that in a moment, actually. Let’s look at something else.

I want to talk about it. Are we actually at a low today or not is another question because we may not really be at a low. Let me take that to the next step right here.

The S&P 500 is a cap-weighted index. That means that stocks like Nvidia, stocks like Apple, and stocks like Google take a good portion of the 500 stocks. I think the top seven stocks were like 30% of the index.

Of course, it’s a cap-weighted index. On an equal-weight index, we’ve built an equal-weight index for the S&P 500. On equal-weight index, the S&P 500 is a different animal.

Now, this is just showing where we are now, as you can see. I’m going to go back to this chart so we can see. As you can see, this is the first time in this bull market when the arithmetic index, the equal-weight index did not make a new high along with the cap-weighted index.

See, back in August, in April of 2022, and back in September of 2022, and back in February of 2023, and September of 2023, and in May of 2024, and in July, was this August of 2024, the both indices basically peaked at the same time. Now, you have a peak in the S&P in February. I think it’s February 14th, February 19th.

The small cap index is, or the, excuse me, the equal-weight index peaked on, I believe it was November 16th or 19th, late November. So, you see a divergence here. You see something you don’t really see normally, which is suggestive of something different, which is suggestive of a diversion, which would be, in this case, would be negative divergence.

Negative divergence by the fact that the equal-weight index has not been able to rally along with the cap-weighted index right here. That’s one way to look at it, but there’s another way to look at it, this way. And that is, you’ll notice that the cap-weighted index traded below is January low.

It’s not through yesterday, it’s not through today. The cap-weighted index is trading below January low, you see? The equal-weighted index is not trading below January low. So, that’s now a positive divergence.

So, that fits with my scenario that the market has had a correction, 6% in the S&P, 9% in the NDX and NASDAQ, 16% in small caps, and so on. But this positive divergence on a short-term basis should tell you that we’re headed for a rally. Now, rally doesn’t mean bull market.

Rally just means that now is not the time to short. Now is not the time to get out of your stocks, wait for a little bit of a rally. So, I point you out on a longer-term basis the fact that the equal-weighted index peaked before the cap-weighted index, and now that bears for the longer term.

But now on a short-term basis, while the S&P cap-weighted is making new lows, while the equal-weighted index is not making new lows, that’s another suggestion that we may be at a tradable low right here. Okay. Generally speaking, I mean, do you hedge your positions when you’re long or short? Okay.

We have two recommended portfolios that we have here. We have two things. First of all, we have a trading portfolio.

So, we’re not hedged. It’s a long or short portfolio. So, for short, we’re not going to be hedged.

If we’re long, we’re not going to be hedged. But then we have a long-only portfolio, which has done very well over the years, where we try to pick stocks. We’re always 100% long in stock, 100% long at all times, but we try to pick stocks that are going to outperform the market, whether the market’s rallying or declining.

We’re not saying we’re going to make money when the market’s declining, but since we don’t want to miss those marvelous days right off the low when the market is up 15% over three weeks, this is the type of portfolio, our recommended portfolio that is wastefully invested. Generally, we have about 30 stocks in the portfolio. Generally, we hold every stock for at least a year.

We’re up on the year. We’re up, I think, 4% through yesterday’s close. Well, the S&P is down, well, 3%, 4%, 5%.

So, our portfolio is up. We have a number of Chinese stocks. Anyway, I don’t want to show you the portfolio at this moment, but no, we don’t hedge.

To our clients, we give a clear position. The long portfolio is always long, but by hedging, we try to find stocks that are going to counter the trend of the market. It doesn’t mean it’ll go up when the market goes down, but it’ll go down less in the market.

And again, we have Chinese stocks, which are making new highs. We had some natural gas stocks, which were making highs a few days ago. But our actual institutional portfolio, our macro portfolio can be long or short.

I guess being 53% short is hedged, because why am I not 100% short or 120% short? So, in a sense, I’m not fully short. But your question is good, and I hope my answer is satisfactory, that we give the institutions what we’re giving you now. We’re giving you both sides of the coin, showing them what we see.

They make their own decisions. I don’t make decisions for anybody. All right.

I’d like to ask you about a few macro variables that are perhaps moving the markets, or perhaps not. Maybe just get you to comment on some of these things. The first that’s been brought to my attention this morning is the Japan 10-year yield is now at a multi-decade high.

I think it’s 16-year high, 1.5. And I think some people are wondering whether or not the yen… No, no, say that again. David, listen to what you just said. 16-year high at what level? At 1.5%. Correct.

Right. Think about it. It’s not significant to pull capital out of the US.

It doesn’t concern me at all. No. Yeah.

It’s meaningless. As far as we’re concerned, that’s meaningless. As far as Japan is concerned, they had deflation, they have a poor economic policy for many, many decades, and they’re just going back to normal.

The normal interest rate in Japan should probably be three and three quarters to 4%. That should be the normal rate based on history. It went from 0.8 all the way up to 1.5. Zach, can you imagine any investor in his right mind who had free choice would lock his money away for 30 years at 0.8%? The whole thing was a farce.

The whole thing was manipulated by the central banks there. Let it get back to normal. It’s very healthy for Japan to have a higher interest rate than it has now.

I mean, we want free markets. We want healthy markets. A healthy market does not have a 30-year bond trading at 0.8%. It’s even not healthy to be at 1.5%. It’s probably to be three, three quarters to 4% for that type of market.

That’s my opinion. It’s irrelevant to US markets as far. Now, on the other hand, if the rally in yields in Japan and in Germany is indicative of a worldwide inflation scare, well, that would affect our bonds and that may even affect our stocks.

I don’t think that’s the case. I think even Germany is just adjusting to the fact that for decades and decades, their interest rates are far lower than it should have been. All right.

Let me give you this article from the Wall Street Journal. Sentiment from the street overall. It says here, the recession trade is back on Wall Street.

Bank stocks in the Russell 2000 have slumped on growth concerns, while treasuries and gold have rallied. This is dated March 6th. And yeah, Wall Street is having another growth scare.

Investors entered 2025 optimistic that the US could get a strong economy. And basically, that has dissipated in terms of optimism. Is a recession on the horizon? Is that why markets are jittery? I think that the fact that the Wall Street Journal, after the Russell was down 16%, they didn’t write this when the Russell was down 2%.

They write this after the Russell was down 16%. It’s another piece of evidence that we’re probably generating a short term low. Look at this index.

This is a price building, building in the air-conditioned heating. We were long this on the way up, but we got out actually, we actually got out in November. But this is down 29% from this November peak.

So this, we’ve already seen the type of scare you’re going to see for a recession. Now, I happen to think there’s a high likelihood for a recession. And I happen to think the markets get ahead much lower.

So I’m not arguing that. But the reality is many markets have already declined dramatically. I mean, this index of, you know, you have fixed comfort system, TT Train, Lenox, Lenar Corporation.

These are down 29%. Let me get to that. This is the price weighted residential building group, which is DR Horton, Lenar, NVR, Pulte Homes, Toll Brothers, KB Homes.

This is down 30.32%, you see. So we’ve already seen a recession scare. We certainly have seen a housing scare.

So I agree with the Wall Street Journal that the reason the market came down is because people worry about recession. But I believe that they’re so worried about recession they’ve been dumping stocks. I don’t think that’s a reason to get out of stocks at this point.

You want to get out of stocks before people are worried about recession rather than after people have already been worried about recession. It’s reflecting the stock prices. The problem with this is it hasn’t been reflected in the S&P 500.

The S&P 500 was down at yesterday’s close, less than 6% off its high. That is not real. That’s really just a random event historically.

So there’s a lot of various ways to look at this market. Again, I think it’s likely you’re going to get a rally, likely you’re going to get a short-term rally. I’m showing you two major indexes.

Home bills are really getting killed. This is a leading indicator for the 2008 financial crisis. Maybe it’s a leading indicator for financial crisis ahead of us.

That does not mean we’re going to rally. In 2007-2008, we also had many strong rallies. We rallied from the July low, July 30th, to October 10th, 2007.

We rallied from 9%, although the Russell peaked in July, and Russell never got a new high. So 8% rallies early in bull markets are not unheard of, and there’s no reason we can’t see it at this moment. But yes, I agree with this Wall Street Journal.

People definitely saw them because of fear of recession. And I think that probability of a significant slowdown or recession are quite high at this moment. It’s very difficult early on to know whether it will be a recession or just a major slowdown.

But I think it’s either way, where bodies of bonds, which I didn’t mention here, we’re long 30% bonds now, 30-year and 20-year, in that same recommended portfolio, it’s 53% short stocks. For the same reason, we think stocks will go down, for the same reason bonds will do well, because the slowdown or recession historically is good for stocks. It’s best for stocks and good for bonds.

On the other hand, when you have a government trying to save money, trying to pay down debt, that is certainly good for bonds. You have two things good for bonds. A, you have a slowdown coming.

B, you have the government probably causing the slowdown through their austerity program. And three, you have the government trying to pay down debts. All these things are bullish for bonds.

So we’re long bonds at this moment, and at this moment, we’re still short stocks. I don’t think we’re going to get out of a long bond position unless technically I see a breakdown. Let me just show you a chart of the bonds.

We didn’t get long early enough. Remember, last time I was on the podcast with you, you asked me a question. I didn’t know the answer.

You said, the load rates in September, you said, why are yields? These are the TLT, it’s inverse to yields. Why are yields rising? And I said, frankly, I said, I didn’t know the answer. It didn’t make sense to me.

But now I understand why at this point, where the 20-year yield got to 5.05%, I said, this is crazy, because if there’s a slowdown ahead, which I thought there would be, or recession, yields are way too high. So then we got long right here at this breakout. Will it last or not? We don’t know.

We got long on February 24th. What was the reason for the yield rally? No, the yield right down here, because people thought there’d be economic strength ahead. Yeah.

As the Fed lowered rates, now they’re realizing, hey, maybe we’re wrong, the economic slowdown. And now I think you’re going to see yields coming down and TLT, which is the inverse of yields, going up in price. We purchased right here.

Hopefully, this level will hold, you see? Anyway, we brought on a technical breakup. Go ahead. Speaking of yields, what do you think, let’s talk about the short end of the curve then.

Fed, what do you think the Fed’s going to do now that expectations for growth are a little bit lower, like you just said, but inflation is still kind of sticky? And I wonder if they’re going to cut more just because of tariff scares and recession scares and slowdown scares. My opinion is, in the opinion of the Fed, my opinion is the Fed will just hold where they are. They’re not going to cut.

I think they continue the quantitative tightening. People have not been talking about the quantitative tightening. And that really is probably more significant than lowering rates.

I mean, lowering rates, lower, what, three quarters of a percent or whatever so far, is not as much of an effect on the economy as the fact that they’re bringing in the money supply month after month, about 40, 60 billion, month after month. They haven’t stopped. They’re doing this for two years.

So I think that is still significant. That shouldn’t stop. And I think they’re worried about inflation.

I personally, I’m not worried about inflation. I think you have a lot of things going for us to stop. First, slowdowns are good for inflation, lower inflation.

Recession certainly lowers inflation. Cutting government debt lowers inflation. Cutting government spending lowers inflation.

And, you know, inflation generally takes place when the government spends. When the government decides to cut back austerity, generally inflation declines. You’ve got two years of the money supply decreasing or quantitative tightening.

And I just think that the risk isn’t inflation. But I think the Fed thinks the risk is still inflation. So I think they’re going to hold tight where they are.

Of course, once they see recession, they’re not going to see it until after it happens. Once they see recession, they’re going to cut. But by that time, you know, the stock market will probably be lower and yields will be much lower as well.

We’ll have to take this one day at a time. But no, I don’t think the Fed is in a position over here to cut rates any further. No, I certainly don’t think they’ll cut rates based on the policy of the president.

They’re going to cut rates based on what they see in the interest rate environment, the economic environment. And I think, you know, short rates, basically where they should be based on the free market, you know, the free market. I think so.

This is my view. If you’re long, 30% bonds, 10% the 30 year and 20% the 20 year. Milton, if you’re long bonds, where can you expect the 10 year to go? How much lower can we get? I think the 10 year yield, 20 year yield, we’ll get back to 3.99%. I think we’ll go back to this level.

Test the level you saw in September where they started cutting rates. That’s I think you’re Okay. You brought up the housing sector earlier.

You brought up the housing sector earlier. You brought up construction. So mortgage rates fell for a seventh straight week.

It’s posting now the biggest weekly drop since the middle of September. According to reports, the average for 30 year loans was 6.63%. It’s down now from 6.76 last week. Right.

So that helps. That helps. But housing prices have not yet come down enough.

That’s the problem. You need mortgage rates to come down and housing price come down because based on the affordability studies I’ve seen, and I’m not a specialist in affordability studies, based on affordability studies I’ve seen, there’s still not enough potential buyers in the market to maintain housing growth at this time. I think you need prices to come down.

It’s not enough for rates to come down. You need a combination of the two. Okay.

Speaking of recession, I know you said that your expectation is for a recession, but take a look at the Atlanta Fed GDP. Now, Tracker, it was at negative 2.8%. Now it’s at negative 2.4, but well into contraction territory. Is this a tradable piece of statistic or not? I thought it might be, but I looked at the history.

I wasn’t talking about it. I looked at the history and now they’ve been all over the place. They’re like a retail stock trader.

You know what I mean? They shift back and forth, back and forth. You don’t know what to make of them. You can’t trade on them at all.

I don’t know. Maybe some of your people you spoke to told you you could trade on them. I looked at history and based on history, you can’t trade on it.

Let’s just say that they’re probably right about the direction that we’re weakening, but it may just be a slowdown rather than contraction. I’m still saying, I’m not sure if it’s a recession or contraction or just a slowdown in growth. I don’t know.

I think it’s one of the two for sure, but I don’t think you can put much weight. Let’s face it. A month ago, they were looking for a 4.5%, what was it, 4.5% growth or something.

I forgot the peak they had a few months ago. A month ago, it was at 2% and then 3%. It was at 4% at some point, yeah.

Listen, they got to do some rebalancing their analysis because it’s all over the place. It’s not that great, in my opinion. How do you feel about so-called risk-off assets, safe haven assets? We talked about bonds and treasuries.

How do you feel about gold right now at nearly $3,000 an ounce? Let’s talk about gold. We were warm gold when we got out in late February. Let me share what I have about gold.

Yeah. Now, I believe gold is a commodity like any other commodity. It’s not like wheat because wheat is consumed.

It’s not like oil. Oil is consumed. Gold isn’t consumed.

Every ounce of gold that has been mined in the history of the world can be found someplace above ground. It’s not destroyed. It’s not consumed.

As the supply of gold increases year after year, you need more buyers to buy gold to keep the price of gold up. This is a chart showing you the price of gold relative to official CPI inflation, official. Official CPI inflation is incorrect.

I accept that argument. But this chart is showing you based on the US government’s official rate of inflation. And as you can see, back in 1980, when gold peaked at $850, the ratio of gold to CPI inflation was at 425, right over here, you see.

And then gold declined more than 50% over the next 20 years. And relative inflation had also declined. And now, back where we are now, we’re back relative to the inflation.

We’re back to where we were. This is through January. But through February, we’re above where we were in 1980.

So to argue that gold is undervalued, you can’t argue. Now, you’re going to say the CPI inflation is incorrect. I’ll admit it’s incorrect.

It’s somewhat fudged. But still, if you’re looking at gold relative to inflation, even a fudged inflation, it’s far higher than it was at the peak in 2011. It’s slightly higher than it was at the peak in 1980.

And it was certainly way higher than it was at the bottom in 2000. So people are arguing a new bull market in gold. You have to understand, it’s not a new bull market in gold.

We have a bull market that began in the year 2000. We’re late stage bull market in gold. Let’s take the next chart.

Let’s get gold relative to home sales. Now, the home sales are elevated. So we can argue, here’s gold relative to home prices, existing one family home prices.

You think gold is cheap. Look where it was in 2013. Look where it was in 1980.

But it’s not cheap. It’s really sort of middle of the road. I mean, there are many periods in history, going back to 1973, where housing was way below where it is now.

So you certainly can’t use this chart to make an argument that gold has to rally to get back to housing prices. Housing prices themselves are overvalued. Who tells you that gold is going to be overvalued relative to housing? Maybe housing will be overvalued relative to gold.

And housing prices go down and gold stays flat. You don’t know. But this is another chart people have been talking about.

And we don’t think it tells you anything. I think it does tell you that gold is more overvalued relative to housing than it was one or two years ago. But it doesn’t tell you much more than that.

Now, what we did was we created a gold price, not relative to the dollar and not relative to the euro, not relative to the British pound, but relative to major currencies on a GDP basis. In other words, GDP weighted. So this is gold.

And basically, this chart doesn’t look like an asset or a commodity that is ready to break out. It certainly looks like a commodity that’s already broken out. And maybe it’s making a top here.

So the argument that gold is going to do well, it doesn’t hold water. You want to make the argument here. The argument that gold is going to break out, you want to make it right here when it’s breaking out.

You want to make an argument that gold is going to break out when it’s here. You see? It doesn’t make sense to make an argument that it’s going to break out. You could say it’s going to go higher for whatever reason you have.

But gold is, you can’t argue that gold is cheap. You just can’t do it. Not relative to CPI, not relative to even housing prices.

It’s not undervalued. And in currencies, as you can see, the price of gold in currencies has surged over the last year and a half. It’s totally surged.

Now, does that mean it can’t go higher? It certainly doesn’t mean it can’t go higher. Does that mean it has to go higher? Is there any reason to think it has to go higher based on this low? No. If inflation is coming down, if they’re staring at the United States, if it’ll be slowed down, I think that’s a reason to think that gold will not do as well as it has done.

Now, I look at gold relative to the S&P 500. People are arguing, look, the bull market in gold began here. Look how low it was relative to the S&P.

Now, it’s again low relative to the S&P. But the S&P and gold is a different animal. Gold is a commodity.

Gold doesn’t create any baby gold. Gold doesn’t give dividends. Gold is just an asset that people buy to hedge against inflation.

And historically, it has hedged very well against inflation. The price of gold has gone up a little better than the inflation rate over the last 100 years, which means that if you want to buy jewelry made out of gold or you want to hold it for yourself, all over the world, people hold gold instead of holding dollars or the other currency, because gold has done better than currencies. But the S&P 500 is a dynamic asset.

It creates dividends. It has intrinsic value. It has retained value.

It has retained earnings. So the comparison is not a fair comparison, in my opinion. Of course, stocks should outperform gold over the long term.

Of course, it should. And so I don’t think this is an argument. I don’t think you can really relate gold to the price of stocks.

I think it’s a poor relationship. But people are talking about this as well. Now, this is something else to look at.

Gold versus long-term, US long-term treasury return. And gold has been outperforming treasuries since 2000, continued to outperform treasuries since the year 2000. Now, maybe treasuries and gold are both sort of real monetary financial assets, except that treasuries give dividends.

So this is the total return of treasuries. So of course, in the total return basis, it might outperform gold. But it really depends, because sometimes treasuries, even on a total return basis, underperform inflation.

I realize the typical retail investor, they’d rather own gold than own a treasury, all things being equal, because they don’t pay taxes on the growth of gold, but they pay taxes on the total return of treasuries. You see, as they clip the coupons or as they get the yield on the treasury, they got to pay taxes on it. So on a tax-adjusted basis, probably gold and treasuries are an equal investment, in my opinion.

And that’s it for gold. So I say, gold, yes, gold had a big run-up. Gold could go higher.

But I see no compelling argument to say that gold must go higher. On a technical basis, can you say it’s breaking out? I don’t think so. On a technical basis, can you say it’s undervalued? I don’t think you can say that as well.

People are showing relative to money supply. But I’m just showing, going back in history, you see you couldn’t trade on it. So I would say, you know, you could trade on a breakout, that you could trade on.

You could trade on a breakout in currency. You could trade on that. It’s difficult to trade on here.

You could even trade this breakout. I mean, talk about it. You could trade on this breakout, too, if you wanted to, right here.

You could trade on this breakout. You find a consolidation, and you could trade the breakout. But just to argue that gold is going to go up because it’s gone up for the last few years, or because there’s still inflation, no.

There’ll be a slowdown, and there’ll be a recession, and there’s quantitative tightening. And those things should not benefit gold in the short term. On the long term, gold is probably the best money to own, probably better than Bitcoin, because it’s not as volatile, and it’s real.

There’s some intrinsic value to gold as opposed to Bitcoin. That’s it for gold, David. All right.

Well, that’s a very thorough analysis. Let’s move to the US dollar. Take a listen to Larry Summers’ comments about tariffs and the dollar, and then we’ll talk about the dollar together.

I think the broad approach we are taking to the rest of the world represents the biggest threat to the US dollar’s role as the central currency in the world economy that we’ve had in the last five decades. And if I were still sitting at the Treasury Department, I would be terrified about the consequences of the kind of rhetoric that the president is engaging in vis-a-vis other countries. I would be alarmed by the way in which China and Europe were being magnets for capital as people rushed out of dollars, were increasingly allying with each other because they had both been alienated from us.

And knowing that I was going to have trillions and trillions of dollars that I had to place, and that I was part of an administration that was going to raise substantially the scale of the national debt with these new ideas like not taxing overtime or not taxing tips and extending the tax cuts for businesses and the wealthy in a massive way. Is the US dollar in danger and under threats? Like you said, I thought tariffs were actually bullish for the US dollar. I’ll let you comment on that.

Well, let’s look at the dollar itself. You know, the dollar, currencies always fluctuate. If the dollar goes up in value, it’s relative to another currency.

The other currency is going down in value. Currency, this is a Ned Davis research chart of the dollar going back to 1980. This is the dollar.

Look how high the dollar was in 1984. Look how low it was in 2008. Look how low it was now.

Fluctuation of the dollar, people make more about it than it is. It’s really just fluctuation of the dollar is a normal aspect of the economy. Currencies are measured against other currencies.

Now, if you’re going to say if the US dollar gets strong and another currency, another country’s currency gets weak, I find it meaningless, at least as far in my experience in the business. The strength and weakness of the dollar had very little impact on either bonds or stocks or on economy. But more importantly, as Larry was saying, he’s terrified about the consequences of Donald Trump’s rhetoric.

If you want to be terrified, you should be terrified about the high taxation in the United States. You should be terrified about the government deficits in the United States. You should be terrified by the government spending, and not only the wasteful spending, even though legitimate spending is much too high.

So I’m not terrified about tariffs. I don’t think tariffs are much of a problem. I mean, I know Ronald Reagan put tariffs on semiconductors early on in his presidency because Japan was dumping semiconductors in the United States, even a free market person like Reagan.

One of the risks they say of tariffs is because if your country puts in a tariff, there’ll be retaliatory tariffs, right? That’s what they say. Well, guess what? We are retaliating against the tariffs that other countries put on us. They have value-added taxes of 17%, 18% of everything we export to them, plus they have tariffs on them.

So what we’re doing is we’re retaliating. We shouldn’t be to blame because we’re retaliating. They should be to blame for putting tariffs in the first place.

So I think Donald Trump is doing the right thing. I think it’s a negotiating tactic. But as you know, when you negotiate, you have to be willing to stick to your negotiating position.

If Europe doesn’t back down, if Mexico doesn’t back down, if China doesn’t back down, we will keep our tariffs. If they’re smart, they will back down because our tariffs are just retaliatory. I’m not worried about tariffs.

Of course, and it certainly is not inflationary. Tariffs are a one-time deal. Let’s say they raise tariffs by 25% in 2025.

They’re not going to raise it by another 25% in 2026 or 2027. So tariffs themselves are not inflationary, even if you’re going to say they cause prices to increase, which is not necessarily the case. Secondly, let’s say you have a tariff of 25%.

Someone’s buying a car. The typical car in America lasts for 12 years. If there’s a 25% tariff, it’s less than 20% per year, far less than the sales tax in New York is on a car that’s 8.5%. I’m not that convinced that tariffs are going to be much of a problem.

I think it’s a negotiating ploy. And I think that Donald Trump is doing the right thing. And I don’t want to use the term make America great again.

But he is trying to level the playing field. America has been the greatest economy in the history of the world. And the countries have been taking advantage of us, which is fine.

But now our economy has a potential weakening because the debt-to-GDP ratio is way above where it’s ever been in history. And that could cause pockets of depression or recession in an unexpected way when you have this type. So I think he’s doing the right thing, cutting deficits, cutting spending, finding waste, and instituting tariffs as a retaliatory measure.

I understand. But I think the question is whether or not these retaliatory tariffs from the US will be bullish or bearish for the US dollar. Well, it could be bearish for the dollar.

It could be bearish for the dollar if the farmers are not going to be needing dollars because they’re not going to be buying our goods any longer. Basically, one of the strengths of the dollar is because on a trade basis, they need dollars to buy our goods. They used to need dollars to buy oil.

It’s not necessarily the case anymore. So it could be bearish to the dollar. But I don’t think it makes much of a difference.

It’s a question of trading the dollar. I have to say I’m neutral. I don’t have an opinion.

If I had to have an opinion, I’d say you want to short the dollar. I don’t think it’s going to make a big difference. Finally, let’s talk about oil.

It’s trading at multi-month lows. And yeah, oil is breaking down, I guess, on the back of lower economic growth expectations. But is there a bigger picture here at play? Okay.

I think this is a chart of crude oil. Crude oil is down. It’s breaking down.

You notice it’s at a level it was, I think, four or five times right here too. It’s got these levels. Technical breakdown.

But again, if you’re going to take oil and adjust it for inflation, oil is really undervalued. See, while gold might be overvalued relative to inflation. I should have showed you.

I have a gold to oil chart. I didn’t prepare it. But oil is actually way undervalued relative to inflation at $70, at $65.

So I don’t think oil is going to break down. In fact, we actually own some natural gas stocks in our long portfolio. We just got into some natural gas stocks.

Let me find them here. And this is natural gas. Natural gas, in the past, has traded as high as, what, $14? This is going back to 1990.

Natural gas is on an uptrend currently. Unlike oil, which is making lows, natural gas is on an uptrend. And we actually own a – this is the short-term chart of natural gas.

Say you want to buy breakouts, you got a breakout here, you got a breakout here. But we own a couple of natural gas stocks. We recommend the range resources as one.

You see, the stocks were near its highs while oil was trading down. But these are natural gas and oil plays. So Gulfport Energy and Terra Resources.

Now, they moved down along with the market. But I’d say oil – I wouldn’t – we had a big scare in oil during the COVID crisis when oil traded below zero. I think oil basically is fairly undervalued.

I don’t think there’s much of a play on the short side. Whether there’s a play on the long side, no, because in a slowing economy, there’s a slowing demand for oil. So there’s probably not much of an upside.

But I just don’t think there’s much of a downside, strictly on a valuation basis. I don’t think people are – long oil or leverage long oil have to get out. Well, people certainly leverage long gold and leverage long Bitcoin, leverage long stocks.

So there’s more reason for people to have to get out of those assets in a recession than to get out of oil. Oil will just be a natural decline because the natural use of oil is not speculating or trading. The natural use for oil is just to use the oil, so there’ll be less demand.

But when it comes to stocks and commodities – excuse me, stocks and gold and Bitcoin, where people are trading it as a financial asset, once you see austerity, once you see recession, usually those are the kind of assets that are forced to decline in value. That’s just my opinion of that as well. Perfect.

All right. Milton, I think we’ve covered a lot of ground today, so we can end it here. That was an excellent presentation.

Thank you very much. Can I take one more minute and show you something else? Most asset class. Yeah, please.

Please go ahead. Thank you. I’ve worked for a few years on a book.

What do I mean by a book? I’ve been modeling every market decline, every 8% market decline going back to 1957 when the S&P first became a – the S&P first became a 500 stock index. It used to be a 90 stock index. We tracked every 8% decline.

This is the chart going back to 1957. Every time the S&P declined 8%. So, you know, if it declined 8%, it continued to decline 9%, 10%, 20%, 30%, 50%.

But anytime the market declined 8% and bottomed, we modeled all of those bottoms. And we have thousands and thousands of models now to point – to pick market bottoms. So, what I’ve tried to create is the following.

Try to create a systematic product where you long the S&P 500. You get out every time it declines 8%. In that situation, it would still be long because the S&P is not down 8% currently.

You’re going to hold the S&P until it’s down 8%. Then you’re going to sell. And then you wait for a buy signal because we have a buy signal.

So, I’m going to use some samples of what we’ve done. For example, here’s an indicator. It’s basically showing you two consecutive 9 to 1 upside volume days in the S&P 500 in the New York Stock Exchange, meaning on two days in a row, there was nine times as much volume in the up stocks as in the down stocks.

And at the same time, on day two, the S&P gained one and a half percent. This happened a number of times in the past. Each time, it was at a market low, you see.

Each time it’s at a market low, marketing it higher. This is – at an area of a load, the market made a 1.8% lower load than the previous load. Well, it was a good time to buy.

Here, it actually took place within an uptrend. Just to show you the kind of – a lot of stuff in the market has not yet been discovered. Here, the S&P declines 14%, holds the low for nine days.

You have a five-day volume highest in five days, which we spoke about earlier. And you have a 10-day rate of change in the S&P 500, greatest in one year. And just combining these together, hold the bottom in 1929, the bottom in 1950, the bottom in 1982, the bottom in 1984, and the bottom in 2019 with a perfect track record.

The point is here that, you know, what we do is modeling. What we do is finding statistical operations in the marketplace. And I really put a lot of years of effort into finding the ability to catch market balance that declines 8% or more.

Here’s another example. Five-day volume is greatest in the year. You have 60 – the S&P is at a 60-day low.

It declined at least 12%. And five-day net up volume, which is the upside volume to downside volume on a five-day basis, is minus 40%. It’s oversold.

And five-day breadth, rather than being two to one upside, oh, you know, a thrust, we call it a reverse thrust. It’s 0.3. And just to show, hold the bottom in 1957, bottom in 62. This is the exact bottom day.

2001 was one day before the final low. And 2018 was exactly the bottom. So these are just kind of things we’ve been building.

And in the future, in the near future, we’ll have a systematic approach, which would be, I think, kind of fascinating based on the work we’ve done. Just wanted to point it out to you. You might find it interesting.

All right, perfect. Where else can we learn about your work in the meantime? The work, we have a website. I think it’s the miltenberg.com. Someone wants to contact us.

It’s info at miltenberg.com. And we’re also on Twitter. They could contact us, I guess, on Twitter as well. And that’s about it.

And mostly, at this point, we’re dealing strictly with institutional clients. And that’s where we’re at this point. That might change in the future.

But at this point, it’s strictly institutional. Okay, we’ll put the links down below. And you can follow Milton’s work there.

Thank you very much, Milton. I appreciate your time today. Very important updates at very uncertain times for our audience.

So I appreciate you coming on. Thank you. Thank you.

Thank you for watching. Don’t forget to like and subscribe.