Etiquetas

Vía Mac Daily News, leo “Apple’s instituional slingshot”  de Jason Schwarz, en Seeking Alpha.

“… Suppose you were a mutual fund manager and your strategic models allowed for a maximum 8% allocation in any individual stock. What would have happened to your Apple holdings in 2012? As of September 21st, Apple was up 74.9% year-to-date. Apple allocations at the largest mutual funds had grown to between 13% and 15% of total holdings with the fiscal year end approaching on October 31st. Because of Apple’s strength, because it was such an outlier when compared to the rest of the market, these money managers were forced to re-balance their portfolios in order to comply with their risk models. The Apple slingshots, or in other words the deeper than unexpected selloffs, are caused by systematic institutional re-balancing. This is the unintended consequence of Apple’s status as the most widely held stock of most hedge funds, indexes, pension funds and mutual funds. Apple’s slingshot selloffs occur because of its strength, not because of its weakness. Apple is an outlier.…”

Más sobre Apple y su comportamiento en bolsa, en Asymco.

“…At least since the iPhone launched, every dramatic drop in share price was followed by a surge in earnings growth. One could even say the worse the bear, the better the growth.

Sounds completely counter-intuitive, but there is some perverse logic in this as well. The market reflects crises (as well as over-abundance) of confidence. Unforeseen growth is what creates wealth and the crisis in confidence is a reflection of the improbability of continuing out-performance. When Apple’s performance is foreseeable the stock moves slowly upward. When its performance is unforeseeable the stock moves dramatically downward.

A pithy way of putting it is: No news is good news. Good news is bad news.

When a product is understood the stock is mildly desirable. When a new product appears the future is hazy and the stock is undesirable. But that haziness hides potential but up and down. New products is what innovators produce. Bizarre new products is what disruptors produce.

In other words, the paradoxical observation in the chart above of “the more drama in the market, the more success in the marketplace” makes sense when inverted.

For disruptive companies, it should be “the more success in the marketplace, the more drama in the market.… ”

Y una visión más negra en yahoo finance.

“… Long-time Apple bull Todd Schoenberger, managing principal at The BlackBay Group is concerned. “Apple is a true proxy of the global economy,” he says in the attached clip. If Apple is slowing down it could be an ominous sign for spending worldwide.

To be sure, the world should dare to dream of having Apple’s problems. The maker of all things that start with a lower-case “i” is still growing at a more than 20% pace, amassing cash faster than ever before seen in corporate history. But that growth has begun disappointing analysts. Too many of what Schoenberger says are derivative “me too” products, like the iPad Mini, have some wondering if Apple’s best days are behind it, spectacular though they were. …”