CORRECTION OR BEAR MARKET: THE QUANTIFICATION OF JARGON
When I first entered the investment business in 1978, the use of quantitative techniques was the lunatic fringe of investing. Those of us who used these methods wanted to change the world, and we did. Now, even “traditional” managers use what would have been considered quant techniques in the 1970s and 1980s.
One of the by-products of analytical methods becoming mainstream has been the quantification of jargon that had already been in the investing world for over 150 years. This struck me with this year’s market sell-off. In early January, Reuters proclaimed “NASDAQ confirms fourth correction since pandemic hit.” About the same time, Bloomberg said that China was in “striking distance” of a bear market. In the former article, a correction was defined as a 10% decline, while in the latter a bear market was a 20% decline. But these precise trigger points didn’t exist until the 1990s. Prior to that, any prolonged downturn in the market was considered a “bear market.” A shorter drop in prices was a “correction.” One rule of thumb was that a bear market was about 6 months or longer, while a correction was a couple of weeks. Accordingly, a “bull market” used to be any extended rally but is now classified as a 20% rise to mirror the bear market definition.
It’s likely that in the 1990s, more precise definitions began showing up largely so that academics and Wall Street analysts could study market characteristics and have a common language to share research. As data became more easily available and computers more powerful, quant research exploded. Why 20% and 10% became trigger levels is not really known, nor is there any magic in those particular numbers. The temporal part of the jargon appears to have been dropped altogether. Now, a 20% downturn of any length is a “bear market,” perhaps so that researchers have more examples to study.
I bring this up because the media will often say that if the market fell by less than 20%, something negative was averted and we should all breathe a sigh of relief. Unfortunately, I don’t believe that a 19% decline feels a lot better than a 20% decline. These pronouncements of bull and bear markets, as well as corrections, should be taken with a lot of grains of salt. They’re not really that meaningful in and of themselves. They are, in fact, arbitrary definitions that help the industry communicate with itself. But that’s about it. The underlying cause of the decline or rally is much more important than arbitrary thresholds.
Past performance is no guarantee of future results. Potential for profit is accompanied by possibility of loss.
© First Quadrant, LLC, 2022. Intended for Institutional and Qualified Eligible Persons Use Only. The views expressed are the views of First Quadrant, LLC, only as of the date shown and are subject to change without notice based on market and other conditions. Forecasts, estimates, and certain information contained herein are based upon proprietary research and should not be considered as investment advice, recommendation, or solicitation of any particular security, strategy or investment product. This publication has been prepared without taking into account your objectives, financial situation or needs. Before acting on this information, you should consider its appropriateness having regard to your objectives, financial situation or needs. It is your responsibility to be aware of and observe the applicable laws and regulations of your country of domicile. All material has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but its accuracy is not guaranteed. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form, or referred to in any other publication, without express written permission.