Market Reaches New Highs

Market Reaches New Highs Despite Downbeat Jobs Report

by Louis Navellier

June 6, 2017

*All content in this Introduction to Marketmail represents the opinion of Louis Navellier of Navellier & Associates, Inc.*

All three major indexes hit new highs on Friday, including the S&P 500, rising 0.96% last week to close at 2,439, despite the fact that the Labor Department announced on Friday that only 138,000 new payroll jobs were added in May – substantially below the economists’ consensus estimate of 184,000. Also, the March and April payroll reports were revised down by a cumulative 66,000 jobs, but the unemployment rate fell to 4.3%, the lowest level in 16 years. Labor force participation rates declined to 62.7%, down from 62.9%.

NowHiring.jpg

As usual, the ADP and Labor Department reports differed greatly. On Thursday, ADP reported that private job growth surged 253,000 in May, substantially higher than the economists’ estimate of 170,000.  This was the strongest monthly ADP private job growth report since 2014, which caused Moody’s Chief Economist, Mark Zandi, to describe the May ADP report as “rip roaring.” Frankly, even though the Fed follows the Labor Department’s payroll figures, the ADP report cannot be ignored, since ADP performs the actual payroll processing for U.S. businesses, so I tend to believe the ADP report is more accurate.

As a result of the disappointing May payroll report, the 10-year Treasury yield declined to 2.15% (the lowest since November 10, 2016), making stocks a bargain relative to long-term bond yields. As a result of these low Treasury yields, I expect that the stock market will get a “second wind” in the rest of June.

In This Issue

In Income Mail, Bryan Perry turns his eye toward overseas markets, which have tempting yields as well as capital appreciation potential. In Growth Mail, Gary Alexander argues that our much-maligned slow-and-steady GDP growth sure beats the manic-depressive boom & bust cycle. In Global Mail, Ivan Martchev examines the “bipolar” messages that the U.S. stock and bond markets are giving us. Jason Bodner focuses on the lagging Energy sector again, while I handicap the Fed’s next interest rate decision.

Income Mail:
Global Markets Moving Higher
by Bryan Perry
Foreign Stock Markets Getting High-Speed Bid

Growth Mail:
Slow & Steady Beats Boom & Bust
by Gary Alexander
Slow Growth is More Sustainable Than Rapid Growth

Global Mail:
When Markets Go Bipolar
by Ivan Martchev
Key Commodities Are Also Weak

Sector Spotlight:
There Are At Least Two Ways to View a Market
by Jason Bodner
Energy Continues to Lag the S&P Sectors

A Look Ahead:
Despite Downbeat News, the Fed Will Likely Raise Rates Next Week
by Louis Navellier
Europe and Trump’s America are Now at Odds

Income Mail:

*All content of "Income Mail" represents the opinion of Bryan Perry*

Global Markets Moving Higher

by Bryan Perry

The global equity markets saw an uptick in trading activity this past week. A fair amount of economic data was released across the world, which provided some movement in the major equity indexes. The S&P 500 took its cue from the improving global macro picture and traded to a new all-time high.

The global economic and stock market performance numbers are picking up. Here are some samples:

  • Starting in Japan, the Nikkei posted solid gains, helped by weakness in the yen against the dollar. The strong sentiment in stocks was supported by another solid set of figures signaling signs of domestic recovery. First, the final May reading of Japan's Manufacturing PMI was revised up to 53.1, vs. the preliminary figure of 52.0. The other significant release was Q1 Capital Spending, that saw better-than-expected growth of 4.5%, vs. the 4.0% consensus.
  • Conversely, China has been trading in red for the past week. Mainland traders pulled back after the Caixin Manufacturing PMI not only fell short of expectations, but also signaled a contraction, falling below 50 to 49.6 (vs. 50.1 estimate). This is notable considering the State-issued PMI suggested an opposite appraisal of the economy (May PMI: 51.2 vs. 51.0). This dichotomy likely left traders scratching their heads after the release of the data, wondering which release paints the more accurate assessment of China’s conditions going forward.
  • In Europe, the major EU bourses got off to a strong start out of the gate last week and have managed to sustain those gains. Energy names are among those catching a bid in tandem with crude futures. Also supporting equities in Europe was some mostly better-than-expected macro-data across the region, led by a slight upward revision in Germany's Manufacturing PMI (59.5 vs. 59.4 preliminary), as well as a better-than-expected 1.2% GDP in Italy.

Source: Briefing.com Market Analysis - June 1, 2017

After growing at a 2.7% rate in 2015 and a 3.1% pace in 2016, the IMF has revised its 2017 growth forecast to 3.5%, and 3.6% in 2018 (source: International Monetary Fund’s “World Economic Outlook” titled “Gaining Momentum?” April 4, 2017). It’s my view that the IMF will continue to bump up their estimates further this year and the markets should respond quite positively when they do. And, let’s not forget, all this comes without any of the Trump economic agenda being passed into law or implemented.

With so much of the focus being on the U.S. economy, it’s a breath of fresh air to see the more-developed global economies (notably Europe and Japan) gain structurally. It’s been a long time coming and now that the seeds of future growth have been sown by massive central bank fiscal stimulus, there is an organic earnings recovery in the making, similar to that of the U.S. What’s so inspiring about the ‘global reflation trade’ is that over 60% of the revenues generated by the companies that make up the S&P 500 are from overseas; and as such, we should see upward earnings revisions for many multinational corporations.

For dividend investors, there is a plethora of American Depository Receipts (ADRs) that trade on the NYSE that sport yields in the 4% to 6% range in well-known companies that have been in a bear market for 10 years. Some have already made solid moves higher while many are trading at steep discounts to book value and to their American peers. What’s nice about buying ADRs is that the listing requirements at the NYSE are very stringent, so there is little to worry about as far as accounting irregularities and transparency of the business. Plus, investors get much more news and updates on these companies because big institutional money managers tend to be the biggest buyers of these stocks.

Foreign Stock Markets Getting High-Speed Bid

Through June 2, the S&P 500 year-to-date total return was 9.91%. However, the bigger story unfolding lies within the international markets. The MSCI World Index, which is part of The Modern Index Strategy, is a broad global equity benchmark that represents large and mid-cap equity performance across 23 developed market nations. It covers approximately 85% of the free float-adjusted market capitalization in each country and the MSCI World benchmark does not offer exposure to emerging markets.

Through Friday, the Global MSCI EAFE Index is up by 16.44% for 2017, so it is trading neck and neck with the 17.14% year-to-date performance for the NASDAQ. Considering that the dividend yield on the Nasdaq 100 (QQQ) is about 0.75% and the yield on the iShares MSCI EAFE ETF (EFA) is about 1.8%, the case for having some international exposure is a solid one.

MSCI EAFE Exchange Traded Fund Chart

Graphs are for illustrative and discussion purposes only. Please read important disclosures at the end of this commentary.

What also makes for a compelling observation is that the MSCI EFA Index is trading at a 24% discount to its previous high recorded in mid-2007. Here we are 10 years later, with global GDP growth looking as if it bottomed in 2015, and the global stock market benchmark trading at a steep discount to historic highs.

In the first quarter, $135 billion went into ETFs, with international equity second only to U.S. equity.

Exchange Traded Funds Flows in the First Quarter Table

The old saying of ‘follow the money’ truly applies in the case of investing overseas. Record fund flows into international markets is pushing those stock indexes higher and paving the way for a banner year while the business media remains preoccupied and sometimes consumed with the ‘FANG’ stocks and domestic M&A stories. There aren’t any high-speed trains in the U.S., but foreign markets are loaded with rising investment prospects that are leaving (or have already left) the station. All aboard!

Growth Mail:

*All content of "Growth Mail" represents the opinion of Gary Alexander*

Slow & Steady Beats Boom & Bust

by Gary Alexander

There has been great moaning and gnashing of teeth over the long string of low-growth quarters we’ve seen since 2010.  This isn’t anything like the Reagan recovery of the 1980s, pundits proclaim.  I agree. The facts are clear.  Growth rates were far more robust in the Reagan and Clinton years than the Obama years, but what these pundits fail to add is that 1982 followed a decade of slow inflationary growth and two steep recessions in short order – a short recession in 1980 followed by a major setback in 1981-82.

Whenever economists or laymen call 2008-09 the “worst recession since the Great Depression,” I always wonder when 1981-82 got flushed down the memory hole.  The jobless rate was much higher (for longer) in 1982 than in 2008-9.  The inflation rate was higher by a factor of 10, as were interest rates.  Real GDP declined 5% between June 1981 and December 1982.  The number of monthly jobs “added” was negative for 17 straight months.  In the middle of 1982, we LOST 280,000 jobs in April.  We lost 243,000 jobs in June, lost 342,000 in July, and lost 2,833,000 net jobs from August 1981 to the end of 1982 (source: BLS).

In 1981-83, the unemployment rate was over 9% for 20 straight months and over 10% for 10 consecutive months, September 1982 to June 1983.  Inflation had receded from 10.3% in 1981 to “merely” 6.2% in 1982, but the annual rate was still running over 7% as of mid-1982.  The Prime interest rate was in double digits for seven years, 1978-85, peaking at 21.5% in late 1980.  In the first half of 1982 it was still 16.5% (or higher).  The Fed Funds rate was 20% for most of 1981 and it was still a lofty 15% for most of 1982.

Perhaps I remember 1982 so well since I was a free-lance financial writer (a polite term for unemployed) that year, but one good thing came out of the pain of 1982.  The Fed and our political leaders (Reagan, then Clinton) delivered low-inflation growth policies, preferring long recoveries to boom-bust cycles.  The result is a Goldilocks economy in which we’ve only seen three recessions since 1982, two of them mild:

Recessions Since 1982 Table

Since the end of 1982, we’ve seen 34 months of contraction and 381 months of growth.  In the eight years since the middle of 2009, we’ve seen two down quarters out of 32, but we haven’t seen two consecutive down quarters – which is the standard definition of a recession.  No single quarter has grown by greater than 5%, while the rolling 12-month growth rates have ranged from 1.0% to 3.3%, averaging slightly over 2.0%.  The last four quarters have risen 1.4%, 3.5%, 2.1%, and 1.2%, averaging a 12-month gain of 2.05%.

United States Real Gross Domestic Product Chart

Graphs are for illustrative and discussion purposes only. Please read important disclosures at the end of this commentary.

Slow Growth is More Sustainable Than Rapid Growth

Back in 2010, when the recovery (and bull market) was very young, 2% was considered “stall speed,” since previous expansions tended to enter a recession after real growth slowed to 2%.  Not this time.

We should always be wary when someone says, “It’s different this time,” unless there are some logical reasons for the difference.  This time around, part of the reason why slower growth isn’t “stall speed” is due to the natural limits to growth for a larger entity – “the law of large numbers.”  It’s much harder for a $20 trillion economy to grow 5% ($1 trillion) than for a $5 trillion economy to grow $250 billion (+5%).

Another difference is the lack of a “bubble” mentality in the stock market or in business spending.  Most past recessions and bull market peaks resulted from a runaway sense of euphoria, including borrowing large amounts of money at high interest rates to fund business expansion.  That has not happened this time around.  Banks have buried their cash (putting it on deposit at Federal Reserve banks) rather than lending it out to businesses.  There has been no huge building boom or borrowing for business expansion loans.

In the May 18 Wall Street Journal (“The Economic Headwinds Obama Set in Motion”), former Senator and lifelong economist Phil Gramm and economist Thomas Saving wrote that “every significant postwar recovery” had “the same driving force: a sustained rise in private investment and new home building, which increased borrowing and drove up interest rates.”  This time around, they say, housing starts have lagged past recoveries.  Private investment has been lacking and housing starts have lagged past patterns.

The classic end to a business cycle is a “credit bubble” that drives prices and interest rates higher.  But nobody would claim we’re in a credit bubble now, or even on the way there.  Banks don’t seem to want to lend to even credit-worthy customers.  They were burned too badly in the crisis of 2008, due to all those kinky mortgage-backed securities, which fed a market panic.  Bank credit standards are much higher now.

Another difference is the lower cost of servicing debt, due to the Fed’s “zero interest rate policy” (ZIRP), in effect from late 2008 to late 2015.  Even though the U.S. public debt has doubled since 2008, the cost of servicing that debt has not risen much.  As a result of that and some spending cuts, real GDP excluding government spending has been growing much faster – at around 3.0% since 2010 (and 2.6% in 1Q 2017).

United States Real Gross Domestic Product and Nonfarm Business Output Chart

Graphs are for illustrative and discussion purposes only. Please read important disclosures at the end of this commentary.

This chart also shows how shallow the 1991-2 and 2001-2 recessions were, and how bad 2008-9 was:

Stagnation (“stall speed”) remains a greater risk than a classic credit bubble right now, but chronically low growth is a more constructive economic backdrop than the “boom and bust” cycle which dominated most of American economic history.  As usual, we would be more successful investors, in my view, if we saw the positive side of reality (counting our blessings) rather than wishing for some alternative reality.

Global Mail:

*All content of "Global Mail" represents the opinion of Ivan Martchev*

When Markets Go Bipolar

by Ivan Martchev

Conservative news blogger Matt Drudge – who has been a source of endless entertainment during the election and now with the related Russia-gate scandal – posted a rather peculiar main story Saturday. To support his catchy headlines (below), Matt used an image of a $20 bill that replaced Andrew Jackson with Donald Trump. While it is easy to see how Mr. Trump would love to be on a large-denomination dollar bill one day – judging by his demeanor, he probably wouldn’t settle for anything less than $100 – the linkage of the market’s all-time high to a “wave of optimism” under Mr. Trump is a problematic thesis.

Drudge Main Story Image of Trump

The so-called “Trump trade” (the reaction of different financial markets to the new administration’s policy agenda after their surprise November victory) is unwinding rather expeditiously. You can see that in weak commodity prices and a massively flattening U.S. Treasury yield curve. On the same day (last Friday) when stocks hit an all-time high, the 10-year Treasury yield hit a fresh 2017 low of 2.15%. (In December 2016 and in late winter in 2017 we had been as high as 2.63% on the 10-year Treasury yield.)

United States Ten Year Versus Two Year Treasury Bonds Yields Chart

Graphs are for illustrative and discussion purposes only. Please read important disclosures at the end of this commentary.

One of the most popular measures of the yield curve slope is called the 2-10 spread – the difference between the 10-year and 2-year Treasury notes. As the 10-year Treasury note yield falls – courtesy of the bond market losing its belief in the Trump administration being able to rejuvenate the economy given its distraction with multiple investigations – the 2-year note yield is rising courtesy of fed rate hikes.

United States Ten Year Treasury Constant Maturity Minus Two Year Treasury Constant Maturity Chart

Graphs are for illustrative and discussion purposes only. Please read important disclosures at the end of this commentary.

If we go by the yield curve, which is a reliable economic indicator that has predicted every one of the last five recessions when inverting, the bond market has already thrown in the towel on the Trump trade. The yield curve today, at 93 basis points, is flatter than where it was on Election Day, when it stood at 101.

In other words, the sharp steepening of the yield curve after the election (signifying the bond market predicting a stronger economy) has completely been unwound and now the yield curve is flatter (signifying the bond market predicting a slower economy). In the eyes of the bond market, Mr. Trump's election promises no longer matter. The yield curve has not inverted yet but with a few more rate hikes and a major delay in the tax and infrastructure plans, it is not hard to see how it could invert.

Right now, the bond market does not agree with the stock market. One of them must be wrong.

I would just like to remind readers of this column that the bond market disagreed vehemently in a similar manner in 2007 when the S&P 500 made an all-time high in October of that year. For those that knew where to look, it was clear that the economy was in trouble as many mortgage bonds and CDOs had collapsed and the Treasury yield drive had inverted at the time of that all-time high in the stock market.

I realize that those are esoteric indicators that were not widely followed by the average investor at the time, but the message of the bond market at the time was clear: We were about to have a nasty recession.

This time we are not quite as advanced in the verdict of the Treasury market on the U.S. economy. The yield curve has not yet inverted, but without any new tax reform and infrastructure plans from the Trump administration we are unlikely to see his master plan gain traction any time soon, economically speaking. The present economic expansion is eight years long – the third longest in history. If Mr. Trump doesn't get his act together, the yield curve will invert, in my opinion, with all the ominous consequences.

Key Commodities Are Also Weak

Iron Ore and Crude Oil Prices Chart

Graphs are for illustrative and discussion purposes only. Please read important disclosures at the end of this commentary.

Crude oil seems to be rolling over in a seasonally strong part of the year (March to September), which cannot be dismissed as normal. I know there is a problem with too much supply but what if there is also a problem with too-little demand? Iron ore, a commodity that has no futures market but where the market is priced using forward contracts, has also been very weak. After recovering from $40 per ton in January 2016 to $90 in March 2017, Iron ore is down to $56 at last count. At the risk of being melodramatic, iron ore is in a free fall. It is certainly dropping faster than in 2014, when China’s slowdown was the culprit.

I think this recent iron ore decline is most likely related more to the Chinese economy than to the U.S. economy, but my point is that there are polar disagreements in commodities and bonds countering the stock market’s wave of optimism. While I don’t believe that a hard landing in China – which I believe is coming – can cause a recession in the U.S., it certainly won't help our domestic economic situation.

It is one thing to be an optimist and quite another to be a realist. When it comes to the message of the bond market, I see a lot of concern about where the U.S. economy is headed.

Sector Spotlight:

*All content of "Sector Spotlight" represents the opinion of Jason Bodner*

There Are At Least Two Ways to View a Market

by Jason Bodner

As I have been saying in these columns all along, there are at least two ways to look at any set of facts.  To the press and to most investors, the prevailing story is what seems to matter most, but there are usually at least two ways of seeing the same facts – and that brings us to the continuing “story” of energy.

Let’s look at the sectors for the past holiday-shortened week. Returns seem somewhat muted in keeping with what we would expect from a Memorial Day trading week. Telecom saw some life this week with a 2.33% vault. Health Care was also a winner with a 2.07% increase. In fact, nine of 11 sectors were positive last week. The losers were Financials and Energy, so it’s time for me to pick on Energy again…

Standard and Poor's 500 Weekly Sector Indices Changes Table

Before I do, however, let’s not celebrate Telecom too much. Recall that this is the smallest sector with only a handful of stocks. If we look at the past three months, Telecom is down almost -9%. Looking back six months, it is the worst-performing sector. Energy also looks ugly down nearly -12% in three months.

Standard and Poor's 500 Quarterly and Semi Annual Sector Indices Changes Tables

Energy Continues to Lag the S&P Sectors

In the last six months. 7 of 11 sectors are up more than 10%! Energy equities have felt some pressure recently, but nothing compared to the volatility and poor performance of oil. Look at this past week’s performance in West Texas crude. Since the recent peak on May 23, WTI has dropped nearly 9%!

CrudeOilWTI.jpg

Energy’s fall is indeed ugly and worrisome. Back in the summer of 2014, oil began behaving badly. It took a while for equities to follow suit, but when oil wouldn’t stop falling, the whole equity market came tumbling after. Eerie echoes of energy in 2014 are beginning to be felt now. The drop from June 13, 2014 resulted in a loss of -72.48% (left chart, below). Even now, oil still is over -55% lower (right chart).

CrudeOilWTI-History.jpg

Energy may be priming the market for another shock – or it may just be a bump in the road. The overall market looks set for more fervor as Treasury bond yields continue to be low, causing equities to still be desirable. The difference between 2014 and now is that energy earnings are largely positive again and the -9% recent performance depicted above falls (shockingly) within crude oil’s recent volatility range.

In these sector spotlights, my attention is usually focused on the weakest sectors, but I don’t want to focus so much on them that I ignore the winners. Or, as Albert Einstein supposedly put it, “Any man who can drive safely while kissing a pretty girl is simply not giving the kiss the attention it deserves.”

EinsteinClown.jpg

A Look Ahead:

*All content in this "A Look Ahead" section of Market Mail represents the opinion of Louis Navellier of Navellier & Associates, Inc.*

Despite Downbeat News, the Fed Will Likely Raise Rates Next Week

by Louis Navellier

The news on the job front was disappointing last Friday, but I think the Fed is “locked in” to their coming (June 14 rate) increase.  In doing so, the Fed will probably pay more attention to their own “Beige Book” report and their favorite inflation indicator (the PCE index), so let’s take a look at those two key indicators:

The Commerce Department announced last Tuesday that personal consumption expenditures (PCE) rose by a very healthy 0.4% in April.  The Fed’s favorite inflation indicator (based on the PCE) rose 0.2% in April.  In the past 12 months (through April 30), the PCE is running at a 1.7% annual pace.  The core PCE rate, excluding food and energy, is running at a 1.5% annual pace.  So now that inflation is running below the Fed’s 2% annual inflation target, the pressure is off the Fed to raise key interest rates, but I still believe that a June interest rate hike is likely, since the Fed wants to get back to more “normalized” interest rates.

On Wednesday, the latest Beige Book survey of economic conditions in the Fed’s 12 districts revealed a relatively upbeat view of U.S. growth.  Although the Beige Book survey said that “optimism waned in some districts,” most of the Fed’s 12 districts reported stronger economic growth.  Labor shortages for skilled positions may be contributing to slower economic growth in some regions, they said, but overall, the Fed will likely cite the positive growth in their Beige Book survey when they raise rates next week.

Europe and Trump’s America are Now at Odds

Last week, the fact that the Trump Administration refused to join the Paris Agreement to restrict carbon emissions without further study miffed Chancellor Angela Merkel.  Furthermore, President Trump’s charge that German vehicle manufacturers were not making enough vehicles in the U.S., despite German plants in Alabama, South Carolina, and Tennessee, further miffed Chancellor Merkel.  Finally, the British election in June may also be weighing on the euro, since Prime Minister May called the election an attempt to get a bigger legislative majority, so Britain could break away from the EU more decisively.

Over the weekend, there was another tragic terrorist attack in Britain, but the Sunday morning news was dominated by the major news media criticizing President Trump’s “twitter storm” after the event.  After tweeting a heartfelt condolence to the people of London, he then tweeted out a series of short messages talking about the root causes of terrorism and the means we need to use to prevent future terrorist attacks.

On the monetary front, European Central Bank (ECB) President Mario Draghi confirmed last Tuesday that the ECB would remain accommodative despite seeing the most robust economic growth in the euro-zone in several years.  Draghi’s comments helped to weaken the euro, since there appears to be no possible end to the ECB’s quantitative easing, which is intended to help support weak banks in Italy and other euro-zone countries.  Also weighing on the euro last week was German Chancellor Angela Merkel’s comments that the euro-zone cannot count on its friends (namely, the U.S. President) like it has in the past.

With the euro up to $1.12 and the U.S. dollar index down 6% so far this year, the multinational companies in the S&P 500 stand to profit the most from this latest war of words between European and U.S. leaders.


It should not be assumed that recommendations made in the future will be profitable or will equal the performance of the securities in this list. Click here to see the preceding 12 month trade report.

Although information in these reports has been obtained from and is based upon sources that Navellier believes to be reliable, Navellier does not guarantee its accuracy and it may be incomplete or condensed. All opinions and estimates constitute Navellier's judgment as of the date the report was created and are subject to change without notice. These reports are for informational purposes only and are not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of a security. Any decision to purchase securities mentioned in these reports must take into account existing public information on such securities or any registered prospectus.

Past performance is no indication of future results. Investment in securities involves significant risk and has the potential for partial or complete loss of funds invested. It should not be assumed that any securities recommendations made by Navellier. in the future will be profitable or equal the performance of securities made in this report.

Dividend payments are not guaranteed. The amount of a dividend payment, if any, can vary over time and issuers may reduce dividends paid on securities in the event of a recession or adverse event affecting a specific industry or issuer.

None of the stock information, data, and company information presented herein constitutes a recommendation by Navellier or a solicitation of any offer to buy or sell any securities. Any specific securities identified and described do not represent all of the securities purchased, sold, or recommended for advisory clients. The reader should not assume that investments in the securities identified and discussed were or will be profitable.

Information presented is general information that does not take into account your individual circumstances, financial situation, or needs, nor does it present a personalized recommendation to you. Individual stocks presented may not be suitable for you. Investment in securities involves significant risk and has the potential for partial or complete loss of funds invested. Investment in fixed income securities has the potential for the investment return and principal value of an investment to fluctuate so that an investor's holdings, when redeemed, may be worth less than their original cost.

One cannot invest directly in an index. Results presented include the reinvestment of all dividends and other earnings.

Past performance is no indication of future results.

FEDERAL TAX ADVICE DISCLAIMER: As required by U.S. Treasury Regulations, you are informed that, to the extent this presentation includes any federal tax advice, the presentation is not intended or written by Navellier to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties. Navellier does not advise on any income tax requirements or issues. Use of any information presented by Navellier is for general information only and does not represent tax advice either express or implied. You are encouraged to seek professional tax advice for income tax questions and assistance.

IMPORTANT NEWSLETTER DISCLOSURE: The performance results for investment newsletters that are authored or edited by Louis Navellier, including Louis Navellier's Growth Investor, Louis Navellier's Breakthrough Stocks, Louis Navellier's Accelerated Profits, and Louis Navellier's Platinum Club, are not based on any actual securities trading, portfolio, or accounts, and the newsletters' reported performances should be considered mere "paper" or proforma performance results. Navellier & Associates, Inc. does not have any relation to or affiliation with the owner of these newsletters. There are material differences between Navellier & Associates' Investment Products and the InvestorPlace Media, LLC newsletter portfolios authored by Louis Navellier. The InvestorPlace Media, LLC newsletters and advertising materials authored by Louis Navellier typically contain performance claims that do not include transaction costs, advisory fees, or other fees a client may incur. As a result, newsletter performance should not be used to evaluate Navellier Investment Products. The owner of the newsletters is InvestorPlace Media, LLC and any questions concerning the newsletters, including any newsletter advertising or performance claims, should be referred to InvestorPlace Media, LLC at (800) 718-8289.

Please note that Navellier & Associates and the Navellier Private Client Group are managed completely independent of the newsletters owned and published by InvestorPlace Media, LLC and written and edited by Louis Navellier, and investment performance of the newsletters should in no way be considered indicative of potential future investment performance for any Navellier & Associates separately managed account portfolio. Potential investors should consult with their financial advisor before investing in any Navellier Investment Product.

Navellier claims compliance with Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS). To receive a complete list and descriptions of Navellier's composites and/or a presentation that adheres to the GIPS standards, please contact Navellier or click here. It should not be assumed that any securities recommendations made by Navellier & Associates, Inc. in the future will be profitable or equal the performance of securities made in this report. Request here a list of recommendations made by Navellier & Associates, Inc. for the preceding twelve months, please contact Tim Hope at (775) 785-9416.

Marketmail Archives Trade Summary

It should not be assumed that recommendations made in the future will be profitable or will equal the performance of the securities in this list. Click here to see the preceding 12 month trade report.

Although information in these reports has been obtained from and is based upon sources that Navellier believes to be reliable, Navellier does not guarantee its accuracy and it may be incomplete or condensed. All opinions and estimates constitute Navellier's judgment as of the date the report was created and are subject to change without notice. These reports are for informational purposes only and are not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of a security. Any decision to purchase securities mentioned in these reports must take into account existing public information on such securities or any registered prospectus.

Past performance is no indication of future results. Investment in securities involves significant risk and has the potential for partial or complete loss of funds invested. It should not be assumed that any securities recommendations made by Navellier. in the future will be profitable or equal the performance of securities made in this report.

Dividend payments are not guaranteed. The amount of a dividend payment, if any, can vary over time and issuers may reduce dividends paid on securities in the event of a recession or adverse event affecting a specific industry or issuer.

None of the stock information, data, and company information presented herein constitutes a recommendation by Navellier or a solicitation of any offer to buy or sell any securities. Any specific securities identified and described do not represent all of the securities purchased, sold, or recommended for advisory clients. The reader should not assume that investments in the securities identified and discussed were or will be profitable.

Information presented is general information that does not take into account your individual circumstances, financial situation, or needs, nor does it present a personalized recommendation to you. Individual stocks presented may not be suitable for you. Investment in securities involves significant risk and has the potential for partial or complete loss of funds invested. Investment in fixed income securities has the potential for the investment return and principal value of an investment to fluctuate so that an investor's holdings, when redeemed, may be worth less than their original cost.

One cannot invest directly in an index. Results presented include the reinvestment of all dividends and other earnings.

Past performance is no indication of future results.

FEDERAL TAX ADVICE DISCLAIMER: As required by U.S. Treasury Regulations, you are informed that, to the extent this presentation includes any federal tax advice, the presentation is not intended or written by Navellier to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties. Navellier does not advise on any income tax requirements or issues. Use of any information presented by Navellier is for general information only and does not represent tax advice either express or implied. You are encouraged to seek professional tax advice for income tax questions and assistance.

IMPORTANT NEWSLETTER DISCLOSURE: The performance results for investment newsletters that are authored or edited by Louis Navellier, including Louis Navellier's Growth Investor, Louis Navellier's Breakthrough Stocks, Louis Navellier's Accelerated Profits, and Louis Navellier's Platinum Club, are not based on any actual securities trading, portfolio, or accounts, and the newsletters' reported performances should be considered mere "paper" or proforma performance results. Navellier & Associates, Inc. does not have any relation to or affiliation with the owner of these newsletters. There are material differences between Navellier & Associates' Investment Products and the InvestorPlace Media, LLC newsletter portfolios authored by Louis Navellier. The InvestorPlace Media, LLC newsletters and advertising materials authored by Louis Navellier typically contain performance claims that do not include transaction costs, advisory fees, or other fees a client may incur. As a result, newsletter performance should not be used to evaluate Navellier Investment Products. The owner of the newsletters is InvestorPlace Media, LLC and any questions concerning the newsletters, including any newsletter advertising or performance claims, should be referred to InvestorPlace Media, LLC at (800) 718-8289.

Please note that Navellier & Associates and the Navellier Private Client Group are managed completely independent of the newsletters owned and published by InvestorPlace Media, LLC and written and edited by Louis Navellier, and investment performance of the newsletters should in no way be considered indicative of potential future investment performance for any Navellier & Associates separately managed account portfolio. Potential investors should consult with their financial advisor before investing in any Navellier Investment Product.

Navellier claims compliance with Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS). To receive a complete list and descriptions of Navellier's composites and/or a presentation that adheres to the GIPS standards, please contact Navellier or click here. It should not be assumed that any securities recommendations made by Navellier & Associates, Inc. in the future will be profitable or equal the performance of securities made in this report. Request here a list of recommendations made by Navellier & Associates, Inc. for the preceding twelve months, please contact Tim Hope at (775) 785-9416.

Marketmail Archives