The Trouble with Relentless Bid Theories

In my piece this morning, The Relentless Bid, Explained, which has since gone mega-viral by the way (thank you!), I laid out a theory for why the stock market has had a relentless bid beneath it for years now, with shorter and smaller corrections along the way. The premise was that investor behavior has changed – owing largely to the way big advisory firms are allocating assets and planning retirement portfolios.

I’ve gotten a ton of feedback behind the scenes, including comments from some heavy hitters in the industry. Many of these responses center around the following three points:

1. Too many dollars chasing too few assets (share buybacks and a dearth of IPOs have shrunk the investable markets)

2. The presence of the Fed and the endless ZIRP / QE of recent years

3. Demographics play a role – portfolios have calmed down because the largest percentage of investors have aged and calmed down themselves

I agree with all of them, and they all have room to coexist with what I’ve said. In fact, they not only coexist, they converge. 

But the most important thing I think should be brought out is the fact that my theory does not mean “It’s different this time.” I am describing what has been going on as relentless, not endless. I am also not projecting it out indefinitely into the future.

In fact, I’d like to quote a passage from Robert J. Shiller’s Irrational Exuberance, specifically the 2005 edition, to show that we’ve seen similar market environments before, which have certainly not run on forever. What these eras have had in common is that each one bore its own creation myth:

 The first of the three major peaks in the price-earnings ratio since 1881 occurred in June 1901, right at the dawn of the twentieth century. Prices had achieved spectacular increases over the preceding twelve months, and in mid-1901 observers reported real speculative fervor…

There was another important theme in 1901: that stocks were now being held in “strong hands”: “The ownership of stocks has changed hands. The public speculators do not now own them. They are owned by people who are capable of protecting them under any circumstances, such as Standard Oil, Morgan, Kuhn Loeb, Gould and Harriman Interests. These people who are the foremost financiers of the country evidently know when they go into a proposition what ultimate results may be expected.” This theory, like theories expressed at other market peaks, finds it inconceivable that there could be a selling panic. In the shortest run, perhaps this theory is right. But those strong hands did not stop the stock market crash of 1907, nor the dramatic slide of stock values between 1907 and 1920.

If the “Strong Hands” line of thinking doesn’t sound remarkably like the modern T.I.N.A. (There Is No Alternative), then I don’t know what does. It also reminds me a great deal of the “Permanently high plateau” patois that ended Irving Fisher’s career shortly after he spoke it ahead of the 1929 crash. I believe that there is some basis in reality for TINA but that, like all small truths, it can be taken toward illogical conclusions and reckless behavior. George Soros once remarked that “Stock market bubbles don’t grow out of thin air. They have a solid basis in reality — but reality as distorted by a misconception.”

Believe me, I am highly aware of the fact that “Relentless Bid” can be misconstrued to represent some kind of “new paradigm” that could persist forever. I want to make it clear that I believe the very opposite – that it will suck in the maximum amount of people taking the largest amount of risk just at the point where it will come to an ignominious end. But as in the 1901-1907 example, miconceptions can persist for a very long time before they’re debunked.

Read Also:

The Relentless Bid, Explained (TRB)

The Relentless (for now) Bid (Above the Market)

T.I.N.A. (or the Seller’s Dilemma) (TRB)

Peter Atwater: An ‘Oligopoly in Confidence’ Puts Global Markets at Risk (Minyanville)



This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

Wealthcast Media, an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here:

Please see disclosures here.

What's been said:

Discussions found on the web
  1. Blue Coaster33 commented on Apr 27

    The Slave of the Husband

    Looking for in advance to learning excess from you afterward!…

  2. tv online, online tv commented on Apr 28

    Woman of Alien

    Excellent function you may have performed, this page is admittedly great with great data. Time is God’s strategy for keeping almost everything from taking place at the same time.

  3. watch free movies online commented on Apr 28

    The Absent Game

    Between me and my husband we’ve owned extra MP3 gamers through the years than I can count, including Sansas, iRivers, iPods (traditional & touch), the Ibiza Rhapsody, etc. But, the last few years I’ve settled down to one line of players.

  4. What if Long-Term Thinking Really Catches On? commented on Feb 24

    […] need, because Brown wrote a follow-up the very same day with The Trouble with Relentless Bid Theories where he offers further explanation along with the caveat that this behavior cannot last forever […]

  5. How Dangerous Is a Stock Market of Mindless Robots? | HYDROCARBON REPORTS commented on Feb 24

    […] So-called robo-advisers manage investments electronically; index mutual funds and exchange-traded funds roll entire markets up into a single bundle; target-date portfolios hold a predetermined mix of assets, marching savers mechanically toward retirement. Could all these millions of people investing on autopilot be pushing an already expensive market even higher? […]

  6. commented on Sep 16

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More on on that Topic: […]

  7. the fifth watches fake leather commented on Sep 18

    … [Trackback]

    […] Read More on to that Topic: […]

  8. Blazing Trader Review commented on Sep 24

    … [Trackback]

    […] Information on that Topic: […]

  9. wholesale suppliers commented on Dec 21

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More Information here to that Topic: […]

  10. Unicc commented on Jan 29

    … [Trackback]

    […] Find More here to that Topic: […]