Is This 1987 All Over Again? What’s Driving the Market Meltdown?

Financial markets are supposed to capture the wisdom of the crowd, but on Monday the crowd ran in all directions waving its hands in the air screaming. Japan’s stock market fell the most in 37 years with a 12% plunge that wiped out all its gains for the year, while in the U.S. the VIX index of implied stock volatility briefly had its biggest rise ever. Panic hit.

The selloff was triggered by Friday’s jobs data prompting a sudden switch in the economic narrative from soft landing to hard landing. Add to the mix a period of deflating hype about artificial intelligence and a Bank of Japan rate rise designed to strengthen the yen. News that Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway had sold half its Apple shares and boosted its cash pile added to the pain.

But the triggers couldn’t possibly justify the scale of the moves. When a new trigger arrived, in the form of better-than-expected data on the service sector, markets partially rebounded and the Vix fell sharply — again, far more than the data could justify.

The selloff—which at one point had chip maker Nvidia down 15%—was so big because investors had been all-in betting that things would work out well. Now things have calmed a bit, the question is whether the unwind of these bets, and the leverage behind them, is done. If it resumes, will the selloff feed back into higher savings and a weaker economy or, worse, hit the financial system?

The extreme examples of past effects from big market falls are 1987’s crash, 1998’s Long-Term Capital Management blowup and 2008’s global financial crisis. History is never perfect, but so far this looks more like a (much milder) version of 1987 than it does the other two.

In 1987, the stock market had its biggest one-day fall ever, with the S&P 500 down more than 20% on Black Monday in October. Investors had built up excessive leverage after a stunning 39% gain in the year to August’s high, and the crash led both to big margin calls and to badly designed automated trading that exacerbated the selling. But the Federal Reserve poured liquidity into the banks, brokers didn’t default and the market made back all its losses within two years. The economy was fine.

The good news was that 1987 was all about markets: They went up, they went back down, no one else was hurt. The S&P made 36% in the eight months to its August 1987 peak, similar to the 33% it rose in the eight months to the end of June this year. As in 1987, this year’s gains came in spite of tight monetary policy and higher bond yields. Just like today, in 1987 investors were on edge and ready to sell to lock in the unexpected profit. The losses are smaller so far, but lucrative trades have reversed , just as they did for the market as a whole in 1987.

In 1998, the situation was much worse, although stocks recovered more quickly. Highly levered hedge fund LTCM was crushed when Russia’s domestic debt default created a flight to safety. LTCM was big enough that it threatened to bring down Wall Street institutions. The Fed cut rates three times and pulled together a group of banks to rescue the firm and wind down its trades slowly. Stocks took just four months to recover, but the easy money helped stoke the dotcom bubble, which popped two years later and led to a mild recession—and gigantic losses for investors in tech stocks.

We don’t know yet if any hedge funds have been taken out by the big moves in markets, which have brought heavy losses for those engaged in the “ carry trade ” of borrowing cheaply in yen and buying higher-yielding currencies such as the Mexican peso or dollar. Large swings in Treasurys on Monday might also have hurt, given the large positions hedge funds hold. Traders are betting that the Fed will slash rates, with a super-sized cut of 0.5 percentage points priced into futures for the September meeting (and far more earlier in the day).

The really bad outcome would be a repeat of 2008, but it seems highly unlikely. True, some large U.S. banks failed last year, due to bad bets on government bonds. But banks are much less leveraged than they were, and the system is less exposed to a liquidity crisis, as private lenders have taken on much of the risk that used to sit in banks. Big losses are entirely possible, and private funds could hit trouble, but that would take time and wouldn’t create the same system-wide crisis.

The ideal would be that excess in the stock market unwinds as in 1987 without creating wider trouble, hopefully more gradually than in 1987. AI enthusiasm could deflate stock prices much more—even after falling 30% from its June high, Nvidia has still doubled in price this year. But the market is already much closer to normal, with Monday’s falls leaving the Nasdaq 100 index up only 6% this year, and the S&P 7%.

If panic continues to abate, the Fed cuts and nothing breaks in the financial system, we should count ourselves lucky. But it would be good if investors could remember the sinking feeling they had on Monday morning, and try to be a bit wiser and less speculative.

Tuesday’s retail sales report could be the scrap of evidence that tips the balance as Federal Reserve officials decide how much to cut interest rates on Wednesday.

It is practically a given that the central bank will reduce rates. Inflation has fallen to its lowest point since February 2021, giving the Fed more flexibility to focus on the second component of its dual mandate—achieving maximum employment. Although the labor market remains resilient, the most recent two jobs reports have been weaker than expected, putting some pressure on the Fed to loosen monetary policy.

The question now is by how much rates will fall—0.5 percentage point, or 0.25 point? The indications from interest-rate futures are split , recently favoring the more aggressive half-percentage-point decrease.

Andrew Hollenhorst, an economist at Citi , leans toward the likelihood the Fed is more cautious on Wednesday, cutting rates by 0.25 percentage points. But he notes that it it is a close call that depends on the dynamics of the bank’s rate-setting committee and the strength or weakness of Tuesday’s retail sales report.

A positive surprise would suggest that both consumers and the labor market remain resilient, paving the way for a more modest cut. If the report comes in well below expectations, however, Fed officials may grow concerned that a weaker labor market is weighing on consumer spending, which could lead to a bigger cut, Hollenhorst added.

Louis Navellier, founder and chief investment officer of the money-management firm Navellier agrees. “In theory, if the August retail sales report is horrible, then a 0.5% Fed key interest rate cut may be forthcoming on Wednesday,” he said.

Economists are expecting retail sales will decline by 0.2% in August from July, according to FactSet. They jumped by a surprising 1% in July .

Lower gasoline prices and car sales will likely drag the headline number lower. Indeed, stripping out car and gas sales, retail sales are projected to increase by about 0.3% month over month.

Yet there is growing concern that even excluding autos and gas sales, the sales figure will be soft. While spending was remarkably strong in July, the Fed’s latest Beige Book flagged that consumer spending ticked down in August, points out Bill Adams, chief economist for Comerica Bank . Many retailers, particularly those catering to lower-income shoppers, have warned that Americans are being cautious and exceedingly choosy about what they are buying and where.

The impact of the retail sales report will likely extend beyond the immediate rate cut. The insights it contains about U.S. consumers will also factor into the Fed’s quarterly update to its Summary of Economic Projections, containing officials’ latest forecasts for the U.S. economy, inflation, and near-term interest rates.

The so-called dot plot , which charts the individual interest-rate projections of the seven members of the Fed’s board of governors and the 12 regional Fed presidents, is always closely watched as investors try to chart the Fed’s future actions.

Hollenhorst believes the median dot showing where rates will be at the end of 2024 should show “at least” 0.75 percentage-point of cuts, factoring in 0.25 point at each meeting through the end of the year. But it is likely that officials will leave the door open for more cuts in case data on the job market or consumer spending sour faster than expected.

Is This 1987 All Over Again? What’s Driving the Market Meltdown?

Past routs offer lessons after Black Monday Morning