+

Cookies on the Business Insider India website

Business Insider India has updated its Privacy and Cookie policy. We use cookies to ensure that we give you the better experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we\'ll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies on the Business Insider India website. However, you can change your cookie setting at any time by clicking on our Cookie Policy at any time. You can also see our Privacy Policy.

Close
HomeQuizzoneWhatsappShare Flash Reads
 

If you're selling stocks because of oil, the worst is probably over

Jan 14, 2016, 22:43 IST

Venezuela's President Hugo Chavez takes a sample of crude during his weekly broadcast at a nationalized oil field at Orinoco's belt in the southern strip of the eastern Orinoco River February 17, 2008. Chavez said on Sunday he will cut oil sales to the United States if Washington attacks the South American country as the country is in the midst of a legal battle with U.S. oil giant Exxon Mobil, which recently won court orders freezing up to $12 billion in Venezuelan assets to ensure compensation for an oil project Chavez nationalized last year.Miraflores Palace/Handout/Reuters

If you're selling stocks because of the negative impact the oil crash will have on the economy, the worst is probably over.

Advertisement

Just short of calling a bottom in oil, Deutsche Bank's Torsten Sløk argued in a client note Thursday that the impact of the crash on the economy cannot get much worse than its been over the last year.

As we recently noted, it's unlikely that anyone would give away oil for free.

And since oil is now about $70 cheaper per barrel from the top, in this strictly nominal sense, the worst of the oil crash is over, according to Sløk.

But Sløk goes further to say that the negative impact on the economy - which is what has some investors spooked - will probably be felt for the next two quarters. And then that will be all.

Advertisement

And like the price of oil, Sløk doesn't see the amount of investment going into oil falling to 0% of capital spending in the economy.

Here's Sløk:

The bottom line is that the US stock market is overly worried about a risk that the consensus doesn't expect (a hard landing in China) and the stock market mistakenly believes that lower energy prices is bad news for the economy. In my view, the decline we have seen in US equities over the past two weeks is a buying opportunity similar to what we saw in September [...]

Combined with the positive effects of lower energy prices on the rest of the economy I think equities, credit, and rates should be paying more attention to the fact that average nonfarm payrolls in October, November, and December was 284,000.

In other words, if all these bearish stories we are telling each other in markets about energy and the dollar and wider credit spreads and China are true, why are companies still hiring almost 300,000 workers every month?

Advertisement

In other words, the stock market is not the economy, and if you're selling stocks over how oil will drag down the economy the worst is probably "baked into the cake," as the old investment adage goes.

Energy's share of capital expenditure - which infers the sector's contribution to economic growth - has plunged 5% in the past 12 months, and it would be "unprecedented" that it would fall to zero, Sløk wrote.

Additionally, in a note on Wednesday, Sløk had argued that the other big dampener of sentiment recently - China -is projected to grow by 6.5% this year and 6.3% in 2017, which isn't exactly a so-called hard landing.

And so while certain financial market conditions might be encouraging investors to sell, and worries about the fundamental strength of the economy are probably overblown given the magnitude of the drop in financial markets we've already seen this year.

NOW WATCH: This is how you're compromising your identity on Facebook

Please enable Javascript to watch this video
You are subscribed to notifications!
Looks like you've blocked notifications!
Next Article