Markets
Highlands Train Wreck
A train wreck (Kirk Sides/Getty Images)

How surging bond yields threaten to derail the momentum trade in stocks

Sharp changes in yields mean the world might be changing. Momentum stocks like it when the world stays the same.

It was a bit of a miracle the S&P 500 managed to deliver a weekly gain last week given the carnage in the bond market.

The Bloomberg Treasury: Long Index, which tracks the return of US government bonds with at least 10 years to maturity, slumped 2.6% for its worst week in more than a year. Renewed jitters about the duration of disruption to oil supplies, a big jump in US producer prices for April, and UK political hijinks (of all things) contributed to the bloodbath in bonds.

A couple factors that have contributed to softness in bonds over time, however, are much more positive for the stock market: US economic data has broadly surprised to the upside, and there’s immense demand for capital to funnel into data centers; both are pluses for the near-term earnings outlook.

But one thing that’s very different about this cycle compared to the totality of the past 32 years is how much the stock market loathes a spike in yields. (Bond prices move inversely to yields.) Since 2022, when long-term bonds are down at least 0.5% in a week, the S&P 500’s median return has been negative — deeply so for weeks when bonds are down at least 1.5%.

This is even more true for the tech-heavy Nasdaq 100:

And momentum, well, the most.

(It’s worth highlighting that the jump has taken bond yields to near the peak of their multiyear range. If the surge in 30-year Treasury yield peters out between 5% and 5.2%, you can’t say you weren’t warned: this would be the sixth time in the past three years that’s happened.)

Sharp changes in bond yields, in theory, suggest the broad economic backdrop may be different than we had anticipated. As such, that dynamic is a particular threat to the momentum trade.

I don’t like changeis the momentum factor’s mantra. Think about it: momentum is betting that winners keep winning, and what could be a better backdrop for winners to keep winning than the world around them staying exactly the same?

“In general, Momentum as a factor performs best in periods of stasis,” wrote Goldman Sachs strategists led by Ben Snider.

To put a fine point on it: during last week’s bond rout, IGV outperformed SMH. That’s not something you would expect if you’ve been overly preoccupied with the idea that rising bond yields are an acute worry for software stocks, because of their long-duration cash flows. (Besides, hasn’t the real worry been AI tools crushing their ability to have long-term cash flows to begin with?)

In 2022, when rising yields undermined the stock market, momentum and software were highly correlated. Now, those two aren’t: momentum and semiconductors are swinging in tandem.

That same dynamic is holding true this morning: a backup in bond yields sent the VanEck Semiconductor ETF 2% lower as of 11:32 a.m. ET and the iShares MSCI USA Momentum Factor ETF underperforming while the iShares Expanded Tech Software ETF treads water in positive territory.

More Markets

See all Markets
markets

Memory stocks tumble after Seagate warns on difficulty of meeting demand, bond yields edge higher

Memory stocks are cratering on Monday after media reports indicating that Seagate Technology Holdings CEO Dave Mosley warned that it would “just take too long” to boost capacity to meet AI-fueled demand.

Micron, Sandisk, and Western Digital are down in addition to Seagate.

Another place to look to help explain the group’s sudden travails (lumping together flash, storage, and high bandwidth): Memory stocks have displayed an elevated level of momentum, and momentum stocks have generally come under acute pressure during sudden bond market selloffs.

Mosley’s answer, delivered at a JPMorgan conference, is worth reading in full, as the summarized media reports miss some of the nuance (emphasis added):

What our customers are driving us for right now is more exabytes. And we believe that the way to get the most exabytes is to take our talented teams and really go through these technology transitions. We're targeting mid-20s percent growth, which is enormous CAGR. And the only way we're going to get there is to be able to go through those technology transitions, if you will, to take a 3 terabyte per platter product to a 4 terabyte per platter to a 5 terabyte per platter year over year over year. And so that's really the way we're driving it. If we took the teams off and started building new factories or bringing up new machines, it would just take too long. You would end up more capacity, if you will, but then you'd slow the rate of growth on that technology. So back to your question directly, the wildcard really is in unit capacity for disk drives, which we again could be fairly flexible with once we package those heads and media. That gets down to more customer diversification and edge and edge AI and all those use cases, which I think could come someday. So we would take the heads and media that we have planned and divert them somewhere else should those applications take hold.

To grossly oversimplify Mosley’s answer, he’s saying that in a resource-constrained environment, technology improvements are the better way to meet demand than building out more capacity.

Reasonable folks can quibble about how negative these remarks really are for the industry.

On one hand, not getting over their skis on capex is something that, all else equal, would protect profitability over time and avoid the boom-bust cycles that have plagued the industry.

On the other hand, that gives more time for competitors (especially those from China) to try to step in and meet the market’s appetite for memory. To that end, Changxin Memory Technologies is posting massive growth as it readies for an IPO.

markets

Lumentum, Coherent fall after hedge fund manager Aschenbrenner dumps his holdings

Shares of Lumentumand Coherent plunged Monday after ex-OpenAI researcher-turned-investor Leopold Aschenbrenner disclosed his Situational Awareness fund exited his holdings in those companies during the first quarter.

By the afternoon, Lumentum was down 11% and Coherent was down over 6%. The losses are relatively small compared to the over 120% and 80% gains the AI infrastructure companies had put up respectively since January.

The two companies are developers of phonetics and optical equipment which help data centers and AI hyperscalers transmit data.

Aschenbrenner's firm Situational Awareness is making major market ripples today, also sending shares of T1 Energy soaring on news he bought the stock.

He also made a bearish bet against Nvidia, which recently invested $4 billion ($2 billion each) into Lumentum and Coherent.

markets

T1 Energy spikes on record call buying after Situational Awareness reveals 3.6% stake

T1 Energy is soaring after a 13F filing released this morning showed Situational Awareness held a 3.6% position in the solar and battery storage company at the end of Q1.

The position makes the hedge fund one of the 10 biggest owners of T1, according to data compiled by Bloomberg.

Situational Awareness has become a closely followed fund because of how well it’s done in the AI era and who it’s run by: former OpenAI researcher Leopold Aschenbrenner, who’s only in his mid-20s!

(In fact, there was much consternation across X on Friday that the fund’s 13F wasn’t released ahead of the weekend.)

Call volumes in T1 are absolutely exploding as traders look to play follow-the-Leopold: they’re running at 52,501 less than 90 minutes into the trading day, already a one-day record for the stock.

Latest Stories

Sherwood Media, LLC and Chartr Limited produce fresh and unique perspectives on topical financial news and are fully owned subsidiaries of Robinhood Markets, Inc., and any views expressed here do not necessarily reflect the views of any other Robinhood affiliate, including Robinhood Markets, Inc., Robinhood Financial LLC, Robinhood Securities, LLC, Robinhood Crypto, LLC, Robinhood Money, LLC, Robinhood U.K. Ltd, Robinhood Derivatives, LLC, Robinhood Gold, LLC, Robinhood Asset Management, LLC, Robinhood Credit, Inc., Robinhood Ventures DE, LLC and, where applicable, its managed investment vehicles.