Decoupling is bunk, but the relative ourperformance of emerging markets is real. I have analyzed this in my blog (please dont take this as a shameless plug). Here is the gist: This decade (starting Jan 2001), emerging markets have retunred 10+%, annualized, whereas S&P has returned -3%, annualized. Interestingly, emerging markets bottomed in November and S&P in March 2009. Lastly, a volatility adjusted portfolio of long EM versus short S&p would have made money in 2008!

What was it before? An urban legend? Gossip about a couple breaking up? Who’s ‘we’? Shouldn’t he tell us where he heard this story before? And now? Was it one of the attorneys for one of the members of the couple?

“So the market really has faith in decoupling this time. Does it have too much faith?”

Now it sounds more like a creed or a hope.

“Disquieting signs, such as the failure of US financial stocks to make any gain since the stress test results came out a month ago, suggest all is not well.”

Now it’s a failed promise or a bad meal.

“But the underlying trend is clear; rightly or wrongly the market believes that China and the other emerging markets will pull the world through.”

Why isn’t the trend clear? How did we go from “seem” to “believe” in this short post?

I like Authers. I think that he was actually having a bit of fun about decoupling in this post.

“But suddenly, in late October, they hit a bottom and started to rise.”

His point is about how silly this decoupling talk sounds. Namely,it has a portentous quality unjustified by the facts. Of course, I thought that “The Homecoming” was a comedy.