TOKYO (Reuters) – Scandal hit Olympus Corp is to stay in the Nikkei average for the time being, the Nikkei publisher said on Thursday.

The publisher will make a final decision after it looks into the situation regarding the company's earnings reports.

The announcement came after Olympus said it was unlikely to issue its earnings by an earlier November 14 filing date but it aimed to meet the December 14 deadline.

Tokyo's stock exchange warned Olympus it would be delisted if it fails to meet the latter deadline.

(Reporting by Antoni Slodkowski and Kaori Kaneko)

NEW YORK (Reuters) – Wall Street rose on Monday, but major averages gave up some of their gains as bank stocks came under renewed pressure.

Stocks had come under heavy selling pressure in recent weeks on growing fears of recession and the possible spread of the euro zone’s sovereign debt crisis.

Bank of America (BAC.N) shares were down 6 percent to $6.53. Late last week, Chief Executive Brian Moynihan sent a memo to senior executives outlining plans to cut another 3,500 jobs.

“The ground zero of all worries is financials,” said Charlie Smith, chief investment officer at Pittsburgh-based Fort Pitt Capital Group.

Among the issues boosting the S&P 500 were Apple Inc (AAPL.O) and IBM (IBM.N), which all have appeal for investors seeking stocks prized for strong growth potential despite economic conditions.

“The rebound is pretty much focused on buying into some of the safer issues,” said Marc Pado, U.S. market strategist at Cantor Fitzgerald & Co in San Francisco.

“There’s value in the market, but very little faith in the government in dealing with the (U.S.) debt problem,” he said. “People are sticking to the big names. No one is taking on added risk.”

The Dow Jones industrial average (.DJI) was up 32.31 points, or 0.30 percent, at 10,849.96. The Standard & Poor’s 500 Index (.SPX) was up 0.99 point, or 0.09 percent, at 1,124.52. The Nasdaq Composite Index (.IXIC) was down 0.91 point, or 0.04 percent, at 2,340.93.

U.S. crude futures rose 2.3 percent on a rebound in equities, even as Brent crude fell 1 percent on expectations Libyan oil exports might resume after the civil war ends. Libyan rebels swept into the heart of Tripoli and met scattered resistance.

The rise in U.S. crude helped lift the S&P energy index (.GSPE) by 1.2 percent. Among major energy advancers, Exxon Mobil (XOM.N) shares advanced 0.6 percent, while Sunoco Inc (SUN.N) stocks climbed 1.2 percent.

Tensions in the Middle East and a spike in oil prices contributed to equity weakness earlier this year.

The S&P had fallen more than 13 percent so far in August, with volatility shifting the index at least 4 percent for six days over the past two weeks.

Credit Suisse on Monday cut its year-end target for the S&P 500 to 1100 from its previous 1275 level. U.S. equity strategist Doug Cliggott cited expectations of a lower medium-term earnings profile and little hope for price-earnings multiples to expand.

Investors looked ahead to a speech by U.S. Federal Reserve Chairman Ben Bernanke on Friday at the central bank’s annual meeting in Jackson Hole, Wyoming.

Some investors hope the Fed will announce new stimulus after the central bank promised earlier this month to keep interest rates near zero for at least two more years, and said it would consider further steps to help growth.

(Reporting by Ashley Lau; editing by Kenneth Barry)

It’s been a rough couple of weeks for the global economy, and the markets have been torn asunder. On Monday, the VIX – a measure of the implied volatility in the stock market – shot up to its highest level since the depths of the 2008-09 financial crisis, up 50% to 48. Tuesday it dropped 27%, the biggest one-day drop in history. Wednesday? Back up 26%. By Thursday, the Dow Jones Industrial Average had experienced its fourth straight day of 400+ point moves, the most in the Dow’s history. So just how long do we have to wait before the market’s mega-mood swings are finally through?

The truth is, nobody knows. But don’t be surprised if the market mayhem continues for weeks – if not months – to come. Yes, the U.S. economy survived a much-feared credit rating downgrade. And in a move to calm the markets, the Fed extended its promise to keep money cheap for several more years. But those don’t change the fact that the global economy’s structure is beginning to come unhinged. In fact, the Fed’s low interest-rate pledge may only accelerate the turmoil, if countries with volatile currencies start fighting back. Here are a few of the big-picture reasons why the market jitters may stick around:

Currency wars: This week’s pledge by the Fed to keep interest rates low until mid-2013 prompted a stampede into U.S. Treasuries. The yield on 10-year Treasury bonds dipped below its record low in 2008, which, when accounting for inflation, means bondholders are so desperate for the “safe haven” that they’re now willing to pay the government to hold its debt. That’s some crazy stuff. The Fed’s dire reading on the economy, coupled with the lower yields on Treasuries, also led to a global stampede into other “safe” currencies offering higher returns, notably the Swiss franc and Japanese yen. Their currency prices have soared against the dollar in recent weeks, prompting moves by both countries to weaken their currencies to keep their exports competitive. If more currency interventions ensue, expect more volatile markets as traders attempt to cope. Even before the Fed’s rate announcement, Callum Henderson, global head of currency research at Standard Chartered in Singapore, warned there would be “more intervention in the future and further acrimony in terms of how the U.S. dollar is doing.” Another round of quantitative easing, which flooded emerging markets with hot money during its last rendition, would surely add fuel to the fire. (Who will save the global economy this time?)

Trade imbalances: China’s trade surplus rose 20.4% in July to $31.5 billion, a more than two-year high. U.S. exports, meanwhile, fell for the second month in a row in June, widening the U.S. trade deficit to $53.1 billion. That’s the biggest U.S. shortfall in more than two and a half years and a stark reminder that troublesome trade imbalances – widely blamed for causing the financial crisis – are only getting worse. Of course, countries like China, Japan, and Germany have run large trade surpluses for years, while the U.S. and peripheral Europe have run big deficits. And for many years, that setup worked, since both the consumers and sellers of exports benefited. The U.S. was happy to live beyond its means by over-borrowing and spending, while China had reason to keep U.S. borrowing cheap, since its dollar binges kept its exports competitive. But now that credit downgrades and bailouts abound, markets are warier of yawning deficits. Cash-strapped populations are also peeved at the painful cuts required to close their countries’ budget gaps, and the resulting crimp on growth sets back needed shifts on trade. For markets to stabilize once and for all, a major rebalancing will have to occur. Mervyn King, governor of the Bank of England, made this point in his latest economic forecast:

One way or another, the losses that were built up in recent years will have to be shared between creditors and debtors; in the world economy between creditors in the east and debtors in the west, and within the euro area between creditors in the north and debtors in the south.

China could lend a helping hand by allowing its currency value to increase faster, something the U.S. and other big industrial countries have been pressing it to do. As for Germany, unless it’s willing to see Europe implode, it will have to pay more of its neighbors’ debts and ensure their economies become more competitive. But the longer the surplus countries drag their feet, the greater the fear that the global economy will slide back into recession. Big market swings reflect a tug-of-war between investors about whether that fear will come true. (Stock Market Plunge: Can the Fed Do Anything?)

Declining trust: The Fed’s pledge to keep interest rates low for two years elicited mixed market reactions. The intention, it seems, was to boost investor confidence and prompt moves into riskier assets. But after an initial upward jolt in stocks, investors retreated to safe-haven Treasuries, a sign the Fed’s gesture may be all for naught. Similarly, President Obama’s attempt to soothe markets (by saying the country’s problems were “imminently solvable” after the country’s shocking downgrade) also failed to quell fears; The market still dropped over 600 points that day. Indeed, no matter what policymakers say or do these days, investors seem far less willing to take the bait. As the Financial Times notes:

What the markets have grasped is that leading policymakers’ strategies for handling these huge economic and financial challenges still amounts to no more than muddling through. The recent panic was thus understandable.

The command of European policymakers is even more pathetic, especially considering that they lack the luxury of time. Even though they reached an agreement on reforming the EU’s bailout fund, for example, the changes still require the approval of cranky eurozone governments, and they happen to be on month-long vacations. Meanwhile, the most needed eurozone reform by many accounts – dramatically increasing the size of the bailout fund – still isn’t settled, mainly because of German foot-dragging. That’s left only one institution – the European Central Bank – capable of easing market jitters by buying up billions more in shaky European government bonds while the whole world waits for reform. But the temporary relief comes with a price: The ECB is now contending with its own credibility concerns and a weakening balance sheet. If these stalwart institutions lose hold of their image, investor skepticism will only grow.

Roya Wolverson writes for TIME. Find her on Twitter at @royaclare. You can also continue the discussion on TIME‘s Facebook page and on Twitter at @TIME.

See TIME’s Pictures of the Week.

See the Cartoons of the Week.

View this article on Time.com

Most Popular on Time.com:

• Remember the 1990s? Good, Because They’re Back
• Will SlutWalks Change the Meaning of the Word ‘Slut’?
• Why I Already Miss Books: A Lament for Physical Media
• Behind the Picture of Farrah Fawcett That Made her an Icon
• Troubled Waters: Why China’s Navy Makes Asia Nervous

NEW YORK – It’s one of the truisms of financial planning: trying to perfectly time the market is a fool’s errand. For long-term gains, the advice goes, you should buy index funds and hold them indefinitely. Warren Buffett likes to say that his preferred holding period is “forever.”

But a very simplistic form of market-timing has worked for the past 11 years. It involves owning the Standard & Poor’s 500 stocks, but only for the first day of every month.

An S&P report recently found that someone who invested $10,000 in the S&P 500 on Dec. 31, 1999, and left the money there until Dec. 1, 2010, would have just $8,209. An investor who was in the market only on the first day of every month over the same time — for example, buying at the close on Dec. 31 and selling at the close of the first trading day in January — would have $13,816.

That’s nearly 70 percent more than buying and holding the whole time. S&P didn’t include reinvesting dividends in either scenario because of the complications of figuring out which companies paid dividends on the first trading day of the month for 11 years. But even if you include all possible dividends for the buy-and-holders, the first-day trade strategy came out 33 percentage points ahead.

The strategy appears to work because of a market quirk. Money tends to go into stocks of the first day of the month as institutional investors reopen their books for a new reporting period. It’s also the day when money tends to go into 401(k) or other retirement accounts.

“It’s a quirk that works,” says Howard Silverblatt, a senior index analyst at Standard & Poor’s. “It’s hard to argue with someone who made well over 30 percent compared to someone who’s down almost 20 percent.”

It helped that the stock market hasn’t been kind to most investors over the past 11 years. Staying in the market for only one day a month would have limited your losses during the dot-com bust or the 2008 financial crisis. The week of Oct. 6-10, 2008, for example, the S&P dropped 18 percent. First-day traders were sitting in cash and spared that agony.

Other financial experts are accepting S&P’s research grudgingly. “It’s not as outlandish as it first appears,” says Christine Benz, the director of personal finance at fund tracker Morningstar. But she says that it might not be a strategy that most small investors can follow because of the trading costs involved and the amount of discipline that’s required to stick with it month after month. She isn’t planning on changing her advice any time soon.

“I don’t know if I want to give up buying and holding,” she says.

Silverblatt says that the first-day trade has worked over two bull markets and two bears markets, which he says gives some credence to the idea that you can time the market, but only over a long period of time.

“Timers either do the best or they go bankrupt,” he says. “No one has gone bankrupt doing this.”

NEW YORK – Get used to a difficult stock market.

It’s nearly four months since stocks reached their 2010 highs and began falling on investors’ doubts about the economic recovery. Some analysts say it could be another year before investors get up enough confidence to restart the rally.

The economy isn’t helping them. Last week, the Federal Reserve and two mass-market retailers, JCPenney Co. and Kohl’s Corp., lowered their outlooks for the rest of the year. The CEO of networking equipment maker Cisco Systems Inc. used the same words as Fed Chairman Ben Bernanke to describe the economy: unusually uncertain.

The Fed also said last week it would start buying government debt in hopes of stimulating lending and in turn economic growth, though investors proved skeptical. The Dow Jones lost almost 400 points over four days.

But investors aren’t even resolute about selling. Stocks have racheted up and down since late April. The market began August with a burst of optimism based on many companies’ overall upbeat view of the rest of the year. The Dow rose 208 points Aug. 2, the first trading day of the month.

Subodh Kumar, global investment strategist at Subodh Kumar & Assoc. in Toronto, noted that the Standard & Poor’s 500 index has moved within a range of about 1,020 and 1,217 this year. “That broad range will hold until the middle of 2011,” he said. The index closed Friday at 1,079.25.

A similar but shorter-term prediction came from Steven Goldman, chief market strategist at Weeden & Co. in Greenwich, Conn. “It looks like it will be this way for the rest of the year,” he said.

You don’t have to be a market pro to understand why. Private employers aren’t hiring at a pace that will get millions of unemployed people back to work. The government put the number of unemployed in July at 14.6 million. Meanwhile, many working people aren’t making enough to pay all of their bills. And then there are those with jobs who are nervous and socking money away. This all adds up to weak consumer spending that can’t give the recovery much momentum.

And there are still the fundamental problems of a troubled housing market and banks that aren’t willing to lend. Even with the Fed stepping in, those issues are likely to remain for some time.

One sign that investors aren’t expecting the economy to pick up speed anytime soon is the poor performance of small-cap stocks. When investors believe the economy is about to go on an upswing, they tend to start buying smaller company stocks on the theory that those companies will see the biggest gains when business is good. The Russell 2000 index, which tracks the performance of small-caps, is down almost 18 percent from its 2010 high close of 741.92, reached April 23.

The Dow, meanwhile, is down 8 percent from its 2010 high close of 11,205.03, reached April 26. And the S&P 500 is down 11.3 percent from its high of 1,217.28, reached April 23.

The deep troubles in the economy may well mean that even when another rally starts, it will still take years before investors can make back the trillions of dollars lost in the 2008-09 market collapse. The Dow has a long way to go before it comes close to surpassing the 14,164.53 record close it had on Oct. 9, 2007. While it is up 57 percent from the 12-year low of 6,547.05 it fell to on March 9, 2009, it’s still 27 percent below its record.

Looking at the market’s recoveries from some past collapses, it’s quite clear that this time around, stocks won’t enjoy a scenario like the 15 months it took the Dow to regain all the ground it lost in the October 1987 crash. The Dow didn’t reach a new closing high until two years after the crash.

The worst scenario was the recovery from the 1929 crash. Because of the Great Depression, the Dow kept falling until July 1932. It took about a quarter century, until 1954, for the Dow to recover all the ground it lost and reach a new closing high.

Perhaps a more likely scenario is the market’s recovery from the nearly three-year slump that started with the dot-com bust in early 2000. The high-tech collapse was followed by a recession, the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks and then a string of corporate scandals that sent stocks tumbling until October 2002. The Dow peaked at 11,722.98 in January 2000, then didn’t return to that level and reach a new closing high until October 2006.