Sunday Spectacle CXXXV

Rolling 20-year Returns vs Starting P/E Ratio
(click to enlarge)

(source: "Generation Returns," Crestmont Research. Last updated 2010.)

Bull markets don't start from high P/E values; that's one reason the market has been in a bear market for the last 10 years or so. Right now, the P/E ratio appears to have dropped to the level that it was in back in 1989.

Having said that, P/E ratio is influenced by inflation. Typically the P/E ratio tends to be low—that is, market attaches low valuation to business worth—if inflation is high or negative (i.e. deflation). The inverse relationship between P/E ratio and inflation is very clear in the graphic below from Crestmont Research.

Inflation vs P/E Ratio
(click to enlarge)
(source: "P/E Ratios & Inflation," Crestmont Research. Last updated 2010.)

Whether stocks are cheap or not (note that I am talking about the market as a whole and not necessarily specific stocks) depend on what the actual inflation ends up being. If inflation is high or negative, P/E will contract further and possibly result in capital losses. If inflation stays low, then the current P/E, which is similar to what it was in 1989, is fairly reasonable.

Over the last 50 or so years, a positive inflation expectation has always been the right call. Though, right now, my feeling is that the inflation call is very difficult. Deflation is a real threat for the first time in 50 years (just last week, Federal Reserve took the unprecedented(?) step of committing to keep rates really low for around 2 years, which some of you may recall was what Paul Krugman has suggested in the past to battle deflation i.e. market participants need to be "ensured" positive inflation expectation). US nominal GDP actually contracted by -2% in 2009, which happens to be the first time in over 60 years (prior to this, it was in 1949 when GDP nominal growth was -1%). So what we are seeing is certainly something that has been uncommon over the last 50 years.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular Posts

Thoughts on the stock market - March 2020

Image
Right now, DJIA has a P/E of 16.8 and forwand P/E of 15.1, whereas S&P 500 is at 20.1 with forward P/E of 15.8. Source: WSJ market Data If you ignore interest rates and inflation expectations--both of these influence valuations but depends on your macro call-- the market is not cheap. Long-term P/E is around 15. Trailing P/E is around 20% (Dow) to 40% (S&P500) higher than average. Forward P/E is in line with long term average but that assumes a strong V recovery. Consensus forecast is for profits to drop 1.2% in 2020. In 2008, it dropped 25.4% so current forecast is a very mild recession. Covid-19 coronavirus is not going to last more than a few months but these forecasts are still too rosy in my opinion. So I wouldn't rely on forward P/E. The richly valued (mostly tech or high quality) have not fallen much but the distressed ones have. So if you want to outperform in the long run, I think one’s choice right now is to: • Wait for market to fall another, say
✖ READ MORE >>>

Warren Buffett's Evolution and his Three Investment Styles

Image
A Young Warren Buffett In a comment to one of my posts , Mark Carter, who incidentally appears to have a  good blog worth checking out , asked: "Buffett Prime is 1970's to early 1990's" Could you elaborate? I have vaguely indicated how I view Warren Buffett in the past, but I thought I would detail my view of his investing behaviour. This is more of an opinion piece and many others would disagree with me (if you do, I'm curious to hear your thoughts). I don't follow Warren Buffett as closely as many value investors so I may get some facts wrong. My view is that Warren Buffett went through three different phases, with each consisting of different investment techniques. The overall investment theory remained the same—what people call value investing—but his execution, tactics, and strategy differs across the three phases. Some people may break up his career into additional periods but my feeling is that the three I will describe essentially capt
✖ READ MORE >>>

Hugh Hendry discussion at the Alternative Investment Conference

Thanks to Value Investing World for bringing this Hugh Hendry interview to my attention. I may not agree with all the things—short-term orientation of hedge funds is actually worse IMO; the sharp pencil effect doesn't always work—but Hendry is a true contrarian and worth listening. Like Marc Faber or Jim Rogers, you also can't take everything Hugh Hendry says seriously. I had always felt Hugh Hendry was firmly in the deflation camp but I get the feeling that he is now opening up to high-inflation possibilities. Otherwise, his stance appears to be similar to past opinions.
✖ READ MORE >>>