Young Research & Publishing Inc.

Investment Research Since 1978

Disclosure

  • About Us
    • Contributors
    • Archives
    • Dick Young’s Safe America
    • The Final Richard C. Young’s Intelligence Report
    • You’ve Read The Last Issue of Intelligence Report, Now What?
    • Dick Young’s Research Key: Anecdotal Evidence Gathering
    • Crisis at Vanguard
  • Investment Analysis
    • Bonds
    • Currencies and Gold
    • Dividend Investing
    • ETFs & Funds
    • Investment Strategy
    • Retirement Investing
    • Stocks
    • The Efficient Frontier
  • Investment Counsel
  • Dynamic Maximizers®
  • Retirement Compounders®
  • Free Email Signup

Trading Short-term Pleasure for Long-term Pain

February 26, 2015 By Jeremy Jones, CFA

Should you take investment advice from the mainstream internet (if I can coin a phrase)? Bloomberg posted an article on their website yesterday with the following headline:

“Goldman Sachs Sees More Value Outside of ‘Stretched’ U.S. Stocks”

Bearish views from Wall Street’s eternally bullish big banks are always of interest to me. Bearish views from Wall Street strategists are few and far between. Why? Being bearish on Wall Street is like opposing motherhood and apple pie. The big banks make more money when their clients are bullish. When investors are bearish fewer deals get done, fewer trades are booked, and clients tend to close. Plus, if a strategist’s bearish investment thesis isn’t proved right, he is often rewarded with a pink slip so there is a lot to lose for strategists who raise the flag of caution.

Why does Goldman think U.S. stock valuations are stretched?

According to the Bloomberg article, Goldman’s chief equity strategist David Kostin says “The only time during the past 40 years that the index [the S&P 500] traded at a higher multiple was during the 1997-2000 Tech Bubble.”

The tech bubble might have been the biggest stock market bubble in history, so if stocks are anywhere close to dotcom valuations we should all be able to agree that valuations must be stretched.

Bloomberg seems to acknowledge the stretched valuations, but then offers this scrap of misguided and misdirected advice.

Seven months after the Federal Reserve warned that valuations of some smaller, biotechnology and social-media stocks may be “stretched” in the U.S., Goldman Sachs Group Inc. is using the same word to describe the whole shebang.

“Stretched” valuations sound scary, but here’s something that may be even scarier: missing out on an 80 percent rally over the following three years because you got out of stocks when the market looked stretched. That would’ve been the case in 1997 when the Standard & Poor’s 500 Index first got to the valuation of 17.3 times estimated earnings for the next 12 months, which is also where it’s trading these days.

What’s happened since the Fed’s remarks about stretched valuations seven months ago? Well, the S&P 500 has gained almost 7 percent, the Nasdaq Composite Index is up 12 percent and the Russell 2000 Index of small caps is more than 5 percent higher. While the Solactive Social Media Index is down about 2 percent since then, the Nasdaq Biotechnology Index has surged more than 30 percent.

To sum up the Bloomberg analysis, stretched valuations don’t matter. But they do. The gaping hole in the Bloomberg analysis is that the author doesn’t mention what happens to stocks after the 80% rally from 1997-1999. Let me fill in the details for you.

For our readers who didn’t live it, over the subsequent three years, stocks gave up every single point of that 80% return and then some. A $100 investment in the S&P 500 on June 30th of 1997 (when the index first crossed the 17.3X PE multiple referenced above), would have been worth $87 in October of 2002. About seven years after that in March of 2009 that $100 investment would have been worth $80. An investment in short-term Treasury notes made in June of 1997 would have performed better than the S&P 500 all the way up until May of 2013. That’s about 16 years. If you include dividends, short-term T-notes were the better investment until year-end 2011—still over 14 years.

SP vs  T-Notes

What is the point here? There are three. Careful what you read on the mainstream internet. It could cost you serious money. Two, three years isn’t the long-term. It has always been true that a bubble can get bigger before it bursts. That doesn’t mean caution is not warranted. Trading the prospect of short-term pleasure for long-term pain has never been a good strategy. And three, valuations matter as always, but still over the long-run.

Share this:

  • Email
  • Twitter
  • Facebook

You Might Also Like:

  • No Forgiveness for UPS from Wall St.’s Short-term Crowd
  • Short-Sellers Bet Against Twitter
  • Has the Fed Lost Control of Short-term Interest Rates?
  • Author
  • Recent Posts
Jeremy Jones, CFA
Jeremy Jones, CFA, CFP® is the Director of Research at Young Research & Publishing Inc., and the Chief Investment Officer at Richard C. Young & Co., Ltd. Richard C. Young & Co., Ltd. was ranked #5 in CNBC's 2021 Financial Advisor Top 100. Jeremy is also a contributing editor of youngresearch.com.
Latest posts by Jeremy Jones, CFA (see all)
  • BULLWHIPPED? Inventory Overhang Could Slow Growth in Certain Sectors - May 20, 2022
  • MARKET TURNING: Canada’s Housing Market Turmoil - May 19, 2022
  • HORDING CASH: Funds Hold the Highest Level of Cash Since 9/11 - May 18, 2022

Search Young Research

Most Popular

  • MARKET CHAOS: This May Take Time, Here’s How to Prepare
  • PRICES SOAR: Diesel Shortage Could Cripple America's Economy
  • Your Survival Guy: “Sell in May, Buy After Labor Day?”
  • All-Powerful Money Managers Voting YOUR Money Targeted by Senate GOP
  • Institutional Investors Fall in Love with Oil, Again
  • COMMODITY CRUNCH: Will Tesla Buy a Cobalt Mine?
  • CRYPTO: Has the Fire Gone Out?
  • The Innovation Bubble Goes Bust
  • Don’t Throw Your Bond Portfolio Out the Window
  • The Power of a Compound Interest Table

Don’t Miss

Default Risk Among the Many Concerns with Annuities

Risk and Reward: An Efficient Frontier

How to be a Billionaire: Proven Strategies from the Titans of Wealth

Could this Be the Vanguard GNMA Winning Edge?

Cryptocosm and Life After Google

Warning: Avoid Mutual Fund Year End Distributions

Is Gold a Good Long-term Investment?

How to Invest in Gold

Vanguard Wellington (VWELX): The Original Balanced Fund

What is the Best Gold ETF for Investing and Trading?

Procter & Gamble (PG) Stock: The Only True Dividend King

The Dividend King of the North

You’ll Love This if You’re Dreaming of an Active Retirement Life

RSS The Latest at Richardcyoung.com

  • Joe Biden – Malicious, Incompetent, a Wannabe Left Wing Ideologue?
  • Jean-Pierre: Economy “Not Something that We Keep an Eye on Every Day”
  • Job Market Survival Advice for Graduates and for Those YOU Love
  • The Destructive Rise and Fall of BLM
  • What Would We Do without the Experts?
  • V4 Stands Against North African and Middle Eastern Invasion
  • BUY THE DIPS? Can You Catch a Ginsu Knife?
  • Florida: Enjoy Certain Freedoms and Individual Liberties
  • ENERGY FREEDOM ACT: Ted Cruz Introduces Bill for Energy Independence
  • Consequences of Biden Killing the Keystone Pipeline

About Us

  • About Young Research
  • Archives
  • Contributors

Our Partners

  • Richard C. Young & Co.
  • Richardcyoung.com

Copyright © 2022 | Terms & Conditions

 

Loading Comments...
 

    loading Cancel
    Post was not sent - check your email addresses!
    Email check failed, please try again
    Sorry, your blog cannot share posts by email.