News Focus
News Focus
icon url

brainlessone

12/30/02 6:31 PM

#60130 RE: Sherlock356 #60128

it depends on whether you think the end of the world is coming and want to have some filthy lucre under the bed

icon url

ajtj99

12/30/02 7:06 PM

#60136 RE: Sherlock356 #60128

That's BS. The S&P 500 earnings number is so vague there's no way to verify that claim. Everyone has projected increases in S&P 500 earnings, but they never arrive.

When people stop being optimistic is the time to buy. Everyone's still believing there is money to be made in the market. That optimism needs to be crushed.

icon url

wahz

12/30/02 7:10 PM

#60137 RE: Sherlock356 #60128

"Right now, the S&P 500 earnings yield is 3-times the short term treasury yield, which is the highest going back 20 years. [This means stocks are cheap relative to bonds.]

At the market bottom in 1982, this ratio peaked at 1.50--so we are twice as undervalued relative to bonds as in 1982.

Important market tops such as 1987 yielded ratios of .70, while in 2000 it scrunched down to .50 before the bear market took over." Are stocks far cheaper relative to bonds than at any time in recent history?


-------------------------------



Yeah, I have a comment. The fact that I have about 75,000 work hours of securities experience and training to to fall back on, and know that data and various formulas as well as anyone could, is costing me a fortune and has for about the last 10 months.

My ex wife and I were talking about the stocks we bought in 1982, vs. the cd's we bought around the same time. The cd's were for 18.5%...that is what stocks were competing against. It made NO sense to buy stocks..they weren't that cheap, and they looked damn awful compared to the 18% guranteed. This is what is so amazing reading these boards now. Reading posts here from folks who think the 73/74 period or in 82, things were cheaper...they obviously weren't there actually dealing with it. I know, you think that pe of 6 looked good, but what those who weren't there aren't "getting" is that you had guaranteed instruments that were very attractive in comparison. This isn't the case now.

Or is it? Money has poured into RE, and it may be that this is the real culprit in making the bulls look dumb for now, just lke the bears looked dumb from 6/99-3/00. We'll see how it all works out. Unfortunately, it seems clear that this is still a bear market, and there is work to do on the downside. We are straying farther and farther away from a market that pays up for an idea or two, and in this land, I personally feel that is a very bad thing for us all.


icon url

Rick Louden

12/30/02 8:05 PM

#60145 RE: Sherlock356 #60128

Right now, the S&P 500 earnings yield is 3-times the short term treasury yield, which is the highest going back 20 years. [This means stocks are cheap relative to bonds.

Just out of curiosity, what if you looked at the actual difference between the earnings yield and short term treasury yield instead of the percentage? How does that compare to 1982? Also, note that the yield curve is quite steep right now. If the economy gets over the hump and shows that we are escaping another recession, the short term yield could go up a percentage point quite easily. How would that effect your numbers?

Sorry to post questions rather than answering yours, but I don't have the data you are looking at readily available.

Tom




icon url

mlsoft

12/30/02 9:12 PM

#60164 RE: Sherlock356 #60128

"Right now, the S&P 500 earnings yield is 3-times the short term treasury yield, which is the highest going back 20 years. [This means stocks are cheap relative to bonds.]

At the market bottom in 1982, this ratio peaked at 1.50--so we are twice as undervalued relative to bonds as in 1982."
---------------------------------------------------------------

Sherlock....

The "S&P earnings yield"?????? What in the world is that supposed to represent, other than some imaginary ratio that someone found to use to make a bullish case for the markets when nothing else pointed in that direction. Think about it - what, pray tell, is an "earnings yield"???? Earnings "yield" nothing except when part is paid out as a dividends, and that is especially true of earnings that are largely imaginary and have nothing to do with reality (pro-forma, EBITDA, etc.).

Remember when the bubble bull was nearing a peak and it was getting very difficult to justify the prices of the dot.coms, so they began inventing new metrics to justify the unjustifiable?? This is the same thing - pure BS.

Just my (very strongly held) opinion, though.

mlsoft