As the chart below indicates, [Lakonishok, Shleifer, and Vishny] found that performance
for glamour stocks was outpaced by performance for their value counterparts.
Not exact matches
This is uncomfortable
for hedged - equity in the short - run, because the
glamour stocks drive gains in the major indices that aren't sufficiently matched by gains in broadly constructed
stock portfolios — particularly those following value - conscious strategies.
While these network effects have generated enormous revenues, today's
glamour stocks also trade at earnings and price / revenue multiples that have historically been reserved
for companies at a much earlier point in their growth trajectories, not
for mature companies with already overwhelming market share.
Following the Fed move, investors went straight
for the
glamour tech
stocks, dumping utilities, pharmaceuticals, consumer staples, hospital
stocks, insurance
stocks - anything that smacked of safety or value.
LSV (and Haugen, Montier, and many others since LSV) showed that when using the various proxies
for risk — Beta, volatility, etc. — they could prove that value
stocks exhibited less volatility than
glamour stocks.
While these network effects have generated enormous revenues, today's
glamour stocks also trade at earnings and price / revenue multiples that have historically been reserved
for companies at a much earlier point in their growth trajectories, not
for mature companies with already overwhelming market share.
This is uncomfortable
for hedged - equity in the short - run, because the
glamour stocks drive gains in the major indices that aren't sufficiently matched by gains in broadly constructed
stock portfolios — particularly those following value - conscious strategies.
Following the Fed move, investors went straight
for the
glamour tech
stocks, dumping utilities, pharmaceuticals, consumer staples, hospital
stocks, insurance
stocks - anything that smacked of safety or value.
The Non-U.S. value
stocks have continued to outperform.As the second exhibit demonstrates, it's unusual
for value to underperform
glamour by so much and
for so long.
The
Glamour portfolio is the decile portfolio containing
stocks ranked lowest on B / M, C / P, or E / P, or highest of GS and vice versa
for the Value portfolio):
The trio found that,
for each of these value /
glamour criteria, value
stocks outperformed
glamour stocks by wide margins.
This chart shows that the dividend yield is a fair, but not great, metric
for sorting
stocks into value and
glamour portfolios.
Market capitalization - weighted returns are useful
for demonstrating that the outperformance of value over
glamour is not a function of the value portfolios containing smaller
stocks.
Admired companies are bid up like
glamour stocks, and scorned companies are ignored like value
stocks, which creates the opportunity
for contrarian bet.
This phenomenon obviously presents a problem
for the efficient markets crowd because the historic excess returns of value
stocks over
glamour stocks can not be explained by the traditional CAPM model.