Not exact matches
No. 5: Price - to - rent and price - to - income ratios show over-
valuation in the Canadian market, but
valuation levels are not usually good indicators of turning
points.
The economic gains and market returns that emerged during the Reagan Administration began from a starting
point of 10.8 % unemployment, a current account surplus, and market
valuations that - on the most historically reliable measures - were less than one - quarter of present
levels.
If the speculative bubbles and crashes across market history have taught us anything (particularly the repeated episodes of recklessness we've observed over the past two decades), it's this: regardless of the
level of
valuation at any
point in time, we have to allow for the potential for investors to adopt a psychological preference toward risk - seeking speculation, and no amount of reason will dissuade them even when that speculation has already made a collapse inevitable over a longer horizon.
Still, it's very true that during a speculative bubble, the
level of
valuations is not sufficient to identify the
point that speculation will shift to risk - aversion.
Buying something after it enters bubble territory can be very profitable, because huge gains will often occur AFTER
valuation reaches a
point where it no longer makes sense to a
level - headed investor.
I expect we'll see
valuations at least touch historically normal
levels at some
point in the next decade, and of course, our 10 - year prospective return estimates imply this.
Indeed, because the
level of interest rates at any
point in time is highly correlated with the
level of nominal economic growth over the preceding decade, the relationship between starting
valuations and actual subsequent S&P 500 nominal total returns is nearly independent of interest rates.
If July turns out to be the low
point for this bear market, it will then mark the second highest
level of
valuation that a cyclical bull has ever started from (the highest starting
valuation level was in 2003).
In the US market, the most recent CAPE
points to a 10 - year real return expectation of 0.4 %, 16 reflecting a revaluation headwind of 2.8 % a year for current
valuation levels.
High stock
valuation levels can mean lower expected stock returns, and low bond yields usually
point to lower future bond returns.
I'm still well over 50 % cash at this
point and plan to continue holding more or less this
level of cash until market
valuations become more attractive.
My
point is that there are a variety of highly predictive, methodologically distinct measures of market -
level valuation (I used the Shiller PE and Tobin's q, but GNP or GDP - to - total market capitalization below work equally as well) that
point to overvaluation.
At some
point we'd like to create a system that could calculate a precise value based on award availability, fees, award
levels and ease of accrual, but for now these
valuations are based on a combination of how much TPG would pay to buy
points if given the opportunity, and the overall value I could get from redeeming them.
At that
point, I'll have to decide whether it's fairly valued — or whether management will reinvest cash & ultimately raise RoE back to historic
levels (20 %, for example), which would obviously justify a far higher
valuation.
It seems like a better way of looking at this issue would be to pick a beginning and end
point with average
valuations (or at least the same
level of
valuation) so that the results aren't biased by a change in
valuation.
He
pointed to an observation made by Warren Buffett that, if interest rates stay below 3 percent, higher
valuation levels for stocks make sense.
The
valuation level that applies on the retirement day tells us how much of the starting -
point portfolio value is real, lasting wealth and how much is cotton - candy nothingness fated to be blown away in the wind over the course of the next 10 years or so.
At that
point, stock
valuations will be below fair - value
levels.
Public companies usually have higher
valuations than private companies, because the shares are more liquid, more accessible, and the reporting / compliance requirements instill a
level of trust from the
point of view of investors.
At some
point we'd like to create a system that could calculate a precise value based on award availability, fees, award
levels and ease of accrual, but for now these
valuations are based on a combination of how much TPG would pay to buy
points if given the opportunity, and the overall value I could get from redeeming them.
At some
point I'd like to create a system that could calculate a precise value based on award availability, fees, award
levels, and ease of accrual, but for now these
valuations are based on a combination of how much I would pay to buy
points if given the opportunity, and the overall value I could get from redeeming them.
Coordinate with
valuation control group to analyze client instructed prices, verify the consistency of pricing source, and ensure the net impact to the fund does not break set basis
point (BPS)
levels.