Not exact matches
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.
At this
point, obscene equity
valuations are already baked in the cake on
valuation measures that are reliably correlated with actual subsequent stock market returns.
Once
valuations are rich and our broad return / risk estimates are negative, our willingness to accept market risk generally requires a window with two exits — one below, at the
point where the trend - following
measures deteriorate, and one above, at the
point where overvalued, overbought, overbullish conditions emerge.
The latitude for a constructive position at present
valuations would lie between the
point where our
measures of market action improve and the
point where an overvalued, overbought, overbullish syndrome reasserts itself.
While we often have very strong views about long - term and full - cycle market outcomes (based on
valuation measures that we find strongly correlated with those outcomes in market cycles across history), we rarely have
pointed short - term market expectations.
However, they did manage a resource upgrade, so that helps... I'm still comfortable with my long - term $ 150 per proved oz in - the - ground gold
valuation, so in this instance I'll apply a 50 % discount to their 32 K of
measured oz & a 75 % discount to their 148 K of identified oz (ignoring inferred resources, at this
point).
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.
All the historical
valuation measures of stocks and markets
point to them being fully valued, and that doesn't mean they're overvalued or anywhere near bubble territory.
The choice of CAPE is not without its critics, who are quick to
point out that changes in accounting rules and changes to the CPI calculation, along with the timing and benchmark issues inherent in relative
valuation measures make CAPE an unreliable metric.