ACTIONABLE ADVICE FOR FINANCIAL ADVISORS: Newsletters and Databases Focused on Investment Strategy

    Last 14 days

Most Popular Articles


Most Popular Commentaries

    Last Year

Most Popular Articles


Most Popular Commentaries



More by the Same Author

Annuities
   Immediate
Economic Insights
   Employment
   Housing
   Inflation
   Recession
Equities
   Growth
   Value
Global Markets
   Global
Investment Strategies
   General
Specialty Investments
   Balanced
Rebuilding Confidence in Stocks
By Dan Richards
August 3, 2010


Go to page Previous, 1, 3, 4, Next     Bookmark and Share  Email Article   Display as PDF

Shiller’s P/E model has been accurate in predicting future returns over long time horizons (at least 10 years); it is notoriously inaccurate at predicting short-term (e.g., one-year) returns.
 
In January, I spent 90 minutes with Shiller over lunch, having fortuitously bumped into him at the Atlanta airport. At that time, he made the comment that even when stocks were at 20-times average ten-year earnings, investors could still do respectably in the following period.

Today, he is more pessimistic. He’s concerned that eroding confidence by American consumers and businesses could lead to a downward spiral of reduced spending, which in and of itself could trigger a double-dip recession.

And he concluded our conversation by saying that while he expects returns in stocks to be positive, he doesn’t think they’ll be stellar – he’s uncertain whether investors will be better off in stocks or in bonds over the next ten years.

The argument for stocks as cheap

Jeremy Siegel uses a different method to value stocks and reaches a different conclusion – his analysis suggests that, compared to long-term averages, stocks are undervalued by 25% to 30%.  

The biggest difference between his approach and Shiller’s is that his is forward-looking, focusing on consensus earnings forecasts for this year and next. Among his criticisms of Shiller’s methodology is that mega-writeoffs, such as the $80 billion writedown by AIG, will distort the earnings base from which backward-looking calculations are conducted for years to come.

Siegel has looked at U.S. stock market valuations over a 200-year period. During that time, the average stock multiple of earnings has been 15-times – that compares with a multiple of consensus earnings forecasts of 13-times for this year and 11-times for next year.

The impact of low interest rates

Siegel’s average of 15-times earnings includes periods of double-digit inflation, when multiples are typically depressed.  Excluding those periods of double-digit inflation, the average multiple that the market paid for earnings was 17-times.

If earnings forecasts for next year are accurate, then returning to that long-term average of 15-times earnings would result in stocks increasing by 35%; rising to the historical low-inflation valuation norm of 17-times would see stocks rise by 50%.

Go to page Previous, 1, 3, 4, Next

Display article as PDF for printing.

Would you like to send this article to a friend?

Remember, if you have a question or comment, send it to .
Website by the Boston Web Company