Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Narcissist alert! wrote:Disagreeing with someone's position is not an "attack."
What is your handle?
You post more here than everyone else combined. Clearly you love to hear yourself talk. Your narcissism is not in doubt. That's an observed fact, not an attack.
new cycle lows on 4 wk average of jobless claims
the catch on that is very often we are in recession just a few months after peak employment. Weird stuff. Could be coincidental/noise.
New intraday high for the Dow.
New cycle high for Shiller CAPE 10.
Still nowhere near late 20th or early 21st century numbers.
Yes you are correct, it is only the third most overvalued market. When doing your math, please remember the NASDAQ Composite dropped 82% beginning March 2000, and reached a new high last summer. Answer: over 16 years.
There's a big difference between a record high and a cycle high.
I guess that depends on what you are looking for. The point is, the predictive value for future returns is more important than a new market high. Today we are within the highest 5% of CAPE 10 valuations. Within that range the ten-year S&P 500 return would historically be about 2%. In other words, a purchase today, will only collect dividends between now and 2027. Likely between now and then the index will drop 50-60%.
I consider that much more important information than a new market high. It makes little real difference if the market moves higher and one does not sell. The poor portfolio return is already in the cards you hold.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
The point is, the predictive value for future returns is more important than a new market high.
The market is forward looking, so a new market high is itself a predictor of future returns.
That statement is nonsense. The S&P 500 hit a thirteen low March of 2009 at 666, a steady climb up to today's 2,309.
It's not nonsense at all. Ask someone who knows something about the market.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
That statement is nonsense. The S&P 500 hit a thirteen low March of 2009 at 666, a steady climb up to today's 2,309.
Seems to me that you just supported his point.
How do you figure? Low point goes to a high, high point goes to a low. Think again.
The economy has been steadily improving and the stock markets rose in advance of that. It's really quite simple.
Going up wrote:
The economy has been steadily improving and the stock markets rose in advance of that. It's really quite simple.
Yes they said the same thing in October 2007.
By the way S&P 500 EPS peaked 9/30/2014. It is 17% lower at the most recently completed quarter of 9/30/2016.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Yes they said the same thing in October 2007.
Of course they said the same thing. They always say that because it's true. That's how the market works. It doesn't change because the date changed.
re; earnings - all I can say is that the market prices in what it believes earnings WILL BE, not what they were.
Sure, buying the market when expensive usually leads to bad returns. But the CAPE has proven to be extraordinarily bad at market timing and possibly obsolete.
Anyway, I'm back in the VXX. My game is to make $50. That's all. Not greedy. I buy the VXX when the underlying VIX gets near 11. Seems like a VIX of 11 indicates a short term high for the market.
Going up wrote:
The economy has been steadily improving and the stock markets rose in advance of that. It's really quite simple.
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAAAA!!!!!!!!
Funniest thing I have heard in a L-O-N-G time!
And I imagine you saying it completely deadpan.
LMAO!
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Going up wrote:The economy has been steadily improving and the stock markets rose in advance of that. It's really quite simple.
Yes they said the same thing in October 2007.
By the way S&P 500 EPS peaked 9/30/2014. It is 17% lower at the most recently completed quarter of 9/30/2016.
of course one way to look at this is to say 'hey what if the SP500 gets back to peak earnings? Then the market is cheap. Buy now. Earnings are surging - easy to make a scenario in whcih they will get back to peak numbers. Since the main problem was falling oil prices.
But the CAPE has proven to be extraordinarily bad at market timing and possibly obsolete.
Timing means very little if the market drops 50% like 2000-2002 and 2007-2009. Most market participants were unprepared for both events even though assets traded at extreme valuation levels.
For those that look at the elevated PEs of the late 1990s as proof that it doesn't matter, conveniently forget the 82% drop in the NASDAQ.
It will be no different this time. Investors paying a premium for phantom growth.
Igy