Lindo!!!! Ou talvez não
6 mensagens
|Página 1 de 1
Uffff
Karamba e cmafonso... andam desactualizados com a versão oficial da história 
ohhhh ohhhh bull mode now... isso já era ... ontem era verdade hoje não... a manipulação de números agora é feita de outra forma.
não encontro o link disto do Pummer, pelo que lá vai um paste integral:
History lesson
Chris Pummer says history shows S&P remains undervalued. A lot.
The valuation question
Commentary: History issues a 'strong buy' signal
By Chris Pummer, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 7:58 AM ET June 11, 2003
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- The primary question on U.S. investors' minds these days is a simple one: "Are stocks too richly valued to sustain the bull market now under way?"
Few investors considered that question leading up to the market's collapse. Now we're transfixed by it, overcompensating for our past disregard. As a result, many have become paralyzed by profound skepticism -- clinging to the self-defense mechanism we lacked not long ago.
Market gurus argue over this question with blue-faced blather for one reason -- value is relative. Yet history is also. Since past is prologue, it's time to consider what it can teach us.
If we look back to the early stage of the 1990-2000 bull market, the answer to the question is: "By no means." And here's why.
Market bears who now refuse to return to their caves for an overdue slumber harp on the fact that the S&P 500's price-to-earnings ratio stands at a hefty 32.5. Yet their argument is disingenuous, for that ratio of how many dollars investors spend for a dollar of annual profit is based on trailing 12-month earnings. No one of sound mind buys stocks based on past earnings.
What matters today, as it always has, is projected earnings for the year ahead. On that score, stocks have plenty of room to run.
Consider these comparisons to two key indexes during like periods into the last bull market -- the S&P 500 group of large-company stocks and the Russell 2000 Index of small-company shares.
The S&P 500
While the P/E ratio for the S&P 500 is 32.5 for the 12 months ended March 31, Standard & Poors' projected P/E ratio is 22.8 for the year ending March 31, 2004.
Flash back to March 31, 1991 -- also six months into a bull market -- and the trailing P/E was a far leaner 17.9. Yet by the end of that year, the trailing P/E jumped to 26.1. That was unfathomably high to investors back then, far more so than 32.5 today, but that didn't stop the market from taking off on the longest bull run in history.
Russell 2000
Like the S&P 500, the trailing P/E on the Russell 2000 is a still lofty 24.6 for the year ended March 31. But the projected P/E for the year ending March 31, 2004 stands at 13.7.
In March 1991 -- the same time frame into the last bull market -- the Russell 2000's projected P/E stood at an almost identical 13.6.
Cause for disbelief
Of course, skepticism about earnings projections is warranted, given the continuing reasons Corporate America gives us not to trust their earnings reports. And in hindsight, the actual P/Es throughout the 1990-2000 bull market always came in far higher than projections.
Yet here's the key point: During the 1990s bull market, the P/E ratio on the S&P 500 rose from a low of 15 when large-company stocks were overlooked in late 1994 to a high of 34.5 in mid-1999 near the close of a five-year run of 20-percent-plus gains. And we were right to flee the market, considering the S&P 500's P/E ratio reached a high 46.5 in March of 2002.
As for the Russell 2000, its P/E ratio clocked in from a low of 18.8 to a high of 34.7 -- well above the projection for the coming year.
A more telling measurement
Since Wall Street's crimes and misdemeanors chastened the analysts it employs, there's fair reason to believe today's earnings estimates are more conservative than in the past, said Richard Geist, head of the Institute of Psychology and Investing near Boston.
Geist contends the best measure of the market is the so-called Fed Model -- the valuation gauge that the Federal Reserve is said to use. It's the same formula that determined stocks were 50 percent overvalued when the bubble burst in 2000 and 34 percent overvalued before the 1987 crash.
Here's how the calculation works: Take the projected operating earnings per share for the S&P 500 for a 12-month period, divide it by the interest rate on the 10-year Treasury note, and then multiply by 100 to come up with the fair value for the S&P 500 Index.
As of Tuesday, the projected earnings per share for all S&P 500 companies was $56.13, and the yield on the 10-year Treasury stood at a 45-year-low of 3.13 percent. The division works out to 17.93, which would put the S&P 500's fair value at 1,793. It closed Tuesday at 984.84, suggesting it's 45 percent undervalued.
The Fed model is considered a better gauge of the market's value because it takes into account relative returns on bonds. As the economy improves, investors will be forced to flee the bond market and move more assets into stocks.
The demand factor
Naysayers note that we've never started a bull run with the S&P 500's trailing P/E at 32.5. Indeed, when the market started upward in 1990, its trailing P/E was just 15.
But that raises a critical issue: The as-yet incalculable degree to which the massive spike in demand for stocks in the last two decades has permanently driven up the market's P/E ratios, rendering comparisons to historical norms based on pre-1980 data far less relevant.
The huge jump in Americans' life expectancy is leading millions of people to keep assets in stocks rather than in fixed-income securities to finance much longer retirement periods. And the systematic shift of retirement assets from fixed-income-leaning traditional pensions to largely stock-based 401(k)s and IRAs also is propelling demand.
"New Paradigm" promoters noted both those trends in the late 1990s to justify P/E ratios reaching into triple digits on many stocks, that is, if companies had profits at all. But unlike long-departed dot-bombs, they are forces warranting serious consideration.
The final analysis
Regardless of how long this bull market will last, the recent run-up in stock prices should be a wake-up call to investors who're still heavily invested in bonds and cash equivalents, said Paul Greenwood, director of U.S. equities for the Frank Russel Co.
"A lot of people may be in for a rude awakening if interest rates go back up," Greenwood said. "Hopefully people will realize the risk of not having adequate exposure to equities."
"If people are lucky enough to get out of stocks in time, they seldom if ever get in in time," Greenwood said. "They always wait for more confirmation and before you know it, the market is up 30 to 40 percent. They should bring their stock exposure up to a long-term level and stop chasing their tails."
ohhhh ohhhh bull mode now... isso já era ... ontem era verdade hoje não... a manipulação de números agora é feita de outra forma.
não encontro o link disto do Pummer, pelo que lá vai um paste integral:
History lesson
Chris Pummer says history shows S&P remains undervalued. A lot.
The valuation question
Commentary: History issues a 'strong buy' signal
By Chris Pummer, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 7:58 AM ET June 11, 2003
SAN FRANCISCO (CBS.MW) -- The primary question on U.S. investors' minds these days is a simple one: "Are stocks too richly valued to sustain the bull market now under way?"
Few investors considered that question leading up to the market's collapse. Now we're transfixed by it, overcompensating for our past disregard. As a result, many have become paralyzed by profound skepticism -- clinging to the self-defense mechanism we lacked not long ago.
Market gurus argue over this question with blue-faced blather for one reason -- value is relative. Yet history is also. Since past is prologue, it's time to consider what it can teach us.
If we look back to the early stage of the 1990-2000 bull market, the answer to the question is: "By no means." And here's why.
Market bears who now refuse to return to their caves for an overdue slumber harp on the fact that the S&P 500's price-to-earnings ratio stands at a hefty 32.5. Yet their argument is disingenuous, for that ratio of how many dollars investors spend for a dollar of annual profit is based on trailing 12-month earnings. No one of sound mind buys stocks based on past earnings.
What matters today, as it always has, is projected earnings for the year ahead. On that score, stocks have plenty of room to run.
Consider these comparisons to two key indexes during like periods into the last bull market -- the S&P 500 group of large-company stocks and the Russell 2000 Index of small-company shares.
The S&P 500
While the P/E ratio for the S&P 500 is 32.5 for the 12 months ended March 31, Standard & Poors' projected P/E ratio is 22.8 for the year ending March 31, 2004.
Flash back to March 31, 1991 -- also six months into a bull market -- and the trailing P/E was a far leaner 17.9. Yet by the end of that year, the trailing P/E jumped to 26.1. That was unfathomably high to investors back then, far more so than 32.5 today, but that didn't stop the market from taking off on the longest bull run in history.
Russell 2000
Like the S&P 500, the trailing P/E on the Russell 2000 is a still lofty 24.6 for the year ended March 31. But the projected P/E for the year ending March 31, 2004 stands at 13.7.
In March 1991 -- the same time frame into the last bull market -- the Russell 2000's projected P/E stood at an almost identical 13.6.
Cause for disbelief
Of course, skepticism about earnings projections is warranted, given the continuing reasons Corporate America gives us not to trust their earnings reports. And in hindsight, the actual P/Es throughout the 1990-2000 bull market always came in far higher than projections.
Yet here's the key point: During the 1990s bull market, the P/E ratio on the S&P 500 rose from a low of 15 when large-company stocks were overlooked in late 1994 to a high of 34.5 in mid-1999 near the close of a five-year run of 20-percent-plus gains. And we were right to flee the market, considering the S&P 500's P/E ratio reached a high 46.5 in March of 2002.
As for the Russell 2000, its P/E ratio clocked in from a low of 18.8 to a high of 34.7 -- well above the projection for the coming year.
A more telling measurement
Since Wall Street's crimes and misdemeanors chastened the analysts it employs, there's fair reason to believe today's earnings estimates are more conservative than in the past, said Richard Geist, head of the Institute of Psychology and Investing near Boston.
Geist contends the best measure of the market is the so-called Fed Model -- the valuation gauge that the Federal Reserve is said to use. It's the same formula that determined stocks were 50 percent overvalued when the bubble burst in 2000 and 34 percent overvalued before the 1987 crash.
Here's how the calculation works: Take the projected operating earnings per share for the S&P 500 for a 12-month period, divide it by the interest rate on the 10-year Treasury note, and then multiply by 100 to come up with the fair value for the S&P 500 Index.
As of Tuesday, the projected earnings per share for all S&P 500 companies was $56.13, and the yield on the 10-year Treasury stood at a 45-year-low of 3.13 percent. The division works out to 17.93, which would put the S&P 500's fair value at 1,793. It closed Tuesday at 984.84, suggesting it's 45 percent undervalued.
The Fed model is considered a better gauge of the market's value because it takes into account relative returns on bonds. As the economy improves, investors will be forced to flee the bond market and move more assets into stocks.
The demand factor
Naysayers note that we've never started a bull run with the S&P 500's trailing P/E at 32.5. Indeed, when the market started upward in 1990, its trailing P/E was just 15.
But that raises a critical issue: The as-yet incalculable degree to which the massive spike in demand for stocks in the last two decades has permanently driven up the market's P/E ratios, rendering comparisons to historical norms based on pre-1980 data far less relevant.
The huge jump in Americans' life expectancy is leading millions of people to keep assets in stocks rather than in fixed-income securities to finance much longer retirement periods. And the systematic shift of retirement assets from fixed-income-leaning traditional pensions to largely stock-based 401(k)s and IRAs also is propelling demand.
"New Paradigm" promoters noted both those trends in the late 1990s to justify P/E ratios reaching into triple digits on many stocks, that is, if companies had profits at all. But unlike long-departed dot-bombs, they are forces warranting serious consideration.
The final analysis
Regardless of how long this bull market will last, the recent run-up in stock prices should be a wake-up call to investors who're still heavily invested in bonds and cash equivalents, said Paul Greenwood, director of U.S. equities for the Frank Russel Co.
"A lot of people may be in for a rude awakening if interest rates go back up," Greenwood said. "Hopefully people will realize the risk of not having adequate exposure to equities."
"If people are lucky enough to get out of stocks in time, they seldom if ever get in in time," Greenwood said. "They always wait for more confirmation and before you know it, the market is up 30 to 40 percent. They should bring their stock exposure up to a long-term level and stop chasing their tails."
-
Info
deve querer
dizer que ainda que o indicie caia 50% ainda se encontraria historicamente caro.
um abraço.
um abraço.
- Mensagens: 544
- Registado: 6/12/2002 0:05
mas olha que
quando nos states se vendiam automóveis aos molhos, as acções dos construtores partiam-se todas..
Engraçado não é.
Boa tarde.
(Nota: não me esqueci nem me esqueço que o PER do SP500 é uma desgraça, mas isso, para trading activo vale pouco)
Engraçado não é.
Boa tarde.
(Nota: não me esqueci nem me esqueço que o PER do SP500 é uma desgraça, mas isso, para trading activo vale pouco)
- Mensagens: 195
- Registado: 11/12/2002 2:48
- Localização: Paço de Arcos
re
transcrevendo ali de um outro post:
"Conclusão: who cares... a marca da bebida é "no 2ºS as economias mundiais estarão bem"
Está-se num estado de letargia bull... aquela sensação de segurança de quem está meio grogue... em que tudo o que se faz e diz é bom.
Espero é que este "carro a full steam não entre em contra-mão numa auto-estrada".
Assim... por enquanto adoremos o deus Baco.. ops.. deus Bull"
"Conclusão: who cares... a marca da bebida é "no 2ºS as economias mundiais estarão bem"
Está-se num estado de letargia bull... aquela sensação de segurança de quem está meio grogue... em que tudo o que se faz e diz é bom.
Espero é que este "carro a full steam não entre em contra-mão numa auto-estrada".
Assim... por enquanto adoremos o deus Baco.. ops.. deus Bull"
-
Info
Lindo!!!! Ou talvez não
13:46 12Jun2003 RTRS-DAX <.GDAXI> UP OVER 2 PCT AT 7-MONTH HIGH ON STRONG FINANCIAL, AUTO STOCKS
Qual é a graça desta notícia? É que a MunichRE cota hoje ExDiv e sobe 4% e a VW veio dizer que não vê sinais de retoma económica em nenhum dos principais mercados e sobe 3%!!!
11:43 12Jun2003 RTRS-VW<VOWG.DE> CEO- SEES NO PICKUP IN WEST EUROPEAN, U.S., SOUTH AMERICAN ECONOMIES
11:44 12Jun2003 RTRS-VW<VOWG.DE> CEO- SIGNIFICANT COST CUTS NEEDED, ALL SPENDING UNDER REVIEW
Qual é a graça desta notícia? É que a MunichRE cota hoje ExDiv e sobe 4% e a VW veio dizer que não vê sinais de retoma económica em nenhum dos principais mercados e sobe 3%!!!
11:43 12Jun2003 RTRS-VW<VOWG.DE> CEO- SEES NO PICKUP IN WEST EUROPEAN, U.S., SOUTH AMERICAN ECONOMIES
11:44 12Jun2003 RTRS-VW<VOWG.DE> CEO- SIGNIFICANT COST CUTS NEEDED, ALL SPENDING UNDER REVIEW
-
****
6 mensagens
|Página 1 de 1
Quem está ligado:
Utilizadores a ver este Fórum: BullDuck, Dar Adal, Denário, Google [Bot], karaya75, latbal, lito, m-m, macau5m, nunorpsilva, OCTAMA, PAULOJOAO, peterteam2, Pmart 1, Purificaçao, smog63, trilhos2006, Zecadiabo e 149 visitantes