IBJOpinion

Skarbeck: Stocks still the best bet among investor choices

Ken Skarbeck
November 30, 2013
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

Ken SkarbeckWith the stock market up 29 percent year to date, as measured by total return on the S&P 500 index, many observers are raising warning flags that stocks are overvalued, and some even say a market bubble is forming. A review of the evidence, in our opinion, doesn’t support their alarm.

Is their rant a case of sour grapes? Is the vocal disbelief in the stock market’s ascent emanating from investors who in recent years chose to avoid stocks and instead hide out in bonds, alternative investments, commodities and cash (anything but stocks)? In other words, if the stock market left you in the dust, shout loud that it is all a mirage.

Stocks were clearly cheap in the wake of the credit crisis, yet fearful investors have continued to avoid the stock market stymied by a negative global macro-economic view, political turmoil and the unprecedented Federal Reserve policies. Stocks ignored these exogenous factors and rose based on American corporations’ improving balance sheets, rising revenues and cash flows as business recovered from the severe downturn in 2008-2009.

Now naysayers are pointing to news that retail investors have poured more money into stock funds this year than at any time in the last 13 years, lured by record stock prices and stung by losses in bond funds. This statistic plays into the notion that the retail investor is the last to join the party and is a signal of a market top.

Perhaps, except that professional investors, including hedge funds and pension plans, are also underinvested in stocks and are trying to play catch-up.

A more plausible argument for market overvaluation is seen in the Shiller PE (also known as the Cyclically Adjusted Price-Earnings ratio, or CAPE), created by Nobel Prize-winning economist Robert Shiller. This measure is calculated by dividing the S&P 500 index by the average inflation-adjusted earnings from the previous 10 years. The CAPE stands at 25.4 compared against its historic average of 16.5.

The all-time high on the CAPE was 44.2 in December 1999, at the peak of the tech-driven market bubble. So while a CAPE of 25 is a bit frothy, the measure is not shouting bubble.

With some hesitation, we could point out that earnings were abnormally depressed during this 10-year period because of the credit crisis—a devastating event not likely to be repeated anytime soon.

Also, Shiller himself says CAPE should not be used to predict market tops or bottoms. Instead, the measure serves more as an indication of what market returns might be going forward. Reversion to the mean average CAPE of 16.5 would argue that stock returns will be considerably lower in future years.

Jeremy Grantham and his firm GMO are out with their quarterly letter. It is a good read, and concludes that stocks are pricey. However, Grantham figures stocks could work higher for a few years before another significant market setback.

With the caveat that investors should exercise caution following such a magnificent move in stocks, the market fundamentals do not suggest stocks are excessively overpriced. While you shouldn’t be pound-the-table bullish, a handful of carefully chosen stocks still offer the best return versus risk profile compared to other investment choices.•

__________

Skarbeck is managing partner of Indianapolis-based Aldebaran Capital LLC, a money-management firm. His column appears every other week. Views expressed are his own. He can be reached at 818-7827 or ken@aldebarancapital.com.

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. It is nice and all that the developer grew up here and lives here, but do you think a company that builds and rehabs cottage-style homes has the chops to develop $150 Million of office, retail, and residential? I'm guessing they will quickly be over their skis and begging the city for even more help... This project should occur organically and be developed by those that can handle the size and scope of something like this as several other posters have mentioned.

  2. It amazes me how people with apparently zero knowledge of free markets or capitalism feel the need to read and post on a business journal website. Perhaps the Daily Worker would suit your interests better. It's definitely more sympathetic to your pro government theft views. It's too bad the Star is so awful as I'm sure you would find a much better home there.

  3. In other cities, expensive new construction projects are announced by real estate developers. In Carmel, they are announced by the local mayor. I am so, so glad I don't live in Carmel's taxbase--did you see that Carmel, a small Midwest suburb, has $500 million in debt?? That's unreal! The mayor thinks he's playing with Lego sets and Monopoly money here! Let these projects develop organically without government/taxpayer backing! Also, from a design standpoint, the whole town of Carmel looks comical. Grand, French-style buildings and promenades, sitting next to tire yards. Who do you guys think you are? Just my POV as a recent transplant to Indy.

  4. GeorgeP, you mention "necessities". Where in the announcement did it say anything about basic essentials like groceries? None of the plans and "vision" have basic essentials listed and nothing has been built. Traffic WILL be a nightmare. There is no east/west road capacity. GeorgeP, you also post on www.carmelchatter.com and your posts have repeatedly been proven wrong. You seem to have a fair amount of inside knowledge. Do you work on the third floor of Carmel City Hal?

  5. I don't know about the commuter buses...but it's a huge joke to see these IndyGo buses with just one or two passengers. Absolutely a disgusting waste of TAXPAYER money. Get some cojones and stop funding them. These (all of them) council members work for you. FIRE THEM!

ADVERTISEMENT