One of the dumbest threads of all time. U.S. stocks are not even close to being a bubble. Jeez doesn't anyone remember 2000? Compare MSFT, CSCO, INTC, YHOO JNPR, ect.'s prices then to now.
Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:
One of the dumbest threads of all time. U.S. stocks are not even close to being a bubble. Jeez doesn't anyone remember 2000? Compare MSFT, CSCO, INTC, YHOO JNPR, ect.'s prices then to now.
Bubbles may be in the eye of the beholder. By a metric I follow, equity valuations have been at historically high levels since 1996 (consistently higher during the past twelve years than 1929's peak value). This can lead us to two conclusions: valuations have hit a permanently higher plateau; or, the 2000 bubble never fully deflated.Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:
One of the dumbest threads of all time. U.S. stocks are not even close to being a bubble. Jeez doesn't anyone remember 2000? Compare MSFT, CSCO, INTC, YHOO JNPR, ect.'s prices then to now.
No question that lower yields are a significant contributor to higher equity prices. Valuations today are still much higher compared to other low-yield periods (1900 - late 1960's).Quote from makloda:
Or bond yields have come down compared to the 70s and 80s, making equities relatively more attractive.
Quote from QQQShort:
Bubbles may be in the eye of the beholder. By a metric I follow, equity valuations have been at historically high levels since 1996 (consistently higher during the past twelve years than 1929's peak value). This can lead us to two conclusions: valuations have hit a permanently higher plateau; or, the 2000 bubble never fully deflated.
S&P 500 PE using ten-year average earnings instead of one-year earnings. Ten-year average earnings -- which was suggested by Shiller in his book "Irrational Exuberance" -- has an intuitive appeal to me because it helps smooth the impacts of business cycles and creative impulses that sometimes affect GAAP results.Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:
Are you willing to discuss your "metric"?