<ol id="1lp5z"><ol id="1lp5z"><dfn id="1lp5z"></dfn></ol></ol><i id="1lp5z"><strike id="1lp5z"></strike></i>
<meter id="1lp5z"></meter>
    <address id="1lp5z"></address>

    
    

      <form id="1lp5z"></form>

        立即打開
        標普500指數跨過危險點,股民安全了嗎?

        標普500指數跨過危險點,股民安全了嗎?

        Shawn Tully 2021年04月20日
        投資者好日子或許還能持續一段時間,但歷史規律表示,大調整快到了。

        筆者一直在密切關注標普500指數,眼看著它的估值日益接近一個危險點位。按照我的非官方指標,標普500指數以前只有一次達到過這個點位,那是2000年9月互聯網泡沫的最高點。4月16日上午,該大盤指數突破了這個令人不安的里程碑。標普指數在開盤后漲至4187點,創歷史新高。根據我的“正?;崩麧櫥鶞手?,這使標普指數的市盈率倍數達到30倍(準確的說是30.02倍)。

        乍一看,30倍的市盈率似乎并不可怕。去年6月,根據之前四個季度按美國公認會計準則計算的凈收益這個標準指標,基本市盈率達到31,當時的股價比今天低26%。2020年第4季度結束時,市盈率倍數約為40倍。這并沒有影響樂觀投資者的心態,因此在那之后標普指數持續上漲。但這些疫情期間的經濟比率,對于衡量股票估值過高、過低還是公允毫無意義。雖然股價持續上漲,但從2019年第4季度到2020年底,股票收益下跌了三分之一,導致最知名、最基本的估值指標升高。

        顯而易見,利潤將從疫情導致的低點實現反彈,這會使分母變大,使40倍以上的市盈率倍數恢復到更現實的區間。為了準確預測股票估值過高還是過低,以及股市所面臨的障礙,你需要使用“正?;麧櫋?。我將“正?;麧櫋倍x為經濟復蘇之后,所有標普500公司最有可能達到的利潤水平。我根據2019年全年的數據,選擇了2019年第4季度的每股收益139.47美元。

        這樣選擇有兩個原因。首先,2019年的利潤不僅達到歷史新高,而且按照歷史標準來看,與銷售額等指標的比率也處在極高水平。這樣降低了正?;杏氏蛏吓で母怕?,因為我們低估了未來出現更高可持續收益的可能性。當然,樂觀的投資者會認為,30倍市盈率倍數并不正常,因為2021年的股票收益會令2019年表現出色的大盤股都相形見絀。

        其次,即使在2019年經濟繁榮時期,仍有一個根本原因導致每個季度的每股收益(EPS)基本保持平穩。雖然利潤達到較高水平,但從基本面來看,收益卻缺乏上行空間。即使到現在,通常超級樂觀的華爾街分析師仍預測,到2021年第2季度,年化利潤將與2019年年底的139美元持平。簡而言之,2021年利潤有望重新達到歷史高點。

        歷史上,除了最近的一次以外,標普指數的市盈率倍數只有在收益大幅下降或暴跌時,才會超過30倍。在1999年第4季度,市盈率倍數達到30.5,接近互聯網泡沫的最高點。這個數字令投資者不安,因為當時的每股收益達到歷史新高。換言之,投資者每獲得1美元利潤,都需要支付30美元,而且當時的利潤水平已經高于歷史標準水平。但每股收益繼續上漲,到2000年第3季度達到53.70美元,再創新高。

        每股收益在隨后四年一直沒有超過這一水平。在每股利潤創新高的同時,基準指數在2000年9月1日漲至1518點的史上最高點。當時,該指數在四年內上漲了120%。所以,與今天的市場最相似的是2000年勞動節前三天的行情。標普500指數歷史上只出現過兩次利潤和股價同時創下新高的情況。(當然,這是因為我選擇2019年的利潤與今天的利潤進行對比。)

        在二十多年前,標普指數的傳統市盈率倍數為26.75。按照這個指標計算,標普指數的成本比今天按30倍市盈率計算的結果高出12%。但市盈率倍數并不全面。比如根據當時的基本面信息,2000年的每股收益遠高于2021年。所以當時的市盈率倍數是可以理解的,因為利潤一定會下降,但今天的市盈率倍數過高是因為每股收益并不高,這預示著未來會有較大的增長空間。

        雖然相關證據有些復雜,但總體而言,截至2019年第4季度的利潤似乎至少達到了互聯網泡沫時期的最高點。例如,2019年全年的每股收益相當于國民收入的5.4%,遠高于截至2000年9月四個季度的4.4%。2019年,標普指數營業利潤在銷售額中的占比或“營運利潤率”為11.1%,比2000年高約4個百分點。相比之下,標普指數在世紀之交的股權收益率為17.5%,高于2019年的15.5%。

        由于大部分指標都顯示2019年的相對利潤高于2000年,因此我們將按保守估算,假設兩個周期的相對利潤相當。然后我們可以對僅有的兩個收益和估值均創歷史新高的時期進行詳細對比。這對于今天的大盤股意味著什么?

        繁榮背后的壞消息

        如果你從未離場,那么市盈率倍數達到30背后的繁榮當然是好消息。但如果你計劃現在進場,或者想把你獲得的利潤再投資到美國大盤股,這可能是最糟糕的消息。不妨看看2000年9月1日之后發生了什么。當時標普指數陷入長期低迷,2003年3月11日跌至801點,下跌47%。直到7年后的2007年9月,標普指數才重回2000年9月的最高點;當然在金融危機期間,標普指數再次暴跌,2013年3月突破1500點。這導致該指數長達12年的收益為零,只有微薄的股息。

        當然,你無法預測我們是否會再經歷一次互聯網泡沫破滅之后的暴跌。樂觀的投資者預測,兩個強大的利好消息將帶領美國股市繼續高歌猛進:快速上漲的利潤將超過2019年的最高水平,以及未來幾年的超低利率。

        這兩種情況出現的可能性不大。而且要從這兩件事中受益的機會更加渺茫。首先,我們來看一下利潤的未來前景。目前,股票收益的GDP占比為5.4%,已經超過了歷史標準水平。如果按照華爾街的預測,每股收益上漲速度將繼續超過GDP,利潤占比只會持續擴大。尤其令人擔憂的是,4月16日,標普指數的估值在國民收入中的占比令人震驚地達到161%,比2000年的130%提高了四分之一,幾乎比二十年中位數翻了一番。

        為了將這個比例維持在160%以上,股票收益需要吞噬掉更大一部分經濟,與此同時,美國長期低迷的工資最終將開始上漲,美國的長期增長率將低于2%,而且企業所得稅作為拜登政府雄心勃勃的支出計劃的主要收入來源,其稅率可能將大幅提高。

        關于利率,樂觀投資者認為,未來幾年10年期國債收益率將與GDP保持相同的增長趨勢,對于這種觀點最好的回應非常簡單:這種情況以前很少發生。正常情況下,“實際”利率或通脹調整后利率會與國民收入增長保持相同趨勢,最近幾十年利率陷入負區間的情況下從來不會持續太久。對于今天低于通貨膨脹的收益率,最合理的解釋是這是千年不遇的新冠疫情沖擊經濟造成的罕見現象。

        依舊有許多經驗豐富的投資者相信,低利率將維持較長時間。路易斯·納維利爾為他的家族理財室管理價值18億美元的資產組合。他非常冷靜,對于股市有獨到的見解。他告訴《財富》雜志:“我們聽說了各種有關通貨膨脹的說法,我們看到了極好的零售銷售數據和GDP向上修正的趨勢。但債券收益率卻在下跌。我敢說按照當前的債券收益率,股票的價值依舊在被低估?!?/p>

        納維利爾的觀點很有道理。但我會繼續對標普指數史上僅有的市盈率達到30的兩個時期進行對比,分析兩者的相似之處?;ヂ摼W泡沫釀成了上個世紀最慘烈的股災之一?,F在,我們再次看到了當時出現過的警告信號和瘋狂的繁榮。好日子或許還能持續一段時間。但如果持續太久將違背歷史規律。根據2000年年底出現的瘋狂和隨后的股災,我更愿意相信歷史。(財富中文網)

        譯者:劉進龍

        審校:汪皓

        筆者一直在密切關注標普500指數,眼看著它的估值日益接近一個危險點位。按照我的非官方指標,標普500指數以前只有一次達到過這個點位,那是2000年9月互聯網泡沫的最高點。4月16日上午,該大盤指數突破了這個令人不安的里程碑。標普指數在開盤后漲至4187點,創歷史新高。根據我的“正?;崩麧櫥鶞手?,這使標普指數的市盈率倍數達到30倍(準確的說是30.02倍)。

        乍一看,30倍的市盈率似乎并不可怕。去年6月,根據之前四個季度按美國公認會計準則計算的凈收益這個標準指標,基本市盈率達到31,當時的股價比今天低26%。2020年第4季度結束時,市盈率倍數約為40倍。這并沒有影響樂觀投資者的心態,因此在那之后標普指數持續上漲。但這些疫情期間的經濟比率,對于衡量股票估值過高、過低還是公允毫無意義。雖然股價持續上漲,但從2019年第4季度到2020年底,股票收益下跌了三分之一,導致最知名、最基本的估值指標升高。

        顯而易見,利潤將從疫情導致的低點實現反彈,這會使分母變大,使40倍以上的市盈率倍數恢復到更現實的區間。為了準確預測股票估值過高還是過低,以及股市所面臨的障礙,你需要使用“正?;麧櫋?。我將“正?;麧櫋倍x為經濟復蘇之后,所有標普500公司最有可能達到的利潤水平。我根據2019年全年的數據,選擇了2019年第4季度的每股收益139.47美元。

        這樣選擇有兩個原因。首先,2019年的利潤不僅達到歷史新高,而且按照歷史標準來看,與銷售額等指標的比率也處在極高水平。這樣降低了正?;杏氏蛏吓で母怕?,因為我們低估了未來出現更高可持續收益的可能性。當然,樂觀的投資者會認為,30倍市盈率倍數并不正常,因為2021年的股票收益會令2019年表現出色的大盤股都相形見絀。

        其次,即使在2019年經濟繁榮時期,仍有一個根本原因導致每個季度的每股收益(EPS)基本保持平穩。雖然利潤達到較高水平,但從基本面來看,收益卻缺乏上行空間。即使到現在,通常超級樂觀的華爾街分析師仍預測,到2021年第2季度,年化利潤將與2019年年底的139美元持平。簡而言之,2021年利潤有望重新達到歷史高點。

        歷史上,除了最近的一次以外,標普指數的市盈率倍數只有在收益大幅下降或暴跌時,才會超過30倍。在1999年第4季度,市盈率倍數達到30.5,接近互聯網泡沫的最高點。這個數字令投資者不安,因為當時的每股收益達到歷史新高。換言之,投資者每獲得1美元利潤,都需要支付30美元,而且當時的利潤水平已經高于歷史標準水平。但每股收益繼續上漲,到2000年第3季度達到53.70美元,再創新高。

        每股收益在隨后四年一直沒有超過這一水平。在每股利潤創新高的同時,基準指數在2000年9月1日漲至1518點的史上最高點。當時,該指數在四年內上漲了120%。所以,與今天的市場最相似的是2000年勞動節前三天的行情。標普500指數歷史上只出現過兩次利潤和股價同時創下新高的情況。(當然,這是因為我選擇2019年的利潤與今天的利潤進行對比。)

        在二十多年前,標普指數的傳統市盈率倍數為26.75。按照這個指標計算,標普指數的成本比今天按30倍市盈率計算的結果高出12%。但市盈率倍數并不全面。比如根據當時的基本面信息,2000年的每股收益遠高于2021年。所以當時的市盈率倍數是可以理解的,因為利潤一定會下降,但今天的市盈率倍數過高是因為每股收益并不高,這預示著未來會有較大的增長空間。

        雖然相關證據有些復雜,但總體而言,截至2019年第4季度的利潤似乎至少達到了互聯網泡沫時期的最高點。例如,2019年全年的每股收益相當于國民收入的5.4%,遠高于截至2000年9月四個季度的4.4%。2019年,標普指數營業利潤在銷售額中的占比或“營運利潤率”為11.1%,比2000年高約4個百分點。相比之下,標普指數在世紀之交的股權收益率為17.5%,高于2019年的15.5%。

        由于大部分指標都顯示2019年的相對利潤高于2000年,因此我們將按保守估算,假設兩個周期的相對利潤相當。然后我們可以對僅有的兩個收益和估值均創歷史新高的時期進行詳細對比。這對于今天的大盤股意味著什么?

        繁榮背后的壞消息

        如果你從未離場,那么市盈率倍數達到30背后的繁榮當然是好消息。但如果你計劃現在進場,或者想把你獲得的利潤再投資到美國大盤股,這可能是最糟糕的消息。不妨看看2000年9月1日之后發生了什么。當時標普指數陷入長期低迷,2003年3月11日跌至801點,下跌47%。直到7年后的2007年9月,標普指數才重回2000年9月的最高點;當然在金融危機期間,標普指數再次暴跌,2013年3月突破1500點。這導致該指數長達12年的收益為零,只有微薄的股息。

        當然,你無法預測我們是否會再經歷一次互聯網泡沫破滅之后的暴跌。樂觀的投資者預測,兩個強大的利好消息將帶領美國股市繼續高歌猛進:快速上漲的利潤將超過2019年的最高水平,以及未來幾年的超低利率。

        這兩種情況出現的可能性不大。而且要從這兩件事中受益的機會更加渺茫。首先,我們來看一下利潤的未來前景。目前,股票收益的GDP占比為5.4%,已經超過了歷史標準水平。如果按照華爾街的預測,每股收益上漲速度將繼續超過GDP,利潤占比只會持續擴大。尤其令人擔憂的是,4月16日,標普指數的估值在國民收入中的占比令人震驚地達到161%,比2000年的130%提高了四分之一,幾乎比二十年中位數翻了一番。

        為了將這個比例維持在160%以上,股票收益需要吞噬掉更大一部分經濟,與此同時,美國長期低迷的工資最終將開始上漲,美國的長期增長率將低于2%,而且企業所得稅作為拜登政府雄心勃勃的支出計劃的主要收入來源,其稅率可能將大幅提高。

        關于利率,樂觀投資者認為,未來幾年10年期國債收益率將與GDP保持相同的增長趨勢,對于這種觀點最好的回應非常簡單:這種情況以前很少發生。正常情況下,“實際”利率或通脹調整后利率會與國民收入增長保持相同趨勢,最近幾十年利率陷入負區間的情況下從來不會持續太久。對于今天低于通貨膨脹的收益率,最合理的解釋是這是千年不遇的新冠疫情沖擊經濟造成的罕見現象。

        依舊有許多經驗豐富的投資者相信,低利率將維持較長時間。路易斯·納維利爾為他的家族理財室管理價值18億美元的資產組合。他非常冷靜,對于股市有獨到的見解。他告訴《財富》雜志:“我們聽說了各種有關通貨膨脹的說法,我們看到了極好的零售銷售數據和GDP向上修正的趨勢。但債券收益率卻在下跌。我敢說按照當前的債券收益率,股票的價值依舊在被低估?!?/p>

        納維利爾的觀點很有道理。但我會繼續對標普指數史上僅有的市盈率達到30的兩個時期進行對比,分析兩者的相似之處?;ヂ摼W泡沫釀成了上個世紀最慘烈的股災之一?,F在,我們再次看到了當時出現過的警告信號和瘋狂的繁榮。好日子或許還能持續一段時間。但如果持續太久將違背歷史規律。根據2000年年底出現的瘋狂和隨后的股災,我更愿意相信歷史。(財富中文網)

        譯者:劉進龍

        審校:汪皓

        This writer has been watching carefully as the S&P 500 climbed closer and closer to matching a perilous valuation mark that, by my unofficial metrics, has been reached only once before—at the height of the dotcom bubble in September 2000. The morning of April 16, the big-cap index reached that troubling milestone. Just after the open, the S&P hit a fresh record at 4187. That lifted its multiple, based on my benchmark for "normalized" profits, to a towering 30 times earnings (or 30.02, to be precise).

        At first glance, a price/earnings ratio of 30 might not seem alarming. In June of last year, the basic earnings multiple—using the standard measure of trailing four quarters of GAAP net earnings—soared to 31, when shares were 26% cheaper than today. And at the end of the fourth quarter of 2020, the P/E stood at almost 40. That number hasn't bothered the bulls at all, since the S&P has partied since then. But those pandemic-economy ratios are pretty meaningless in gauging whether stocks are expensive, cheap, or fairly valued. Although prices romped, it was the one-third earnings collapse from the fourth quarter of 2019 to the end of 2020 that most inflated the most famous and fundamental of valuation measures.

        It was always clear that profits would rebound from COVID-stricken lows, increasing the denominator and putting that 40-plus PE in a more realistic range. To get an accurate reading on where stocks stand on the spectrum of super-pricey to bargains, and hence handicap where they're headed, you need a yardstick for "normalized profits." I define that level as the number the S&P companies collectively are most likely to post once the recovery takes hold. My choice is the Q4 2019 earnings of $139.47 per share, based on the total for the year.

        I made that pick for two reasons. First, 2019 profits not only set a record, but also stood extremely high by historical standards when compared to sales and other measures. That reduces the chance that our normalized P/E is distorted upwards because we're underestimating much higher sustainable earnings in the pipeline. Of course, the bulls will argue that our 30 multiple is way out of whack, because 2021 profits will dwarf even big-caps’ super performance in 2019.

        Second, even in the strong economy of 2019, earnings per share (EPS) from quarter to quarter were essentially flat, for a basic reason. Profits had reached such high levels versus fundamentals that earnings lacked room to run. Even now, Wall Street analysts, who are typically ultra-optimistic, project annualized profits through the second quarter of 2021 that match the $139 registered at year-end 2019. Put simply, rescaling that summit is a likely scenario for profits in 2021.

        Historically, the S&P multiple has exceeded 30 only at times when earnings dropped sharply or collapsed, with one exception prior to today. In the December quarter of 1999, the P/E reached 30.5 near the peak of the Internet stock craze. That number flashed red, because it came on top of the highest EPS ever recorded. In other words, investors were paying a gigantic $30 for every $1 in profits, and those profits were already elevated by historical standards. But EPS marched on, striking a new high of $53.70 in the September quarter of 2000.

        As it turned out, EPS wouldn't beat that mark again for four years. Those record profits coincided with an all-time peak for the benchmark index, which reached the summit of 1518 on Sept. 1, 2000. At that point, the index had surged 120% in four years. So the best single parallel to where the market stands today is its status three days before Labor Day in 2000. Once again, those are the only two times the S&P 500 achieved never-before-witnessed profits and prices at the same time. (Of course, that's using our choice of 2019 profits for the comparison to today.)

        On that date more than two decades ago, the S&P’s traditional multiple hovered at 26.75. By that yardstick, the index is 12% more expensive today at a P/E of 30. But the multiple doesn't provide the full picture. Say that according to fundamentals at the time, EPS was a lot higher in 2000 than in 2021. In that case, the multiple could be understated because profits were bound to fall, and today's P/E is overstated because EPS is still modest, presaging big increases to come.

        The evidence is somewhat mixed, but on the whole, profits as of Q4 2019 appear at least as high, relative to the period, as at the apex of the tech bubble. For example, earnings for the full year of 2019 were equivalent to 5.4% of national income, far above the 4.4% for the four quarters ending in September 2000. As for operating profits as a share of sales, or "operating margins," the S&P recorded 11.1% in 2019, beating the number in 2000 by around four percentage points. By comparison, the turn-of-the-century index did better in return on equity, garnering 17.5% to 2019's 15.5%.

        Since most but not all of the metrics point to higher relative profits in 2019 than 2000, we'll take a conservative stance and rate them about equal for both periods. We're left with a side-by-side look at the only two periods of all-time high earnings coincided with record valuations. What does this mean for today's big-caps?

        Bad news behind the boom

        The boom that brought the P/E of 30 is great news if you've been riding the train. But it's the worst possible tidings if you're planning to jump in now, or want to leave your winnings in U.S. big-caps. The evidence: Look what happened in the period following Sept. 1, 2000. The S&P entered a long swoon, bottoming at 801 on March 11, 2003, for a loss of 47%. The index didn't regain the September 2000 mountaintop for seven years, until September 2007; prices plunged again, of course, during the financial crisis, before climbing back above 1500 in March 2013. That adds up to over 12 long years of booking zero gains except for paltry dividends.

        Of course, it's impossible to predict whether we'll experience a drop of anything like the aftermath of the dotcom catastrophe. The bulls forecast that two powerful tailwinds will converge for a full-rigged voyage to glory: fast-rising profits that will surmount the feats of 2019, and the support of super-low interest rates for years to come.

        Both are possibilities, but unlikely. And benefiting from the confluence of both is an even longer shot. Let's look first at the outlook for profits. At 5.4% of GDP, earnings are already outsize by historical standards. For EPS to keep outpacing GDP, as Wall Street predicts, profits would have to get even more outsize. It's especially worrying that on April 16, the S&P's valuation as a share of national income hit an astounding 161%, one-quarter above the 130% it reached in the 2000 rampage, and almost double the two-decade median.

        To stay at 160%-plus, earnings would have to devour an even bigger share of the economy at a time when wages, depressed for years, are finally on the rise, the U.S. is facing long-term growth rates at below 2%, and corporate income taxes are likely to rise significantly as a prime source of revenue for President Biden's ambitious spending agenda.

        As for interest rates, the best response to the bull case that the 10-year Treasury yield will trail the trajectory of GDP in the years ahead is basic: It has seldom happened before. "Real" or inflation-adjusted rates normally track national income, and cases in which they’re in negative territory have never lasted long in recent decades. The most logical explanation for today's sub-inflation yields is that they're a rare phenomenon caused by COVID's once-in-a-millennium blow to the economy.

        Still, many seasoned investors believe rates will remain low for a long time. Louis Navellier, who runs a $1.8 billion portfolio for his family office, is a sober, insightful student of the markets. "We were hearing all this talk of inflation, and we saw stunning retail sales figures, and upward GDP revisions," he told Fortune. "And yet bond yields fell. I can make the argument that where bond yields are now, stocks are still undervalued."

        Navellier makes a good case. I'll stick with the takeaway from setting the only two times the S&P reached 30 on peak earnings cheek by jowl, and judging the resemblance. The aftermath of the dotcom fever ranked among the worst deluges of the past century. We're reliving the warning signals and wild exuberance we saw then. The great times may keep rolling for a while. But for the roll to last would be a departure from history. And I'm betting on history, as chronicled by the craziness of late 2000 and the wreckage that followed.

        最新:
        • 熱讀文章
        • 熱門視頻
        活動
        掃碼打開財富Plus App
        亚洲AV最新在线网址18禁,夜夜天天噜狠狠爱2019,国产超碰无码最新上传,老司机久久精品最新免费
        <ol id="1lp5z"><ol id="1lp5z"><dfn id="1lp5z"></dfn></ol></ol><i id="1lp5z"><strike id="1lp5z"></strike></i>
        <meter id="1lp5z"></meter>
          <address id="1lp5z"></address>

          
          

            <form id="1lp5z"></form>