Tag Archives: Shiller CAPE

So….2016

As the first week of January progressed and markets tumbled, I was thinking about this post and couldn’t get away from the thought that 2016 feels very like 2015. The issues that were prominent in 2015 are those that will be so again in 2016 plus a few new ones. The UK vote on the EU and a US presidential race are just two new issues to go with China economic and political uncertainty, Middle East turmoil, Russian trouble making, a political crisis in Brazil, the insidious spread of terrorism, a move towards political extremes in developed countries and the on-going fault lines in Europe and the Euro. All of these macro factors together with earnings and the impact of rising interest rates are going to dominate 2016.

2015 joins two other years, 2011 and 1994, in being a -1% year for the S&P500 in recent times, as the graph below shows. In fact, the movements of the S&P500 in 2015 show remarkable similarity with 2011. However, there the similarities end. 2011 was the year of the Euro crisis, the Arab spring and the Japan quake. Interest rates were falling, earnings stable, and PE multiples were around 15. 1994 was even more different than 2015. In 1994, the economy was taking off and the Fed was aggressively raising rates, earnings were stable and PE multiples fell to around 15. Interesting the next 5 years after 1994 on the stock market were each 20%+ years! With 2015 around a 20 PE and earnings falling, the comparisons are not favourable and may even suggest we got off lightly with just a -1% fall.

click to enlargeS&P500 Years Down -1%

A recent article in the FT does point to the influence of a limited number of stocks on the 2015 performance with the top 10 stocks in the S&P500 up 14% in 2015 and the remaining 490 stocks down 5.8% collectively. The performance of the so-called nifty nine is shown below. The article highlights that “dominance by a few big companies – or a “narrowing” market – is a symptom of the end of a bull run, as it was in the early 1970s (dominated by the “Nifty Fifty”) or the late 1990s (dominated by the dot-coms).”

click to enlargeS&P500 vrs Nifty Nine

Bears have long questioned valuations. The impact of continuing falls in oil prices on energy earnings and a fall off in operating margins are signalling a renewed focus on valuations, as the events of this past week dramatically illustrate. A graph of the PE10 (aka Shiller CAPE) as at year end from the ever insightful Doug Short shows one measure of overvaluation (after this week’s fall the overvaluation on a PE10 basis is approx 30%).

click to enlargeS&P500 Valuation PE10 Doug Short

One of the longstanding bears, John Hussman, had an article out this week called “The Next Big Short”, in honour of the movie on the last big short. Hussman again cites his favourite metrics of the ratio of nonfinancial market capitalization to corporate gross value added (GVA) and the ratio of nonfinancial corporate debt to corporate GVA (right scale) as proof that “the financial markets are presently at a speculative extreme”.

click to enlargeHussman Market Cap to GVA

Many commentators are predicting a flat year for 2016 with some highlighting the likelihood of a meaningful correction. Whether the first week in January is the beginning of such a correction or just a blip along the path of a continually nervous market has yet to be seen. Analysts and their predictions for 2016 have been predictably un-inspiring as the graph below shows (particularly when compared to their 2015 targets).

click to enlarge2016 S&P500 Analyst Targets

Some, such as Goldman Sachs, have already started to reduce their EPS estimates, particularly for energy stocks given the increasingly negative opinions on oil prices through 2016. The 12 month forward PEs by sector, according to Factset Earning Insight dated the 8th of January as reproduced below, show the different multiples explicit in current estimates with the overall S&P500 at 15.7.

click to enlargeS&P500 Sector Forward PE Factset 08012016

Current earnings estimates for 2016 as per the latest Yardeni report (EPS growth graph is reproduced below), look to me to be too optimistic compared to the trends in 2015 and given the overall global economic outlook. Future downward revisions will further challenge multiples, particularly for sectors where earnings margins are stagnating or even decreasing.

click to enlargeS&P500 Earnings Growth 2016 Yardeni

To further illustrate the experts’ views on EPS estimates, using S&P data this time, I looked at the evolution in actual operating EPS figures and the 2015 and 2016 estimates by sector, as per the graph below.

click to enlargeS&P500 Operating EPS by sector

With US interest rates rising (albeit only marginally off generational lows), the dollar will likely continue its strength and higher borrowing costs will influence the environment for corporate profits. Pent up labour costs as slack in the US economy reduces may also start to impact corporate profits. In this context, the EPS estimates above look aggressive to me (whilst accepting that I do not have detailed knowledge on the reasoning behind the EPS increases in individual sectors such as health care or materials), particularly when global macro issues such as China are added into the mix.

So, as I stated at the start of this post, the outlook for 2016 is looking much like 2015. And perhaps even a tad worse.

Sell in May and go away…

This week has been a volatile one on the markets with much of the week’s losses being regained after a “goldilocks” jobs number on Friday. Janet Yellen chipped in with the statement that “equity market values at this point generally are quite high” which resulted in the debates about market valuation been rehashed on the airwaves through the week.

My thoughts on the arguments were last aired in this post. I believe there is merit to the arguments that historical data needs to be normalized to take into account changes in business models within the S&P500 and the impact of changes in profit margins. Yield hungry investors and the lack of alternatives remain strong supports to the market, particularly given the current thinking on when US interest rate rises will begin. Adjustments on historical data such as those proposed by Philosophical Economics in this post make sense to me (although it’s noteworthy he concludes that the market is overvalued despite such adjustments).

Shiller’s latest PE10 metric (adjusted for inflation by the CPI) is currently over 27, about 38% above the average since 1960, as per the graph below.

click to enlargeCAPE PE10 1960 to May2015

I tend to put a lot of stock in the forward PE ratio due to the importance of projected EPS over the next 12 months in this market’s sentiment. Yardeni have some interesting statistics on forward PE metrics by sector in their recent report. Factset also have an interesting report and the graph below from it shows the S&P500 trading just below a 17 multiple.

click to enlargeForward 12 month PE S&P500 May2015

Recently I have become more cautious and the past week’s volatility has caused me to again review my portfolio with a ruthless eye on cutting those positions where my conviction against current valuation is weakest. Making investment decisions based upon what month it is can be justifiably called asinine and the graph below shows that the adage about going away in May hasn’t been a profitable move in recent years.

click to enlarge5 year S&P500 go away in May

However my bearishness is not based upon the calendar month; it’s about valuation and the nervousness I see in the market. To paraphrase a far wiser man than me, all I bring to the table is over 20 years of mistakes. Right now, I would far rather make the mistake of over-caution than passivity.

STOXX600 versus S&P500

There is a nice article over at the Philosophical Economics blog from last month on the dangers of using the Shiller CAPE when the constituents of the underlying indices are constantly evolving. I particularly like the Ship of Theseus thesis being updated by the case of the 1970s group the Little River Band! As always with the Philosophical Economics blog, the post is well worth a read and provides some interesting food for thought in the on-going CAPE debate. I also largely agree with the author’s analysis on Europe and the assertion that monetary union “is going to have to eventually dissolve, or at least undergo a substantial makeover”.

In the post, the author references an April 2013 report from KPMG’s Global Valuation Institute on why more European firms traded below their book value following the financial crisis than US firms. One exhibit, produced below, shows that European firms in the STOXX600 recorded less impairments than S&P500 firms through the crisis. This highlights the sources of the impairments and the differing accounting standards at play.

click to enlargeSTOXX600 vrs S&P500 Impairments

Another exhibit from the report illustrates the different sectors that make up the STOXX600 and S&P500 and the percentage of each sector that traded below book value in early 2013. It would be really interesting to see an update of this exhibit.

click to enlargeSTOXX600 vrs S&P500