Be wary of investing in a rigged market

The S&P 500 recovered above 3000, suggesting another advance, but bearish divergence on Twiggs Money Flow warns of (secondary) selling pressure.  Further tests of new support at 2950 are likely.

S&P 500

Falling commodity prices warn of declining global demand.

DJ-UBS Commodity Index

Declining crude prices reinforce the warning.

Nymex Light Crude

While in the US, the Cass Freight Index formed a lower peak. Follow-through below the previous trough would warn of a down-trend and declining activity.

Cass Freight Index

Capital goods orders, adjusted for inflation, continue to decline.

Capital Goods Orders

Housing starts are steady but declining building permits warn of a slow-down ahead.

Housing Starts and Building Permits

Craig Johnson of Piper Jaffray says odds of a recession are growing:

“The bond market has already priced in two rate cuts at this point in time, and potentially part of a third,” Johnson said. “History has always said that bonds lead equities and we need to listen to that message. I think that’s what the smart money is doing…I guess we can’t seem to quite get off of the monetary train that we’ve gotten ourselves onto, and I don’t think it’s quite so simple.”

S&P 500 PEmax

Trailing price-earnings (PEmax) are above 20, historically a warning that the market is over-heated. The biggest buyers of stocks are the companies themselves, through buybacks. The Fed is expected to cut rates while employment growth is still strong. Price signals are being distorted.

Be wary of investing in a rigged market. It’s a good time to be cautious.

“It is optimism that is the enemy of the rational buyer.”

~ Warren Buffett

Rate cuts and buybacks – the emperor’s new clothes

The interest rate outlook is softening, with Fed chairman Jerome Powell hinting at rate cuts in his Wednesday testimony to Congress:

“Our baseline outlook is for economic growth to remain solid, labor markets to remain strong and inflation to move back over time.”
but…. “Uncertainties about the outlook have increased in recent months. In particular, economic momentum appears to have slowed in some major foreign economies and that weakness could affect the US economy.”

Stephen Bartholomeusz at The Sydney Morning Herald comments:

“Perhaps the most disturbing aspect of the Fed shifting into an easing cycle before there is strong evidence to warrant it, is economies already stuck in high debt and low growth environments will be forced even deeper into the kind of policies that in Japan have produced more than 30 years of economic winter with no apparent escape route.”

If the Fed moves too early they could further damage global growth, with long-term consequences for US stocks. But markets are salivating at the anticipated sugar hit from lower rates. Stocks surged in response to Powell’s speech, with the S&P 500 breaking resistance at 3000. A rising Trend Index indicates buying pressure.

S&P 500

The argument for higher stock prices is that lower interest rates may stave off a recession. The chart below shows how recessions (gray bars) are normally preceded by rising interest rates (green) followed by sharp cuts when employment growth (blue) starts to fall.

Fed Funds Rate & Payroll Growth

Rate cuts themselves are not a recession warning, unless accompanied by declining employment growth. Otherwise, as in 1998 when there was minimal impact on employment, the economy may recover. Falling employment growth is, I believe, the most reliable recession warning. So far, the decline in growth has been modest but should be monitored closely.

Falling employment is why recessions tend to lag an inverted yield curve (negative 10-year minus 3-month Treasury yield spread) by up to 18 months. The negative yield curve is a reliable warning of recessions only because it reflects the Fed response to rising inflation and then falling employment.

Yield Spread

Valuations

A forward Price-Earnings ratio of 19.08 at the end of June 2019 warned that stocks are highly priced relative to forecast earnings. The forward PE  jumped to 19.55 by Friday — an even stronger warning.

S&P 500 Forward Price-Earnings Ratio

June 2019 trailing Price-Earnings ratio at 21.52 warned that stock prices are dangerously high when compared to the 1929 and 1987 peaks preceding major crashes. That has now jumped to 22.04.

S&P 500 Price-Earnings (based on highest trailing earnings)

The only factor that could support such a high earnings multiple is unusually strong earnings growth.

But real corporate earnings are declining. Corporate profits, before tax and adjusted for inflation, are below 2006 levels and falling. There are still exceptional stocks that show real growth but they are counter-balanced by negative real growth in other stocks.

Corporate Profits before tax adjusted for Inflation

Impossible, you may argue, given rising earnings for the S&P 500.

S&P 500 Earnings

There are three key differences that contribute to earnings per share growth for the S&P 500:

  1. Inflation;
  2. Taxes; and
  3. Stock Buybacks.

Inflation is fairly steady at 2.0%.

GDP Implicit Price Deflator & Core CPI

Quarterly tax rates declined from 25% in Q3 2017 to 13.22% in Q4 2018 (source: S&P Dow Jones Indices).

S&P 500 Quarterly Tax Rates

Stock buybacks are climbing. The buyback yield for the S&P 500 rose to 3.83% in Q4 2018 (source: S&P Dow Jones Indices).

S&P 500 Buyback Yield

The 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act caused a surge in repatriation of offshore cash holdings — estimated at almost $3 trillion — by multinationals. And a corresponding increase in stock buybacks.

S&P 500 Buybacks, Dividends & Earnings

In summary, the 2018 surge in S&P 500 earnings is largely attributable to tax cuts and Q1 2019 is boosted by a surge in stock buybacks in the preceding quarter.

Buybacks plus dividends exceed current earnings and are unsustainable in the long run. When the buyback rate falls, and without further tax cuts, earnings growth is going to be hard to find. Like the emperor’s new clothes.

It’s a good time to be cautious.

“Only when the tide goes out do you discover who’s been swimming naked”.

~ Warren Buffett

Is the S&P 500 way over-priced?

Robert Shiller’s CAPE (Price/10-year simple MA of inflation-adjusted earnings) is at 30.31, the second-highest peak (behind the Dotcom bubble) in 120 years.

S&P 500 CAPE

PEmax (Price/highest prior 12-month earnings) is far lower at 21.04. I prefer this as a more accurate measure of stock pricing than CAPE. But PEmax is still high relative to the peaks of Black Friday in October 1929 and Black Monday in October 1987.

S&P 500 PE of Maximum Prior Earnings

Forecast earnings for the remainder of 2019 may be slightly optimistic, given recent escalation of the US-China trade war, but the forward price-earnings multiple is lower, at 18.62. The sharp difference between forward and historic PE ratios (as in PEmax) is largely attributable to the earnings hiccup in Q4 of 2018 which is excluded from the forward ratio.

S&P 500 Forward Price-Earnings Ratio

Forecast earnings growth, on the chart below, shows a similar anomaly in Q4 of the current year, caused by comparison to the earnings dip in Q4 of 2018. Forecasts assume that earnings will grow between 7.1% and 7.8% for the rest of 2019, rising to above 11% in 2020.

S&P 500 Earnings Growth

Their projections seem optimistic.

Year-on-year sales growth is a modest 5.8% for Q1 of 2019 and is likely to continue between 4.0% and 6.0% for the foreseeable future. The spike in sales growth in 2017 – 2018 is a result of recovery from negative growth in 2015 and is unlikely to be repeated.

S&P 500 Quarterly Sales

Operating margins are just as important. Margins recovered to 11.25% for Q1 2019 (89.9% of stocks reported), after a sharp fall in Q4 2018, but it is questionable whether these are sustainable.

S&P 500 Quarterly Operating Margins

Conclusion

Earnings forecasts seem optimistic. With lower sales growth and downside risk in operating margins, long-term earnings growth of between 4.0% and 6.0% is likely. The 30-year average is 6.17% p.a. but low inflation (and a possible trade war) is likely to see us undershoot this.

Forward Price-Earnings ratio of 18.6 is on the high side for expected low earnings growth. A forward PE of 16.0 or less, however, should be viewed as a buy opportunity.

Buybacks, interest rates and declining growth

The Fed did a sharp about-turn on interest rates this week: a majority of FOMC members now expect no rate increases this year. Long-term treasury yields are falling, with the 10-Year breaking support at 2.55/2.60 percent. Expect a test of 2.0%.

10-Year Treasury Yields

While the initial reaction of stocks was typically bullish, the S&P 500 Volatility Index (21-day) turned up above 1.0%, indicating risk remains elevated.

S&P 500

The reason for the Fed reversal — anticipated lower growth rates — is also likely to weigh on the market.

Stocks are already over-priced, with an S&P 500 earnings multiple of 21.26, well above the October 1929 and 1987 peaks. With earnings growth expected to soften, there is little to justify current prices.

S&P 500 Price-earnings (PEmax)

The current rally is largely driven by stock buybacks ($286 billion YTD) which dwarf the paltry inflow from ETF investors into US equities ($18 billion YTD). We are also now entering the 4 to 6-week blackout period, prior to earnings releases, when stock repurchases are expected to dip.

Why do corporations continue to repurchase stock at high prices? Warren Buffett recently reminded investors that buybacks at above a stock’s intrinsic (fair) value erode shareholder wealth. If we look at the S&P 500 in the period 2004 to 2008, it is clear that corporations get carried away with stock buybacks during a boom and only cease when the market crashes. They support their stock price in the good times, then abandon it when the market falls.

S&P 500 Buybacks
source: S&P Dow Jones Indices

Shareholders would benefit if corporations did the exact opposite: refrain from buying stock during the boom, when valuations are high, and then pile into the stock when the market crashes and prices are low. Why doesn’t that happen?

The culprit is typically low interest rates. It is hard for management to resist when stock returns are more than double the cost of debt. Buybacks are an easy way of boosting stock performance (and executive bonuses).

Treasury Yields: 3-Month & 5-Year

Corporations are using every available cent to buy back stock. Dividends plus buybacks [purple line below] exceed reported earnings [green] in most quarters over the last five years.

S&P 500 Buybacks & Dividends compared to Earnings

That means that capital expenditure and acquisitions were funded either with new stock issues or, more likely, with debt.

Corporate debt has been growing as a percentage of GDP since the 1980s. The pace of debt growth slowed since 2017 (shown by a down-turn in the debt/GDP ratio) but continues to increase in nominal terms.

Corporate Debt/GDP

Low interest rates mean that stock buybacks are likely to continue — unless there is a fall in earnings. If earnings fall, buybacks shrink. Declining earnings mean there is less available cash flow to buy back stock and corporations become far more circumspect about using debt.

S&P forecasts that earnings will rise through 2019.

S&P 500 Earnings

But forecasts can change. Expected year-on-year earnings growth for the March 2019 quarter has been revised down to 3.5%. Forecasts for June and September remain at 12.0% and 11.4% (YoY growth) respectively.

S&P 500 Year-on-Year Earnings Growth Forecast

If nominal GDP continues to grow at around 5% (5.34% in Q4 2018) and the S&P 500 buyback yield increases to 3.0% (2.93% at Q3 2019 according to Yardeni Research) then earnings growth, by my calculation* should fall to around 8.2%.

*1.05/0.97 -1.

With an expected dividend yield of 2%, investors in the S&P 500 can expect a return of just over 10% p.a. (dividend yield plus growth).

But the Fed now expects growth rates to fall by about 1.1% in 2019 and 1.2% in 2020, which should bring investor returns down to around 9% p.a. Not a lot to get excited about.

I knew something was wrong somewhere, but I couldn’t spot it exactly. But if something was coming and I didn’t know where from, I couldn’t be on my guard against it. That being the case I’d better be out of the market.
~ Jesse Livermore

PEmax and why you should be wary of Robert Shiller’s CAPE

Robert Shiller’s groundbreaking works, Irrational Exuberance and Animal Spirits, led to a Nobel prize in 2013 but we need to be careful of placing too much reliance on his CAPE as an indicator of stock market value.

What is CAPE?

CAPE is the cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings ratio, normally applied to the S&P 500, to assess future performance of equities over the next decade. CAPE is calculated by dividing the S&P 500 index by a moving average of ten years of inflation-adjusted earnings. Higher CAPE values imply poor future returns, while low values signal strong future performance.

Economists John Y. Campbell and Robert Shiller in 1988 concluded that “a long moving average of real earnings helps to forecast future real dividends” which in turn are correlated with returns on stocks. Averaging inflation-adjusted earnings smooths out short-term volatility and medium-term business cycles in the economy and, they argued, was a better reflection of a firm’s long-term earning power.(Campbell & Shiller: Stock Prices, Earnings and Expected Dividends)

Shiller later popularized the 10-year version (CAPE) as a way to value the stock market.

S&P 500 CAPE

Strengths

CAPE correctly identifies that the S&P 500 was over-priced in the lead-up to Black Friday (October 1929) and ahead of the Dotcom bubble in 2000. It also correctly identifies that stocks were under-valued after the Depression of 1920-21, during the Great Depression of the 1930s, and during the 2008 Global Financial Crisis.

Weaknesses

Some CAPE readings are rather odd. The rally of 1936, in the midst of the Great Depression, shows stocks as overvalued. Black Monday, October 1987, which boasts the highest ever single-day percentage fall (22.6%) on the Dow, hardly features. Current CAPE values, close to 30, also appear exaggerated when compared to current earnings.

Causes

There are several reasons for these anomalies, two of which relate to the use of a simple moving average to smooth earnings.

The simple moving average (SMA) is calculated as the sum of earnings for 10 periods which is then divided by the number of periods, 10 in our case. While the SMA does a reasonably good job of smoothing it has some unfortunate tendencies.

First, the SMA tends to “bark twice. If unusually high or low data is recorded, the SMA will rise or fall accordingly, as it should. But the SMA will also flag unusual activity, in the opposite direction, 10 years later when the unusual data is dropped from the average.

Second, the SMA is fairly unresponsive. If earnings rise rapidly, the SMA will lag a long way behind current values.

The third anomaly relates to the use of a moving average of earnings to reflect future earnings potential. Companies may incur losses at the low-point in the business cycle, especially in a severe down-turn like 1929 or 2008, but the impact on future earnings capacity is marginal.

Take a simplistic example, where earnings are $1 per year for 9 years but a loss of $5 is incurred in the following year.  When the business cycle recovers, potential earnings are likely to be $1, not $0.50 (the 10-year SMA).

Examples

All of these flaws are evident in the CAPE chart above.

Problem 1

Expect a fall in CAPE next quarter (Q1 2019) when losses from Q4 2008 are dropped from the SMA period.

Problem 2

Earnings multiples in the lead-up to Black Friday (1929) and the DotCom bubble (2000) are both overstated because of the lag in the SMA caused by rapidly rising earnings.

Problem 3

Potential earnings in 1936 are understated because of the sharp fall in earnings during the Great Depression, resulting in an overstated earnings multiple. The same situation occurs 2009-2018 when losses from 2008 inflate CAPE values.

Proposed Solution

I tried a number of different moving averages in order to avoid the above anomalies but all, to some extent, presented the same problems.

Eventually, I tried dropping the moving average altogether, instead using the highest previous four consecutive quarter’s earnings to reflect future earnings potential. I call this PEmax © (price over maximum historic earnings). PEmax matches normal historic price-earnings ratio (PE) most of the time, when earnings are growing, but eliminates the distortion caused by sharp falls in earnings near the bottom of the business cycle.

S&P 500 PEmax

PEmax overcomes distortions associated with the 1936 bear market rally, Black Monday in 1987 and our current situation in 2018.

Compare how the two perform on a single chart below.

S&P 500 PEmax compared to CAPE

The spikes on Black Friday and the Dotcom bubble are more muted on PEmax but still warn that stocks are over-priced relative to future earnings potential. The 1936 bear market rally is restored to its proper perspective. As is the 1987 Black Monday spike, by removing the distortion caused by declining earnings in the early 90s. The same happens after the Dotcom bubble. And again in 2009 -2018.

Potential Uses

The historic average (1900 – 2018) for PEmax is 12.79. For what it’s worth, standard deviation is 5.32 but this is not a normal distribution.

S&P 500 PEmax distribution

The median (middle) value is slightly below the mean, at 12.23.

Visual inspection of the data suggests that low values are skewed towards the first half of the 20th century. The average over the last 50 years (1969-2018) is 15.85 but, again, this may be distorted by the Dotcom era.

Based on visual inspection, we suggest using a PEmax of 15.0 as the watershed:

  • PEmax greater than 15.0 indicates that stocks are over-priced; while
  • PEmax below 15.0 presents buying opportunities.

Potential Weaknesses

PEmax has one potential weakness. If S&P 500 earnings are ever exaggerated by an unusual event, to a level that is unlikely to be repeated, potential earnings will be overstated and PEmax understated. Fortunately, that is likely to be a rare occurrence, where earnings for the entire index spike above actual earnings capacity.

Conclusion

PEmax ©, an earnings multiple based on the highest previous four consecutive quarter’s earnings, is a useful comparison of price to future earnings potential. It eliminates many of the distortions traditionally associated with price-earnings multiples, including CAPE. High PEmax values (above 15) suggest poor future performance, while low PEmax values (below 15) correspond with greater investment opportunity.

China’s newest export

“Polish authorities have arrested a Chinese employee of Huawei, the Chinese telecommunications giant, and a Polish citizen, and charged them with spying for Beijing, officials said on Friday, amid a push by the United States and its allies to restrict the use of Chinese technology based on espionage fears….
It is not the first time in recent months a Huawei employee has been arrested abroad. Meng Wanzhou, the company’s chief financial officer, was arrested in Canada last month at the request of the United States, where she had been charged with fraud designed to violate American sanctions on Iran….
A 2012 report from United States lawmakers said that Huawei and another company, ZTE, were effectively arms of the Chinese government whose equipment was used for spying. Security firms have reported finding software installed on Chinese-made phones that sends users’ personal data to China.”
From Joanna Berendt at The New York Times

Lack of independence of private companies in China, their use for espionage purposes including industrial espionage, and failure to open Chinese markets up to foreign competitors are likely to throttle attempts to resolve trade disputes with the US. An impasse seems unavoidable.

It is important that the West confronts China over their trade tactics, espionage and ‘influence’ operations. Whether Donald Trump is the right person to lead this, I will leave for you to judge.

I doubt that China wants to rule the world. Dominate, perhaps. But the overriding goal of their leaders is to ensure the survival of the Chinese Communist Party (CCP). They want to make the world safe for autocracy. They don’t seem to understand that this is an oxymoron. Autocracies make the world unsafe because they lack the checks and balances, imperfect as they may be, that ensure stable government in democracies whose citizens are protected by rule of law. If you think the world is already unsafe, imagine Donald Trump as president without the constraints of the US Constitution. History provides plenty of evidence of autocrats — Stalin, Hitler and Mao are prime examples — who abused their power with catastrophic results.

China’s newest export may be a global recession if world leaders are not careful. These two charts from the RBA highlight the current state of play.

Declining growth in retail sales is accelerating. Manufacturing PMI is rolling over and industrial production is likely to follow.

China Activity Levels

Output, on the other hand is surging, as the state attempts to spend its way out of a recession. Cement production is the sole laggard.

China Output

Matt O’Brien at The Age describes China’s dilemma:

…in the depths of the Great Recession, Beijing unleashed a stimulus the likes of which the world hadn’t seen since World War II.

It amounted to some 19 per cent of its gross domestic product, according to Columbia University historian Adam Tooze. By point of comparison, US President Barack Obama’s stimulus was only about 5 or 6 per cent of US GDP.

Aside from its size, what made China’s stimulus unique was the way it was administered. The central government didn’t borrow a lot of money itself to use on infrastructure, but it pushed local governments and state-owned companies to do so.

The result was a web of debt that’s been even harder to clean up than it might have been because of all the money that unregulated lenders – “shadow banks” – were frantically handing out above and beyond what Beijing had been hoping for….

What is new, though, is that this isn’t working quite as well as before. As the International Monetary Fund reports, China seems to have reached a point of diminishing returns with this kind of credit stimulus.

So much new debt is either going toward paying off old debt or toward economically questionable projects that it takes a lot more of it than it used to just to achieve the same amount of growth.

Three times as much, in fact. Whereas it had only taken 6.5 trillion yuan of new credit to make China’s economy grow by 5 trillion yuan per year in 2008, it took 20 trillion yuan of new credit by 2016.

I don’t share Matt’s conclusion that Wall Street fears the broad market will follow Apple (AAPL) into a tailspin as Chinese retail sales decline. I covered this in my last newsletter.

Nor do I think that falling Chinese steel production will plunge the global economy into recession. Though it would certainly affect Australia.

China has $3 trillion of foreign reserves and has shown in the past that it is prepared to spend big to buy its way out of a recession. Whether they succeed this time is uncertain, but old-fashioned stimulus spending will soften the impact.

I believe Wall Street has no idea how the trade dispute will play out. And financial markets have gone risk-off because of the uncertainty, despite a booming US economy.

Earnings ratios have fallen dramatically, back to 17.8, from what was clearly bubble territory above 20 times historic earnings. I use the highest preceding four quarters earnings, to smooth out earnings volatility, so my P/E charts (PEmax) will look a little different to anyone else’s.

S&P 500 PEmax

Market volatility remains high, with S&P 500 Volatility (21-day) above 2.0%. A trough above 1% on the next multi-week rally would confirm a bear market — as would an index retracement that respects 2600.

S&P 500

Momentum shows a strong bearish divergence.

S&P500 Momentum

Similar to the Dotcom era below. It would be prudent to wait for a bullish divergence, as in 2003, to signal the start of the next bull market.

S&P500 Momentum

I repeat the same quote as last week as an important reminder of current market volatility.

What beat me was not having brains enough to stick to my own game – that is, to play the market only when I was satisfied that precedents favored my play. There is the plain fool, who does the wrong thing at all times everywhere, but there is also the Wall Street fool, who thinks he must trade all the time.

~ Jesse Livermore

S&P 500 earnings surge

Of companies in the S&P 500 index, 90.2% have reported their results for the quarter. According to S&P Dow Jones Indices:

  • Sales growth at 11.0% year-on-year (Y/Y) is close to a potential record.
  • The earnings beat rate of 78% is also historically high, compared to an average of 67%.
  • Operating margins are at a record 11.58%, compared to an average of 8.08% over the last 20 years.

Forward earnings estimates are climbing, driving the forward Price-Earnings ratio to a more comfortable 17.6 compared to its March 2015 high of 23.9.

S&P 500 Forward Earnings Estimates

Valuations based on historic earnings remain high, but P/E multiples have fallen to 22.02 from 24.16 in the last quarter. The long-term chart below compares the index price to previous highest annual EPS, to eliminate distortions caused by sudden falls in earnings.

S&P 500 Price-earnings based on Maximum Previous Earnngs

The current earnings multiple is still significantly higher than the 18.86 reached prior to the 1929 Wall Street crash and 18.69 in October 1987. But high valuations don’t cause market crashes. Sudden falls in earnings do. And there is little sign of that at present.

The S&P 500 is retracing for another test of its new support level at 2800. Respect would signal an advance to 3000. Declining Money Flow warns of selling pressure but this appears secondary in nature, with the indicator still well above the zero line.

S&P 500

The Nasdaq 100 also warns of a correction, with bearish divergence on Twiggs Money Flow. Again this appears secondary in nature because of the indicator’s position relative to the zero line. Expect a test of support at 7000.

Nasdaq 100

Price & Earnings: The Race to the Top

Now that 93% of S&P 500 stocks have reported first quarter earnings we can look at price-earnings valuation with a fair degree of confidence. My favorite is what I call PEMax, which compares Price to Maximum Annual Earnings for current and past years. This removes distortions caused by periods when earnings fall faster than price, by focusing on earnings potential rather than necessarily the most recent earnings performance.

PE of Maximum Earnings

Valuations are still high, but PEMax has pulled back to 22.78 from 24.16 in the last quarter. Valuations remain at their highest over the last 100 years at any time other than during the Dotcom bubble. Even during the 1929 Wall Street crash (Black Friday) and Black Monday of October 1987, PEMax was below 20.

While that warns us to be cautious, as valuations are high, it does not warn of an imminent down-turn. Markets react more to earnings than to prices as the chart below illustrates.

S&P 500 Earnings per Share Growth

The last two market down-turns were both precipitated by falling earnings — the blue columns on the above chart — rather than valuations.

While it is concerning that prices have run ahead of EPS — as they did during the late 1990s — consolidation over the past quarter should allow earnings room to catch up.

Black Monday, October 1987

Cross-posted from Goldstocksforex.com:

What caused the Black Monday crash of 1987? Analysts are often unable to identify a single trigger or cause.

Sniper points to a sharp run-up in short-term interest rates in the 3 months prior to the crash.

3 Month Treasury Bill Rates

Valuations were also at extreme readings, with PEmax (price-earnings based on the highest earnings to-date) near 20, close to its Black Friday high from the crash of 1929.

S&P 500 PEmax 1919 - 1989

Often overlooked is the fact that the S&P 500 was testing resistance at its previous highs between 700 and 750 from the 1960s and 70s (chart from macrotrends).

S&P 500 1960 - 1990

A combination of these three factors may have been sufficient to tip the market into a dramatic reversal.

Are we facing a similar threat today?

Short-term rates are rising but at 40 basis points over the last 4 months, compared to 170 bp in 1987, there is not much cause for concern.

13-week T-Bill rates

PEmax, however, is now at a precipitous 26.8, second only to the Dotcom bubble of 1999/2000 and way above its October 1987 reading.

S&P 500 PEmax 1980 - 2017

While the index is in blue sky territory, with no resistance in sight, there is an important psychological barrier ahead at 3000.

S&P 500

Conclusion: This does not look like a repetition of 1987. But investors who ignore the extreme valuation warning may be surprised at how fast the market can reverse (as in 1987) from such extremes.

PEMAX second highest peak in 100 years

I published a chart of PEMAX for the last 30 years on Saturday. PEMAX eliminates the distortion caused by cyclical earnings fluctuations, using the highest earnings to-date rather than current earnings. The idea being that cyclical declines in earnings reflect a fall in capacity utilization rather than a long-term drop in earnings potential.

Since then I have obtained long-term data dating back to 1900 for the S&P 500 and its predecessors, from multpl.com.

PEMAX for November 2017 is 24.34, suggesting that stocks are over-valued.

S&P 500 PEMAX

Outside of the Dotcom bubble, at 32.88, the current value is higher than at any other time in the past century. PEMAX at 24.34 is higher than the peak of 20.19 prior to the 1929 Black Tuesday crash, and higher than the 19.8 peak before Black Monday in 1987.

This does not mean that a crash is imminent but it does warn that investors are paying top-dollar for stocks. And at some point values are going to fall to the point that sanity is restored.

Robert Shiller’s CAPE ratio

Here is Robert Shiller’s CAPE ratio for comparison. CAPE attempts to eliminate distortion from cyclical earnings fluctuations by comparing current index values to the 10-year average of inflation-adjusted earnings.

Shiller CAPE 10 Ratio

While this works reasonably well most of the time, average earnings may be distorted by the severity of losses in the prior 10 years.

You are neither right nor wrong because the crowd disagrees with you. You are right because your data and reasoning are right.

~ Warren Buffett