Any Weather: Valuations Say Stocks are Cheap and Expensive

by Liz Ann Sonders, Senior Vice President, Chief Investment Strategist, Charles Schwab & Co

Key Points

  • Valuation has many shadesā€”from black to white, with lots of gray in between.
  • But valuation is more of a sentiment indicator than a fundamental indicator.
  • Macro conditions (for now) support higher-than-average multiples; but earnings estimates for next year are cloudy at best. 

ā€œIt is only in appearance that time is a river. It is rather a vast landscape and it is the eye of the beholder that moves.ā€

-Thornton Wilder

Iā€™m often asked about equity valuations and whether the market is cheap or expensive (or somewhere in between). My answer is rarely any of the above because to some degree it depends on the valuation metric being used. But the reality is that valuationā€”regardless of metricā€”is as much (or more of) a sentiment indicator than it is a fundamental indicator. Yes, if youā€™re looking at a traditional price/earnings (P/E) ratio, itā€™s ā€œfundamentalā€ in the sense that there is an actual defined ā€œEā€ (earnings) and of course there is always an actual defined ā€œPā€ (price). However, there are times when investors are willing to pay very little for stocks and P/Es descend to historically-low levelsā€”like in 2010-2011, when earnings were rebounding sharply, but investors remained skittish. Then there are times when investors are willing to pay exorbitant prices for stocks and P/Es ascent to historically-high levelsā€”like in 1999-2000.

Back to the metrics; I often say, when speaking to a large group of investors, that I could find the most bearish person in the room, and the most bullish, and easily find a valuation metric they could use to support their view. Case in point is the valuation table below. It covers myriad valuation metrics many of which are familiar to investors but some are a tad more esoteric. Below the table I added in the definitions for each.

Valuation Metric

Definitions

Fed Model: Compares the S&P 500ā€™s earnings yield (which is the inverse of the P/Eā€”or E/P) to the yield on long-term U.S. government bonds. Negative readings suggest favoring stocks over bonds.

Equity Risk Premiums: Subtracts either the forward 10-year U.S. Treasury bond yield or the forward Baa corporate bond yield from the forward S&P 500ā€™s earnings yield (E/P). Positive readings suggest stocks are undervalued relative to bonds.

Rule of 20: Stocks are considered fairly valued when the sum of the S&P 500 forward P/E ratio and the year-over-year change in the consumer price index (CPI) is equal to 20 (or inexpensive when itā€™s below 20).

Trailing P/E: Divides the current S&P 500 price by 12-month trailing operating earnings per share.

Forward P/E: Divides the current S&P 500 price by 12-month forward expected operating earnings per share.

Price/cash: Measures the value of the S&P 500 relative to its operating cash flow per share.

Price/book: Divides the S&P 500 price by the book value of its components per share.

5-Year Normalized P/E: Uses four years of historic earnings, two quarters of forward earnings; taking the midpoint between reported and operating earnings (a take on Shillerā€™s CAPE, but with a shorter time span, and with an adjusted earnings calculation).

Tobinā€™s Q: Developed by Nobel Laureate James Tobin, itā€™s a fairly simple concept, but laborious to calculate (calculations are done by the U.S. government and the ratioā€™s readings are provided by the Fed). Itā€™s often called the Q Ratio and is the total price of the U.S. stock market divided by the replacement cost of all its companies. A high Q (greater than .85) implies overvaluation.

Dividend Yield: Compares the current dividend yield on the S&P 500 with both historic averages and the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield. At near-equivalent yields, the market is seen as fairly valued.

Shillerā€™s Cyclically-Adjusted P/E (CAPE): Uses an inflation-adjusted price for the S&P 500 and divides by reported earnings over the prior 10 years.

Market Cap/GNP: Considered Warren Buffettā€™s ā€œfavorite valuation indicator,ā€ itā€™s the ratio of total U.S. market capitalization to gross national product (GNP).

Popularity contest

The most popular valuation metric(s) is the P/E ratioā€”but even with that, there are several versions as seen above. Because the stock market is ostensibly forward-looking and discounts the expected future trajectory of earnings, itā€™s arguably the most widely used. As you can see in the chart below, the forward P/E for the S&P 500 is currently 17.7 (meaning the index is trading at 17.7 times expected earnings over the next 12 months). Relative to the long-term (post-1995) median, that is slightly expensiveā€”but nowhere near the nosebleed levels of the late-1990s.

Forward P/E slightly above median

SP Forward PE
Source: Charles Schwab, FactSet, as of November 29, 2019.

What about the E?

A rub in the current environment is that there is a debate raging among analysts and strategists about the validity of earnings expectations for next year. Those with more bearish leanings believe earnings-per-share (EPS) estimates are too high and donā€™t reflect the ongoing effect of the trade war and tariffs. Those with more bullish leanings believe that there is a likely Phase I trade deal pending, that the planned December 15 tariffs wonā€™t kick in, that global manufacturing may be troughing, and that EPS may have upside next year.

Below, you can see the trajectory of EPS expectations from Refinitivā€”showing the possibility of an ā€œearnings recessionā€ courtesy of negative earnings in both the third and fourth quarters; with a pickup to double-digit growth by next yearā€™s second quarter. I do believe trade, tariffs and the fate of the December 15 tariffs (which target a vast number of consumer-oriented goods) will decide the fate of EPS expectations. However, I wonā€™t do the impossible and try to predict the outcome of the ongoing trade negotiations.

Earnings Table
Source: Charles Schwab, I/B/E/S data from Refinitiv, as of November 27, 2019. Forecasts are for illustrative purposes only, may be based upon proprietary research and are developed through analysis of historical public data.

Macro support

Most macro conditions do continue to support multiples at the higher end of any normal rangeā€”with low interest rates, low inflation and the Federal Reserve on hold for now. Low bond yields mean equities are inexpensive on a relative basis (to Treasuries and/or corporate bond yields; as seen in the valuation table in the beginning of this report). A change in those macro conditionsā€”like higher inflation expectationsā€”and/or a deterioration in EPS expectations in 2020, could put some downward pressure on multiples.

My colleague Kathy Jones wrote about a similar topic in her Sunday evening (internal) missive:

ā€œEver since the Federal Reserve reversed course and began easing policy, markets have enjoyed smooth sailing. It looks like it can last a while, since we donā€™t anticipate a shift in central bank policies any time soon. The problem is that market valuations become skewed in environments like this. Low interest rates and high liquidity encourage risk-taking and yield-seeking. Asset valuations become elevated and investors become complacent.ā€

Iā€™ll end with another quote, from Joan Jett (todayā€™s report title is thanks to her as well):

ā€œYou want to have butterflies in your stomach, because if you donā€™t, if you walk out onstage complacent, thatā€™s not a good thing.ā€

 

Copyright Ā© Charles Schwab & Co

Total
0
Shares
Previous Article

Lazard: What to Watch in 2020

Next Article

A Future Embedded in the Present

Related Posts
Read More

Women & Alts: A Global Perspective with Barbara Stewart

In this episode of Insight is Capital, Pierre Daillie welcomes Barbara Stewart, CFA, a renowned global researcher, author,…
Subscribe to AdvisorAnalyst.com notifications
Watch. Listen. Read. Raise your average.