Investing When Stocks Are the Most Expensive They’ve Ever Been

Originally published at: https://peakprosperity.com/investing-when-stocks-are-the-most-expensive-theyve-ever-been/

Welcome to this next installment of Finance U. Today’s topics are especially important for anyone with wealth to preserve and protect.

Let’s cut to the chase: Today’s financial markets, or ““markets”” as I like to refer to them to convey just how distorted they’ve become, are not just extremely expensive by practically every single historical measure, they are record expensive.


To book your free, no-obligation portfolio review and retirement planning session with Paul and his team, click here, fill out the simple form, and within 48 business hours, someone from Paul’s team will contact you to schedule a meeting.


Whether we are measuring stocks by Price-to-Book, the “Euphoriometer” index measuring bullishness, or the ‘Buffet Indicator' which is the total value of all equities divided by GDP, the result is the same; US equities have never been this expensive before in history.

Let me repeat that; never.

So we’re in uncharted territory in that respect. But history has been very clear on what happens when equities become expensive – future returns suck.

So where people ought to have the expectation of lousy returns (hey, we can all hope for great returns, but we should not expect them starting from these levels) they often have recent returns as their internal guide for how the future will unfold.

Historically speaking, that is a lousy bet to make, but many people are unfortunately making exactly that error with their retirement planning.

Enter proper risk-based portfolio management and retirement planning. Paul Kike of Kiker Wealth Management takes us through one of the sophisticated tools his firm uses to help guide people toward the best possible chance of success, defined as “having one’s money last for the entire length of their retirement.”

Naturally, one has to make some starting assumptions about the desired level of spending, future inflation, and retirement age. Often people go through this process and realize that they either have to adjust their spending levels or, that they’re in fine shape and can relax a bit. Either way, they know what they need to know to navigate the future successfully.

I am pleased to introduce everyone to this way of approaching investment and retirement planning because (a) it gets the right elements on the table for productive decision-making and (b) did I mention that stocks are stupid expensive right now?

Finally, with the collapse in Chinese government bond yields and the re-steepening of the US yield curve we’ve got plenty of creaking and popping sounds that are consistent with economic difficulties. As is always true, it’s far better to be early in one’s planning than late!

11 Likes

Agree with your sentiments Chris about return to fundamentals - I don’t at all understand “the market” anymore. This bubble will burst - things are not “different this time”. Would like to avoid the really big loss and then be ready to strategically step into undervalued areas. Looking forward to that discussion. Aside from commodities, wondering what yours and Paul’s take on developing markets internationally. Curious what investments in Argentina have done in the last couple years.

4 Likes

Its the same as travel advice: take half the clothes, and twice the money

5 Likes

RutRho!

All of that effort to hold the 10-yr below 4.70 just got smashed:

Not a great moment for stonks either:

If you think it’s weird that Germany and Europe should be clobbered by a stronger-than-expected US labor report, then you are on the right track. These should be far more diversified (decoupled) than that.

This is a monolith ““market”” now, which has new conjoined risks to consider…

4 Likes

Euro dropped almost a full point at release. Perhaps currency flows are a driver.

2 Likes

Another great weekly set of charts and discussion.
Little hype with just data converted to information!!
Rick

2 Likes

Tech is worst (-2.60%) but second worst are the banksters (-2.39%). Higher long rates = more broke banksters. Homebuilders down just -1.60%.

Whoa, my short-term XLF puts just turned green. I haven’t seen that happen in a while.

1 Like

What is FCash and why is Fidelity changing how it handles core positions? Could this be a step in the great taking?
CHANGE_core-transaction-account-changes.pdf (262.8 KB)

Good news! FCASH has no fidelity mgmt fees or OpEx, like the 'old option.

Bad news! FCASH has ~half the yield of the ‘old’ options so they have effectively upped their mgmt fee/take from ~0.8% to around 2.0%

2 Likes

There have been some fundamental changes in taxation in Aus in the last 30 years. 30 years ago the government provided for a pension for workers when they retired. This became a miserly mean(s) tested system in the 1990s and a new tax called superannuation was levied on companies employing workers. This started at 3% in 1990s and is now 12%. Unlike income tax, it is not on earnings, it is on turnover, and there is no lower threshold starter - it applies to every dollar of wages. So in effect it has resulted in a doubling of taxation at the personal level.
Legislation dictates where this tax goes (all to neos) - not to be borrowed against - so one can’t use a SMSF to set up a business.
I don’t know if you 401s are similar.
So all of this Aus tax is now be used to buy (out) equities in the US Market.
That gives neos board seat control on targeted companies, and through those controlled boards, control of further companies. Its how Blackrock can spend $1 and control $100 of stock.
That money is still being spent at increasing rates - threats are decreasing income (everyone looses their job, or everyone lays flat: vax injured, or insulted).
The outgoing side of super is really interesting - we all have to plan to live to 92? But in reality only half of us make it - and that may get worse.
Super companies only pay out half of what then take in from taxes. After profits from investments where frequently they can tilt the table, that leaves for a lot of cash for fees, and sloshing into the market.
The risk is left with the Superannuate at the end of the day.
Perhaps a new rule: purchase of shares using superannuation tax be restricted to Priority Shares (differing from ordinary shares, these may share in profits similarly, but don’t have voting rights - they also place priority shareholders above ordinary shareholders at getting money back if SHF).
Because Priority Shares are pretty similar to debt, neos will be inclined to lend. (If they can’t control by board seats, they will become bankers and control by conditions of contract - but it may stem the IP transfer taking place).
Timing is over company board election cycles, say 1-6 years, which might allow for a ramp.

2 Likes

David - thanks for the detailed write-up! Much appreciated.

In other semi-related news this came out today:


(Link to Court Decision)

Wowza! This opens a huge floodgate for pensioners to sue if or when they feel they can prove their pension trustees were not making reasonable choices, as was definitely the case with ESG investing.

The judgment comes at the end of the month, so we don’t know yet how big the damages might be, but skimming through the filing it looks like the judges DENIED every single defendant motion and argument.

8 Likes

Wow that’s YUGE.

I was wondering when this would come up. “Sure I’ll take less of a return so that the Oligarchy gets to impose stricter controls on us little people.” Says nobody.

Temporal marker on the big chart showing “Rise and Fall of the WEF.”

4 Likes

Ive seen this sentiment and opinion in many places. So who is buying? Someone must buy chinese government bonds otherwise they shouldnt offer it on market and thus get new loans. Or is it just another version of US-FED-government money shuffling that little transactions make it look like “free market” but essentially same government tied group moves same money assets around to make reports look good…
I can see from this is born hubris that debt dont need to be paid back ever.

About ““markets””… is US situation very similar as in UK described here… it is not about taxes and deficits but much bigger regulatory-fiscal governmental structure heavily favoring public money in expense of any private activity and assets. Im spesifically meaning structure of things that in variation of Munger means spesific structures lead to spesific problems. Tyler sounds brilliant in putting words these macro views.

Ive long , some 20 years, pondered how come same item, be it MWh or kWh of electric, gallon of fuel or same service/product (phone service/physical gsm phone) cost so very different amoutns in world despite globalism and mass scale shipping is relatively cheap. Yet lots of things in US cost extragavant amounts vs in India. Im tlaking like telecom service and smartphone. Via internet and some people travel a lot, they can easily compare directly same exact product. Energy price is most curious as it is same coal or gasoline used practically everywhere due to mass refinement favors huge scale(capital investment).

“Back to fundamentals” makes me think correction in these very daily level items towards some global average, not milking alaskans for same products 3x with excuse of “hard shipping to cold”.

Aint longterm rate higher better for just sitting idle and collecting those interests? Banksters dont work that hard. They work hard to get 100mn$ yearly bonus, not for same measly pay average worker does. If they had to work that hard, whole finance sector wouldnt exist.

2 Likes

Thank you for showing us some of your calculations.
I assumed 10% annual inflation, and I can barely make it.
But at 3.5% we should be plenty fine.
I did not include collecting SocSec benefits.
I also assumed I would not generate any income on my retirement money.
My thought process is that if I generate something, it adds time.

But this is all guessing. I remember good people losing everything in the 1970s when the rates rocketed up and people lost houses, etc. 18% to buy a car. Wow…

2 Likes