SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Strategies & Market Trends : Buffettology

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: jhg_in_kc who wrote (307)9/22/1998 1:38:00 PM
From: Robert Douglas  Read Replies (1) of 4691
 
Forgive me for stepping in to your discussion but I have to make one comment. You quote someone as saying:

The reason P/Es have expanded
over their historic averages is because long-term interest rates are
low. 30 year bonds are yielding a little over 5%! Invert that number and
you get a P/E (yes, the inverse of yield is P/E!!!) of 20x. Now, since
investors put money into equity markets in hopes of increases in future
earnings and cash flows, it makes sense that the current earnings yields
for equities would be lower than comparable yields for fixed income
securities. Put another way, if the 30 year bond has a P/E of 20, then
the stock market needs to have a P/E well in excess of 20.


I have always been under the impression that the higher risk investment would carry the lower P/E. Since you are comparing a bond's yield to the P/E of a stock, you must compare the relative risks of each instrument as well. Is there anyone here that doesn't know which is the riskier? Additionally, the premium paid for a growing stream of earnings would only be greater if the that growth rate is greater than the yield in question, in this case 5%. Is the long term growth rate of earnings going to be greater from this level? Perhaps, but not much more.

-Robert
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext