Interesting comparison between 1987 and 2009.
Actually there is no comparison. Totally different.
Let's break-down the market in 87 and 2009, also for-sake-of-comparison we'll also look at 1929, the start of the great deppresion and 2000 the end of the tech boom.
Here's the previous 5 years and 2 years of market returns coming into each period. And remember, earnings drives the stock market for the most part, when the markets been driven way up stocks become expensive relative to earnings unless earnings rise at the same pace. When stocks are expensive relative to earnings is when the stock market produces big corrections.
5 years coming into ............
1929 --- 29.8% average per year
1987 --- 20.3%
2000 --- 28.9%
2009 --- (-.08%)
even if we throw out 2008, a down year for the market
2008 --- 10.6%
2 years coming into ...........
1929 --- 42.3%
1987 ---- 25.7%
2000 ---- 24.9%
2009 --- (-15.9%)
2008 --- 10.6%
First, we can see there's no comparison with 2009 or 2008 with the other 3 peiods.
The two 5 year periods coming into 1929 and 2000 are "BY FAR THE BEST RETURNS" of the four periods.
These were also the "2 BEST 5 YEAR RETURNS OF ANY 5 YEAR PERIOD IN THE HISTORY OF THE STOCK MARKET BEGINNING IN 1871".
Looking at 2 Years previous 2009 and 2008 again is no comparison to the other periods, stocks have not been driven up coming into 2009 or 2008 like they were going into the other 3 periods which all produced big market corrections.
Remember, when stocks get driven-up they become expensive relative to earnings unless of coarse earnings are rising at the same rate. And the way we tell this is..... Price-to-Earnings Ratio of the S&P 500, (PE).
In 1929 the PE was around 27, the highest or most expensive period for stocks at the end of a bull run untill 2000 when the PE was around 45.
What did these 2 most expensive periods produce ??
The only two periods in the history of the stock market when stocks went down 3 consecutive years (2000-2002), and 4 consecutive years (1929-1932).
Again, high PE's, when stocks are expensive, produce market corrections.
The 42.3% returns in the 2 years coming into 1929 produced the 2cd best 2 year returns in market history, meaning stocks are now expensive relative to earnings, and not surprisingly produced the only 4 consecutive year losing streak in market history.
What 2 year period produced the largest 2 year return ????
The 2 year period just a few years after the only 4 consecutive year losing streak , meaning stocks are now inexpensive.......
1935-1936 --- 43.7% average per year
Looking at the PE of each periods tell's us the story.....
1929 --- around 27
1987 --- around 23
2000 --- around 45
2007 (october) --- around 30
today ---- around 17
Stocks are the cheapest they've been for years and years and years today.
The largest market correction's in 1929, 2000, 2007 also followed the largest PE's.
The PE in 1987 was one of the highest at the time, since the tech boom in the 90's the PE has been higher than in past years like 1929 or 1987 because investors are willing to pay more for tech, tech consistently trades higher than the rest of the market.
Also today it's much easier for the average investor to buy stocks, just as recently as in the 80's commissions were 10 times higher then they are today and one needed to buy a minimum number of shares or they were accessed a penalty.
Because of these reasons is why we see PE's much higher since the tech boom of the 90's, "BEFORE BIG MARKET CORRECTIONS", such as the 30 PE before 2007 or the 45 PE in 2000.
This is why a 17 PE today is not the same as a 17 PE years ago, stocks today are cheap and............
WE'RE GOING UP FROM HERE FOLKS !!!!!!!!!!!