저자: JeremyGrantham · 외국인
요약 보기
결론: 그랜섬은 미국 주식·부동산·채권이 동시에 버블권에 있어 향후 큰 폭락 위험이 크다고 보며, 신흥국(특히 중국·인도) 저평가를 선호한다. 버블 역사와 교훈: 1929, 1973-74, 2000년 닷컴 버블 등은 장기간 손실을 남겼고, 일본 1989년 버블은 31년이 지나도 고점을 회복하지 못했다. 버블은 가격 급등, 가속 상승, 대중의 과열(헤드라인 도배)로 식별 가능하다. 현재 시장 진단: 미국 주식·부동산·채권이 동시에 고평가이며 금리는 역사상 최저 수준에 가깝다. 미국 주식 PER은 과거 100년 대비 약 70% 높고, 기업 이익률은 30% 높다. 주택 가격/가계소득 배수는 2006년 버블 정점 수준으로 되돌아왔고, 최근 12개월 약 20% 상승했다. 원자재(비에너지 지수)는 2011년 고점 수준까지 회복했다. 인플레 보호 채권 수익률 등 자산 수익률 하락: 과거 수익률 6%대에서 현재 3% 안팎으로 낮아져 복리 부의 축적이 크게 둔화되었다고 지적한다. 이익률 평균회귀: 기업 이익률은 경제에서 가장 확실히 평균회귀하는 지표이므로, 이익률 확대에 높은 값을 지불하는 것은 잘못이라고 주장한다. 신흥국 비교: 미국 PER이 11→22배로 오른 반면 신흥국은 11→10배로 하락해 역사적으로 극단적인 괴리가 생겼다. 향후 5~10년간 신흥국이 미국을 이길 확률이 높다고 본다. 중국·인도: 고성장이 곧 주식 수익으로 이어지지 않으며(성장률과 수익률은 약한 역상관), 수익성이 핵심이라고 강조한다. 중국은 교육·기후 대응·과학 존중 측면에서 강점이 있다고 평가한다. 사회 구조 리스크: 미국은 불평등이 심하고 임금이 1970년 이후 실질적으로 정체되었으며, 기업 권력 집중과 노조 약화가 장기 위험이라고 경고한다. 출연자 전망: 미국 주식 전반에 대해 큰 폭락 가능성을 경고하며, 단기 방향을 특정 자산에 대해 명확히 예측하지는 않았다. 자산배분 측면에서 미국 비중 축소와 신흥국 선호를 제시한다.
다듬은 글
the beauty about indexing is you never miss an Amazon or an apple and the bad thing about indexing is you never miss having a lot of overpriced stocks into one of the relatively rare bubbles such as we have now so it's kind of good news bad news if you can ride out the odd 50 decline totally unnecessary of course I'm fundamentals 30 years ago the market is mildly hysterical from time to time and it's totally unjustified by the steady stream of dividends and earnings but it happens and if you want to ride those 50 drops you know good luck it works out very well in the long long run but it can take you 20 years to get back in the game if you get caught in 1929 it works out just fine but you don't get your money back until 1955.
if you get hammered in 74 you're going to get your money back until 87 and then when you've gotten it back for a month or two you give it up again and the same in 2000 by 2010 you're still losing money so for those who feel their Brave and enough I'm willing to try I've always thought that sidestepping some of the pain might be a good idea I think they're perfectly straightforward intellectually easy and psychologically disastrously difficult they're easy because in most cases they're so extreme it's like how do you notice the Himalayas when you're standing in Northern India I mean they come out of the plane and they soar up you can't miss these things 1928-29 was just such a massive rally so the sheer price rise you can't miss secondly just to make it easier the great bubbles have always tended to rise faster and faster towards the end and that's a kind of defining feature also and then thirdly they have all been accompanied by Massive public obvious crazy behavior where the headlines migrate from the financial page to the front page where they migrate to the opening few sentences of the evening news on the radio of the television and they talk about Market New highs and and they talk about what the Bitcoins of the era have done I know it's not a stock but it's a speculative instrument and The Game Stops of the world and back in 2000 most of you will be old enough to remember the pet.com and the utter craziness of that area and the same was true of 1929 the same was true of Japan we had a group from Solomon Brothers a leading American brokerage House of the era who came around in 88-89 when Japan was moving to 60 times earnings and explaining that their yields Etc and their interest rates Etc they really should have been selling it a hundred times and they were cheap and you should buy them and it didn't start the Japanese Market breaking the following year it has not recovered the high of 31 years ago yet so that was pretty painful taught us in a sense a powerful lesson about how human behavior works but it also explains to us why the big firms couldn't play that game it is simply not a commercial proposition to get out of a bull market because every now and then they run other and faster than you expected Japan went on and on and on Way Beyond people's expectations two thousand beat the record there's a lot of difference between 35 times earnings and 21 the previous record so sometimes they break out to an astonishing degree now the bad news is that changes nothing they go back even more and longer and they go back where they came from and the higher they go the harder and longer they fall but it changes everything when you're there when you're having a bubble it's really advisable to have the bubble be in one focused area in 2000 for example it was U.S growth stops it was not Global and real estate was really cheap as in cheaper than the cost of building the building you could buy real estate for the bonds were really cheap and inflation-protected funds had just come out and they yielded 4.2 percent 4.3 percent I mean can you believe it real return guaranteed against inflation even within the market the value stocks were not too bad and the small stocks were not too bad and small value was actually cheap enough that when the s p had gone down 50 it hadn't gone down at all it was I think plus three I mean amazing and the REITs all of the real estate they were up 30 as the s p hit minus 50.
that was a bubble that was Paradise for an asset allocator because there were so many Alternatives what you want to avoid is what Japan did in 89. Japan had the biggest bubble in history I believe bigger than the south sea bubble and that was in London real estate and the old Story the land under the empress Palace was worth more than the whole state of California we spent two days actually asking and digging and it was it literally was first of all it's a big palace with great palace grounds and secondly downtown Tokyo all around it was selling for you know four five six times downtown Manhattan and the numbers worked out just amazing simultaneously they had the biggest Equity bubble of any important Market there are some flaky tiny markets that don't count but of any major Market that's the biggest bubble of all time at the time we were told it had gone 65 time zones there's always historical revisionism in the data so you have to be a little careful but at the time it was clear everybody agreed 65 time zones which is pretty remarkable and it's had never sold at over 25 times before so that's the thing that makes every value manager wake up sweating in the middle of the night is Japanese stocks anyway they managed to do both of these at the same time and 31 years later the land is not back real estate's not back and stops are not back to where they were this was a loss of perceived wealth so profound that you have to congratulate the Japanese for not going into depression and people talk about the last decade but that was the last decade where they actually inched forward they actually did not go even backwards for the decade when you're taking that kind of loss of wealth you're in trouble now in the so-called great financial crash which irritates me as a title because I think it was a housing bust the housing Market had this perfect three sigma 100 Year outlier bubble had been very very stable historically so to get to that level it only had to go up only he says about 40 or so in two to three years which it did and then it gave it all back but the trouble with 2007 housing bubble is it took the stock market with it the stock market was not sensationally overpriced but it was a big overpriced bull market it was not in itself a bubble but the housing market puts a bubble a beautiful magnificent bubble and if you look at it it's perfectly round it goes up for three years it goes down for three years exactly the same speed and it goes all the way back where it came from and the housing bubble inflicted about 10 trillion dollars of loss of perceived value so one minute you thought your house was worth four hundred thousand three years later you would tell it was worth 550 000 three years later you were told it was four hundred thousand and two years after that three hundred and fifty thousand so you had lost an enormous asset and housing markets are much more dangerous because more people own them the middle class in particular that earns very little stock earns a lot of Housing and it really when you lose that value you skip the trip to Portugal and you realize you can't send your second son to uh private school and it really flows through the system don't do it so what do we have this time we have of the four major asset classes on the planet we have three and a half in bubble lab we have Jim Grant would say the most overpriced one market and the lowest rates in the history of man that go back 4 000 years there is never a time when so much had a negative return where you pay the government to take your money so that's number one number two we're a contender for the highest priced U.S Equity Market in history I would say a majority of bubble experts think this is now slightly higher than 2000 which was epic and some people do not but at least we can all agree it's a contender and then we have real estate and real estate was kind of of off-screen until a few minutes ago and suddenly on some of the databases it has risen twenty percent in the last 12 months as shillis series a little more conservative lags quite a bit I think it's only up 13 but the other series perfectly seriously done up 20 is the sharpest rise sharper than the 70s with inflation and sharper than the housing bubble of 2005.
and what that means is metric we hero worship is multiple of family income how much does the median house the one in the middle how many multiples of the median family income is it's a nice stable Fair metric it used to be in America that we'd sell it three times family income and in the bubble we kind of went to four and a half or so and then back and we are now at the multiple of family Inca that we were in 06 the very peak of the housing bubble we're back now the rates are very low so all being well you can quote afford it what you can't afford to do if you're a beginner is buy it in the first place how painful for most people higher asset prices are they're kind of fun when you own them they're great for retirees who have nothing to do but liquidate their pile of assets but for people who don't have it and for society in general it's a disaster because what has happened over the last 25 years is that the yield on assets has dropped as the price Rose and at six percent you can reinvest and double your money in 12 years and at three it takes 24 years so in 48 years you have a quarter of the wealth ignoring taxes for a second a quarter of the wealth that you would have had in the world on average of the 20th century this is terrible and the same with a house you're getting half the house that you used to get for your income it's a disaster for people who don't have assets and the whole society is compounding as well much more slowly it's such a simple arithmetic point but nobody seems to get it it is slowing our wealth creation down and giving us the illusion that we're all getting rich and of course if you have a house you know that the house hasn't changed house was the same house at 300 000 as it was at 450 and back to 300 000.
it's the same darned house it doesn't hold off the rain any better in a housing bubble like today it's the same with Stocks by the way they're the same old stocks only in stocks you get the fantasy of pretending that somehow their earnings have gone stratospheric and you can expand the storytelling to fit the available price and that's why bubbles in the stock market are so dangerous but when you look back you find there was no a dramatic shift in long-term earning power in 2000 it was just a game we all played there wasn't even in Japan there was a fairly modest upswing in profit margins and profit margins are as I like to say the most provably mean reverting Series in economics so if you pay up for Rising profit margins that is absolutely the wrong thing to do you should pay up for crushed profit margins because they always bounce you should pay down for Heroic profit margins because they always move downwards anyway so here we are we have the trifecta first time in American history the real estate market the bond market and the stock market and then coming up on the rails as they say are Commodities if you take the Goldman Sachs index for non-energy they have a ludicrous total index it's so dominated by oil that when they break out oil and non-oil and the total index you can't tell the difference really between the total index and the energy part but if you look at the non-energy part which is all the metals all the critically important foods plus one or two other things like cotton it's back to the all-time high of 2011.
it's back to that epic move in Commodities I mean who knew that the broad base of Commodities a lot of them that count are back to the all-time high and the UN Global index of food prices is not far after 2011 high and then there's more complicated story of energy because energy in terms of fossil fuels is in the end game the Paradox or the slight irony here I suppose is in the stock market where it really is focused most on the US and although the developed countries are quote overpriced it's fairly business as usual and there are some countries the UK for example and some would value Japan are not particularly expensive and Emerging Markets seem to be perfectly ordinary which means against the bubble U.S they're one of the two or three lowest relative points in history and from those other points they have done very very well indeed as recently as 2008 the Emerging Markets sold at a PE premium to the s p and now it sells R and that's a pretty decent discount why does this time seem very very different I am actually hard-pressed to find anything that isn't different start with the basics the price earnings ratio of the market for the last 20 years has been 70 percent higher than the previous hundred years this is not a small number this is not 15 the profit margins of U.S corporations have been 30 percent higher in the last 20 years so you've had really profound shifts I think also the style of corporate management 30 years ago they used to think about expansion the market for paper would get a little tied and they'd start to open new Mills now they think about profit margins more than expansion and they use their extra money to buy stock back it works out very well for corporate offices tends to push the price of the stock up a little bit tends to be a little bad for a GDP growth a little bad for jobs but for the corporation itself it works pretty well and for the stockholders there's no easy correlation between the economy doing well and the staff you might think there is when you read the newspaper or listen to the news but there isn't if you run a correlation between the countries that do well you can't find any connection rapid growing countries of the past have tended to slightly underperform so you might start with Japan had the best growth didn't do that well overall and then South Korea China today they outgrow everybody it doesn't mean you make more money on the stock market in fact you run them all together over the last hundred years you see a slightly negative correlation the countries that have grown more slowly tend to do a little bit better in the market the thing that drives return is how profitable you are not how fast you grow I'm causing a lot of trouble amongst my fellow value managers by saying that I don't think this Market is a true bubble about to blow up but that doesn't mean I would put my money in the U.S market I think Emerging Markets is unusually much cheaper than the us as recently as early 08 it sold at a premium in the price earnings ratio and by the spring of last year amazingly it was actually cheaper than it had been after the crash in 1909 and the U.S meanwhile priced at 11 times earnings had gone to 22 and emerging had gone from 11 to 10.
so a huge Divergence in favor of the US and that's usually a pretty good sign you should pay attention be ready to be a little Brave and the probability of emerging not outperforming the us over the next five or ten years is I think very slim it will win who has the strongest economy in the world and how do you measure it I think obviously China and India have been able to outgrow everybody else and I think that's a workable definition of a strong economy how many of your poor have you turned into middle class what is the average Lifestyle what's the average educational standard and you have to give it to the Chinese what should scare us a little bit is the success particularly in the Chinese of educating their average Workforce their recent scores in math are higher than the US not only are they one-third the price or one quarter the price but they're actually more skilled in basic quantitative methods this should make us nervous it makes me nervous exactly it makes people in Silicon Valley nervous too I think it does yeah yeah and can you argue that over the long run whatever the long run is those countries that don't have a highly functioning democracy will be in the long run restrained in terms of their prospects I have this view about capitalism that it does millions of things better than other kind of top-driven economic systems but one of two things it does very badly if it's very long term capitalism is not really suited to that they have this discount rate problem whereby anything that happens out 20 years doesn't seem to matter and the Chinese can deal with those problems much better and today the real threats tend to be long-term issues such as climate change population how do you deal with these problems which are what economists call externalities mainly they're societies I think can and are handling it much better they respond to climate change much more quickly and more seriously than we do and they have much greater respect for science so I think the biggest risk to American Business and American society is the drift to more corporate power in politics and more corporate power through monopolies and so on and less less to the workers and the destruction of the unions and the income inequality where we are a 20th out of 20 rich countries we are the most unequal Society and also the speed with which you can move from one economic class to another one always used to think of America as being extremely mobile where the stickiest we're the most difficult Society in the developed 20 countries to go from the lower class to the middle class this is absolutely a long-term threat to how virile a capitalist Society can be if you suppress the ordinary worker since 1970 the average hourly pay adjusted for inflation has not changed and in France I bring up France because ever since I've been here for 40 years if you read business week you think we've been kicking their bottoms but their average hourly pay is up 140 the poor old Brits is up 65 the Japanese up 80 and the U.S hourly wage the average of all hours worked has not changed since 1970.
I mean this has been a tough era and why wouldn't the workers be upset and yet wouldn't you say if you look at actually what is happening and what is being proposed that this is the complete flowering of corporatism it is the complete domination where people from a particular industry are appointed to run the regulatory body that is meant to protect the general people from misbehavior of the drug companies or misbehavior of the fossil fuel companies they have been taken over by the corporation a good Society will have these waves you move towards capitalism you move back towards the worker capitalism was the top dog back in 1880 the Gilded Age and then combination of a couple of Wars FDR and depression and from 45 to 75 we had the Golden Era of equality where everybody benefited from productivity Pension funds were started the workers made huge advisors educational standards for ordinary people went up and the GDP was handsome and then from 75 to 85 began to get and after 85 it's been pretty much corporate power increasing all the time when the Smoke Clears all these new technologies seem to increase the power of the elite
Comments 0