저자: BrunoKreidler · 외국인
요약 보기
1997년 Peter Lynch 인터뷰를 재편집해 현재 고평가 시장에 적용한 영상으로, 결론은 단기 시장 예측은 불가능하니 장기 관점과 자신의 역량 범위 내 투자가 중요하다는 것이다. 시장 밸류에이션: S&P 500 평균 PER이 40 이상으로 과거 대비 과열이며, 20 이상은 드물다는 Lynch의 주장을 인용. 다만 Apple, Microsoft, Amazon 등 고PER 대형주 비중이 평균을 끌어올린다고 설명. 종목 발굴 방법: 대형주보다 S&P 500 하위권(50~100위 이후) 기업 등 소외 종목에서 기회를 찾으라는 조언. 20개 기업을 봐야 하나를 고를 수 있다는 Lynch의 견해 인용. 역량 범위(circle of competence): 개인은 4~5개 기업만 깊이 이해하면 충분하며, 잘 모르는 바이오테크·석유 시추 등에 투자하지 말라는 주장. 캐시 우드의 ARK 바이오테크 투자와 GameStop 열풍을 사례로 언급. 밸류에이션 판단: 주가 하락이 곧 저평가는 아니며, 과거 고평가였다가 적정가치에 근접한 종목보다 평가가 갑자기 저평가로 바뀌는 종목을 기다려야 한다는 입장. 고PER 기업은 완벽한 성장을 이미 가격에 반영하므로 리스크·보상 비율이 핵심. 경기 및 파생상품: 단기 시장 방향은 동전 던지기와 같아 예측 불가하며, 조정이나 침체가 오면 진입 기회로 활용하라고 조언. 옵션 등 파생상품은 이해하지 못하므로 다루지 않는다는 Lynch 발언 소개. 결론적으로 '시장에 머무는 시간이 시장 타이밍보다 낫다'는 메시지.
다듬은 글
Hello and welcome to today's video. The weather outside is fantastic, but of course I'm still going to post a video. The show must go on, and today I've brought along an interview with Peter Lynch from 1997, when the market situation was very similar to today's. The market was already very hot back then, and he made some interesting statements that are almost directly applicable to the current situation today, and I found that so fascinating that I thought, why not give it a try?
The interview is in English, but I 've edited it so that I repeatedly summarize the points and place them in the context of today. Therefore, even if some viewers don't understand everything, that shouldn't be a problem and I'm very curious to see how it's received. In my opinion, there's a lot to take away from the video, and that's why I really wanted to show it to you.
But before we really get started, I would of course be happy, as always, if you could leave a subscription . We are on our way to 500 subscribers. We're already back up to 236. It's incredible how fast it's going, so a huge thank you, thank you, thank you again to everyone who supports me. Okay, let's go.
And this is where it gets really interesting, because they measure how overheated the market has become by the average PE ratio of the S&P 500. PE ratio is P/E ratio, i.e., price-earnings ratio. And Peter Lynch says that in history it has only been above 20 very few times, and that 20, i.e. a P/E ratio of 20, is actually the upper end of what can be considered good.
And so, where are we today? With an average P/E ratio of over 40 for the S&P 500, this is, of course, insane when you compare it to the statements made, and one might think that the market must therefore soon experience a massive correction . That may be the case, but it must be noted that the S&P 500 is nowadays, of course, packed with companies like Apple, Microsoft and Amazon as, I believe, the largest holdings, which naturally have a very, very high P/E ratio and therefore drive this average up .
Whether this is justified, whether these Big Tech companies can justify it with their future growth, is another question, but we are certainly in a similar situation to back then and a little caution is therefore advisable. But what does all this actually mean for how we should invest or behave in this market situation?
Okay, you got Pier 1 Imports, by the way, I found that one too, but you have to look at 20 to find one. It's just you don't go to the mall and find the stock. I mean, you have to say, "My God, this sounds like it's good." Then you have to do some steps. You have to do an organized method. And here Peter Lynch says which companies he takes a closer look at, namely the companies that might be in trouble, that are not doing so well , or that are simply ignored by many and haven't been looked at much.
So, away from the Big Techs, away from Apple, Amazon and so on. And perhaps one could take a look at the companies that, for example, only come after position 50 or after position 100 in the S&P 500, because there you can often find significantly better deals than with the companies that everyone already knows and that get all the attention from the press.
And a very important statement he makes here, in my opinion, is that you have to look at 20 companies to find one you want to invest in. And that describes, to some extent, the care with which one should actually approach investing in individual stocks . Let's see what else he has to say about investing in companies in the current situation.
I have to take some steps. You have to do an organized method. People care when they buy a toaster. Care for them're careful when they buy a stock. They do, they do some research. But they don't do it with stock. They call the broker or they see somebody at lunch and they say, "Man, I got this hot stock." And you run right out and you spend $5,000.
Small investors. Yeah . Well, in most cases they put an option in International Data Wack. They don't even own International Data Wack. They even play 90-day games. But Bill said it was good and they made a lot of money. Right, right. And it's and it's like a casino. Yeah . So, it's like a casino. You get the same results, except there's more paperwork.
So, this morning you get up and you go in and you look at those companies that fit that you know something about. You have to have an edge. I mean, let's say the cement industry goes from crumbly to semi-crummy to fairly good. The stocks are going north. You're going to make money. That's the industry you know.
What if you know the publishing industry? You Some people have You have an edge. You work. I mean, what if you last 30 years, you work in the restaurant industry. You would have seen Taco Bell. You would have seen some burritos. You would have seen Pizza Hut. You would have seen Chili's. You would have seen these companies doing very well.
You should have bought those instead of trying to buy biotechnology stocks which you know nothing about. I mean, I know nothing about local area networking. A lot of people are buying this Cisco. They're buying the equipment saying, "We're going to route together all these peripherals and put together the servers." but it's not a bad buy cuz they own a huge percentage of their market.
Yeah, but that was they're saying only a few people had them. I mean, my god, if it works for us, other people try it, then colleges will try it, high schools will try it, then it'll go overseas. They knew they were early in the ballgame. Right. And they should have been buying that company instead of out buying something they don't know anything about, some oil drilling company.
I mean, people have this tendency to always buy something they don't. All you need is a few Charlie, all you need is a few good stocks a day. Yeah, but this is your song. This has been your song for a long time. Only buy what you know. No, but people wake up in the morning and say there's 5,000 companies out there.
Which one should I buy? The average person should be able to follow four or five companies. They should be able to lecture on them. They understand the companies. And this forces you. This tool says to you, "Write down the story." But you keep saying this. And here, for the first time, we see that one or two things he says can really be applied directly to today's situation.
Of course, he says that you need an organized method, that you have to put time into research and analysis when you invest in individual stocks. He gives an example here, saying that when people buy a toaster, they think a lot about it and compare toasters to find the best one and then decide on one , but they don't do that when they invest in companies.
Back then, many people used the stock market more or less as a casino, whether they knew it or not, and the same thing was seen during GameStop Mania. What happened there was absolutely insane, and besides, he says, which is very important, that you should stay within your circle of competence. You hear it all the time , but it's just so important, and he uses the example of biotechnology companies here.
So these biotech companies were already a topic back then, and it is again today. People have a tendency to invest in things they absolutely don't understand, and when I look at Cathie Wood investing in biotech companies with her Ark Invest fund , then she should go ahead and do it, and it's crazy that so many private investors are now jumping on the bandwagon and investing in these companies, about which they have absolutely no idea what they actually do, how they make money, and what their future prospects are.
You simply have to be very realistic with yourself and admit that you just don't know anything about certain topics . And that is by no means a sign of weakness or lack of ability. It's simply a fact that no one can be an expert in every area . And that's why you should focus on the companies that you truly understand one hundred percent.
And especially since the question now is which companies on the market are still fairly valued or which are overvalued, when should I actually buy a company? He now says one or two very interesting things about that. The clip isn't over yet, but I'd like to jump in here because this is very important.
We saw last week that many of the growth stocks, which had been trading incredibly high for a long time , have undergone partial corrections of almost 50% . That does n't mean they're cheap now. Just because a stock has fallen does n't automatically mean you're getting a bargain. We want to find companies that are suddenly undervalued by a fair valuation, and not companies that have been overvalued for a long time and are now perhaps fairly valued .
I came to the same conclusion at the end of my Adobe stock analysis , which I have uploaded. This is a great company that is currently fairly valued, but I don't want to invest in companies that are already fairly valued. I'm waiting for a correction to happen when a company, which I previously assumed was fairly valued, suddenly appears undervalued .
And he makes another very important point here, which concerns all companies that are already trading at a very high P/E ratio, because this high P/E ratio, sometimes in the triple digits, or even in the four digits, already implies that these companies have to show great growth over the years and expects virtually flawless performance.
That means you're already paying the price for the performance that will only come to pass in the best-case scenario. It's always about the risk-reward ratio. If I'm right, how much money will I make? If I'm wrong, how much money will I lose? And it doesn't matter what kind of company you're looking at; this risk-reward ratio should always be the deciding factor in whether or not to invest in the company.
In Future 10 20 20 20 20 He tells you quite openly that he has no idea what will happen to the market in the short term and that you could flip a coin because nobody can predict what will happen to the market in the short term. However, what he can rely on is that the best-managed companies will be able to present significantly better profits in 10 years than they do today, and therefore everyone should focus on long-term thinking and ignore short-term market fluctuations.
Should a minor correction occur or the market collapse, we should all be happy, because that could be a great entry opportunity to finally invest in the company that we may have already looked at, but which has simply been too expensive so far. What about all the criticism of derivatives and the impact they have had?
That's a little complicated for me. All I know is I mean, I don't know about complicated for you. It's way over my head. I've never bought an option in my life. I never bought your Time's on your side when you own a stock. You know. I do n't know about putting, you know, 3% down and buying a future in a scrap and a straddle.
That's way over my head. I ca n't deal with that. Let someone else deal with it. All right. So, you're optimistic about the future of the American economy. Earnings potential for most well-run companies will do all right. But people have to understand we've had nine recessions since World War II. We'll have other recessions.
But we're not in one now. But we may have one in the future. And don't get worried about it. We will have one. Sometime it'll happen. And no one will tell you when it's going to happen. It's Well, but don't the fundamentals tell you? No, you'll find out after the fact. You'll all of a sudden you'll notice orders slowing, prices getting more competitive, then earnings are down.
I mean, usually you find that after the fact. No one declares it's insane we're going to have a recession for five years. It just hasn't happened. It's great to see you. I hope you'll come back anytime, Peter. I think that rounds off the whole interview perfectly. He says he has nothing to do with options trading and doesn't want to get involved with it .
He says he doesn't understand it . I do not think so. I think he understands that quite well, but the point is simply that nobody can predict when the next market crash will come, when we will be in a recession, and nobody needs to predict that, because time in the market is your friend. Even though I think it's a bit of nonsense, it's simply true that Time in the Market beats Timing the Market, and that perfectly concludes the interview.
I hope you all enjoyed it and I'm very, very curious about the response and how the video is received, because I think you can learn a lot from clips like this and it has definitely given me a bit of reassurance that my thoughts on the current situation and how to behave are largely shared by Peter Lynch.
So, I'm looking forward to the next video. It will definitely be exciting again. Until then, have a good one.
Comments 0