저자: Dr.EdYardeni · 외국인
요약 보기
생산성 향상(AI·로보틱스·자동화)이 실질 GDP 성장, 저인플레이션, 이익률 개선을 이끌고 있으며 경기침체 없이 경제가 회복탄력적이라고 주장. 베이비붐 세대 퇴직에 따른 노동 부족을 기술이 메우고 있고, 공급망 리쇼어링과 미국 내 자동화 공장 증가도 생산성을 높인다고 봄. 주가는 실적 증가에 따른 상승으로 설명하며 2026년 말 S&P500 8,250, 2029년 말 10,000 전망. 2030년 주당순이익 400달러 이상, PER 20~21배를 가정. 다만 애널리스트 기대치 과열 가능성도 언급.
다듬은 글
We're seeing many technologies now helping to boost productivity, just as happened in the 1920s. And productivity is like the fairy dust of the economy. When you achieve better productivity , you achieve real GDP growth point by point. You get lower inflation. You get better profit margins and real wages, adjusted for inflation, keep pace with that productivity.
So that boosts the standard of living. And in August 2020, my prediction seemed delusional, as we had just seen the start of the pandemic and were experiencing lockdowns. It was too early to be optimistic, but we said, " Look, one of the things I know as a ' baby boomer' is that my friends will be retiring during this decade." That will create a problem in the labor market.
All these people with tremendous experience will be retiring. They will obviously be replaced along the way, but it's such a large group that they will be missed . They will have an impact on the labor shortage. I didn't know what the migration story would be, but I imagined we would need technologies to find ways to increase the productivity of those who continued working.
And I perceived, like everyone else, that there were technologies out there with the potential to boost productivity. I mentioned artificial intelligence, as well as robotics, automation, and self-driving vehicles. Little did I know that in November 2022 we would see OpenAI present ChatGPT and, as a result, we have had this AI boom that I believe is real.
Clearly there's a lot of hype, there's a chance some will fail and others will succeed, but overall I think it's a tremendous productivity tool. But I think AI has also forced every company to analyze every department and every employee to see how we can use AI effectively. And I believe that the simple fact that companies are examining their operations so closely is already increasing productivity.
Do we really need this department? Even if AI didn't exist, is this really a good business to be in? So, a lot of that has been happening. We have a tremendous amount of relocation, which is obviously not related to AI. It is related to geopolitics. It's related to what we learned from the pandemic: that you want to have your supplies close by.
Well, now we are learning not only from supply chain disruptions during the pandemic, but now also in the Middle East. And well, we are seeing many factories being built in the United States. And they are being operated by automation, robotics and, perhaps increasingly, by humanoids. So , the story of productivity is truly extraordinary.
And it's not just in the production of goods, it 's also in services. You know, trivial things like walking into a fast food restaurant, ordering on an iPad, getting a table number, and someone serving you. I mean, it seems trivial, but it's clearly a driver of productivity and there are many examples of services where that happens.
So, here we are, 7 years; Some people think it's 2026, so 6 years, but if you count on your fingers, you'll see it's actually the seventh year of the Roaring Twenties. That's worked remarkably well. Real GDP at a historic record, with no recession. And that was one of the theses: that the economy would turn out to be surprisingly resilient.
And you know what, John? There hasn't really been a recession since the great financial crisis of 2007, 2009, and 2010. We did have a two-month recession due to lockdowns in 2020, but that doesn't really count. The fact is that the economy has been resilient. And at the beginning of the decade, people were saying, "Oh my God, the pandemic is going to cause a recession." "And now the disruption to the supply chain is going to cause a recession." "The labor shortage is going to cause a recession." "Inflation will force the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates to levels that will cause a recession." And I kept saying, "Well, we might have some ongoing recessions, but I don't think we'll have an economy with a widespread recession." And I said, "You know , I think this is going to turn out to be the most widely anticipated recession of all time that isn't going to happen." And so far, everything is going well.
And I think that's one of the reasons why the stock market has done so well, because without a recession, the economy grows and profits grow. Without a recession, investors are willing to pay higher price-to-earnings multiples . So I have the market, the S& P 500, reaching 8,250 by year-end, which isn't really that bold anymore because it's 6.5% away from where we are.
We're almost at 7,800. And then I think that by the end of the decade we'll reach 10,000. By the end of the decade, I mean the end of 2029. And that's with the market pricing in something over $400 per share in 2030. Um, and with a multiple of 20 to 21. I think those are reasonable assumptions, and I think we could get there.
A lot there. So, do you think we can reach 10,000? And that's $400 in EPS with a multiple of 20 or 21. Well, yes, that's it, that's $8,000 right there. And I have been optimistic, but I really haven't been optimistic enough when it comes to profits. I recently coined a word, FEMO. We all know what FOMO was, the fear of missing out.
And I think that's really a valuation multiple concept . You know, everyone's making money. I also have to earn money. The stocks are rising. I love the concept. I 'm not really looking at the fundamentals of the companies I invest in, but everyone else is making money. So that leads to an increase in the valuation multiple, even if the earnings story isn't that exciting, beyond a macro environment or one that's psychologically supercharged with irrational exuberance.
That was in the late 1990s, and that led to the technological collapse. Many people have made the analogy that this could happen again this time, but I said, "Well, no, this time it's FEMO, a fabulous earnings boost." The gains have been much stronger than even I thought. I've been optimistic about the economy, optimistic about profits.
But analysts continue to raise expectations. Now, it is possible that this time, instead of irrational exuberance in the P/E multiple, the valuation multiple, we have irrational exuberance in analysts' expectations about earnings. But you know, John, analysts are usually pretty accurate when there's no recession.
They're always wrong when there's a recession because they're not economists. They don't predict it. So, you know, if you agree with me that the economy has proven its worth, has proven its resilience, you know, it's been almost bulletproof, literally with a war in the Middle East, with oil prices going up and down, the economy has held up remarkably well.
And as a result , the earnings outlook remains positive, and I will probably have to increase my earnings figures for this year. I'm just waiting for the second quarter earnings season to end and then I'll increase them a little. I'm still going to maintain the 8,250 by the end of the year. And then, you know, 10,000 by the end of the decade.
There's a lot to break down there. I want to highlight three or four things that I think were critical of what he said. One is that she said she believes AI is something serious. The second is this idea that AI is a mandatory function, forcing companies to audit their operations. Even if they don't become big adopters, that's right.
Right now, it's forcing them to review item by item, department by department, yes, and see what they could possibly cut. And then, he has this great line. He said that productivity is like the fairy dust of the economy because it can boost GDP, reduce inflation, improve profit margins, and improve living standards.
That's wonderful. familiar with your unique circumstances investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security, strategy, or investment product . date of recording, are inherently uncertain, and may not occur. Past performance, market projection anbout data from third-party sources. The guarantee that any projection, forecast, or opinion will be made.
Any rate of return mentioned is of a historical or hypothetical nature and is not a guarantee of future returns. Past performance is no guarantee of future performance. the possible loss of capital, and are not suitable for all investors. Investment values will fluctuate according to market conditions and securities positions.
At the time of sale, they may be worth more or less than their mentioned in any other publication interpreted as an offer or recommendation of these securities.
댓글 0