Skip to main content

Stock market getting cheaper (relative to bonds)

Several indicators are signaling an increase in the probability of a recession. Most of these indicators are variables that have shown to be statistically leading the recession but they cannot always be seen as the cause of one (for example, an inverted yield curve)

In the search of a cause for a recession we typically look for imbalances. One that has mattered in the past is asset price bubbles. Standard valuation metrics of the stock market suggest that in the last quarters the market has gotten cheaper and moved further away from bubble territory. The Financial Times reports that US companies dividend yield is now larger than the interest rates on a 30 year government bond (see image below). This is not at all a new phenomenon in Europe where the dividend yield has been larger than the interest rate on bonds for years and is now reaching record levels.



A good way to summarize the improvement in the valuation of stocks is to calculate the ex-ante risk premium. The image below shows the risk premium for the US stock market (S&P 500) from 1991 until today (see sources and methodology at the end of this post).


The risk premium has climbed back up to levels (around 4%) that are average for the post-2008 period and significantly higher than in previous decades (high risk premium means that stocks look cheaper relative to bonds - assuming risk attitudes or perceptions are not changing).

What is more significant is that the risk premium is much larger than in the quarters prior to the previous two recessions. In the quarters prior to the 2001Q1 recession the risk premium was negative. In the quarters prior to the 2007Q4 recession the risk premium was falling and below 2% for several quarters. We are now at 4%, far away from any of those magnitudes.

Similar calculations for Europe produce an even "cheaper" stock market (relative to bonds). P/E ratios are as low as 19 for Germany. Combined with a -0.7% yield on a 10 year government bond and assuming inflation around 1.5% means a risk premium of 7.5%. Almost as high as during the panic years of the last crisis (2009) in the US.


Antonio Fatas

____

Methodology: under certain assumptions the expected ex-ante real return of the stock market can be approximated by the inverse of the P/E ratio. The risk premium can then be calculated as the difference between this magnitude and the real yield on a 10-year government bond. See Blanchard and Gagnon for alternative calculations of the risk premium.

Sources of data: P/E ratios and nominal 10-year interest rates from Robert Shiller; forecasts of inflation from the survey of professional forecasters posted at the Philadelphia Fed.


Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Where did the saving glut go?

I have written before about the investment dearth that took place in advanced economies at the same time that we witnessed a global saving glut as illustrated in the chart below. In particular, the 2002-2007 expansion saw lower investment rates than any of the previous two expansions. If one thinks about a simple demand/supply framework using the saving (supply) and investment (demand) curves, this means that the investment curve for these countries must have shifted inwards at the same time that world interest rates were coming down. But what about emerging markets? Emerging markets' investment did not fall during the last 10 years, to the contrary it accelerated very fast after 2000. This is more what one would expect as a reaction to the global saving glut. The additional saving must be going somewhere (saving must equal investment in the world). As interest rates are coming down, emerging markets engage in more investment (whether this is simply a move along a downward-sloppin...
Post a Comment
Read more

COVID-Economics Daily Links (May 2)

How to Avoid a W-Shaped Recession - Jeffrey Frankel (PS) Covid Economics: Vetted and Real-Time Papers, Issue 12 - CEPR Leaders' speech and risky behaviour during a pandemic  - Nicolas Ajzenman, Tiago Cavalcanti, Daniel Da Mata (VoxEU) How did COVID-19 disrupt the market for U.S. Treasury debt?  - Jeffrey Cheng, David Wessel, and Joshua Younger (Brookings) Who is doing new research in the time of COVID-19? Not the female economists  - Noriko Amano-Patiño, Elisa Faraglia, Chryssi Giannitsarou, Zeina Hasna  (VoxEU) An Estimate of the Economic Impact of COVID-19 on Australia  - Flavio Romano (SSRN) COVID-19 Caused 3 New Hires for Every 10 Layoffs  - David Altog et al (FRB of Atlanta) Mandated and targeted social isolation policies flatten the COVID19 curve and can help mitigate the associated employment losses  - Alexander Chudik, M. Hashem Pesaran, Alessandro Rebucci  (VoxEU) Life after lockdown: welcome to the empty-chair ...
Post a Comment
Read more

You can lower interest rates but can you raise inflation?

Last week the Bank of England lowered their interest rates. This combined with previous moves by the ECB and the Bank of Japan and the reduced probability that the US Federal Reserve will increase rates soon is a reminder that any normalization of interest rates towards positive territory among advanced economies will have to wait a few more months, or years (or decades?). The message from the Bank of England, which is not far from recent messages by the Bank of Japan or the ECB is that they could cut interest rates again if needed (or be more aggressive with QE purchases). Long-term interest rates across the world decreased even further. The current levels of long-term interest rates have made the yield curve extremely flat. And in several countries (e.g. Switzerland) interest rates at all horizons are falling into negative territory. The fact that long term interest rates is typically seen as the outcome of large purchases of assets by central banks around the world. In fact, many se...
Post a Comment
Read more