Skip to main content

We’re Living in What May Be the Most Boring Bull Market Ever

To the extent anyone on Wall Street cares—and many will tell you they don’t—records in stocks are good for one thing: advertising. Talk all you want about rates of return or piling it up for retirement, but nothing beats a headline about an all-time high for bringing customers in the door.
And in they have come. Cheered by what’s become by some measures the longest bull market on record, U.S. investors have plowed money into U.S. stock exchange-traded funds at a rate of almost $12 billion a month since the start of 2017, five times as much as seven years ago. There are signs of stress—like the recent sell-off in Asia—but so far they appear in U.S. investors’ peripheral vision. Anyone buying stock in an American company right now must be comfortable paying two or three times annual sales per share, a level of shareholder generosity that hasn’t been seen since the dying throes of the dot-com bubble.
When we tell our grandchildren about this bull market, we’ll start by describing its demise, in the crash of 2019, or 2020, or 2025. But we don’t know the end of this story yet. What will we say of the rest? That dips were bought and passive investing ruled, perhaps, and that a handful of tech megacaps—most of them decades old—grew to planetary size. But if the decade is remembered for anything, it could also be as the era when equities returned close to 20 percent a year on average from the March 2009 bottom and the stock market, somehow, got boring.
Featured in Bloomberg Businessweek, Sept. 17, 2018. Subscribe now.
Photo illustration: 731. Photos: Getty Images; Shutterstock (2)
Which is to say, this isn’t like the boom of the late 1990s. Rarely do companies have initial public offerings where their stocks double on the first day of trading. The tip-dispensing cabbies of the bubble era are driving Ubers now, and any money they have to invest is going into ETFs, not individual stocks.
That’s what it’s like now: a market with fewer human voices, where the hum of computers is the background music to math projects with names like smart beta and risk parity. It’s a land ruled by giants. Three, to be exact—Vanguard, State Street, and BlackRock, which manage 80 percent of the $2.8 trillion invested in U.S. stock ETFs. IPOs, once the life of the market party, have turned into inconveniences in a world dominated by passive funds, occasions for reordering delicately balanced indexes.
In any case, companies are staying away from public markets in droves. From an annual rate of almost 700 new listings in the last half of the 1990s, the average has fallen 75 percent. While deals are up from last year and hope is running high that the spigot will open again, such expectations have been repeatedly dashed. “What we are really witnessing is an eclipse not of public corporations, but of the public markets as the place where young successful American companies seek their funding,” says a recent study by academics Craig Doidge, Kathleen Kahle, G. Andrew Karolyi, and René Stulz. They found there were 11 public firms for every million Americans in 2016, compared with 22 in 1975.

Publicly Listed U.S. Companies

Data: Journal of Applied Corporate Finance
There’s no shortage of theories on what’s causing this, spanning everything from old-fashioned accounting rules to how the internet has made it easier to raise money from private investors, but the hardships of being a public company are frequently cited as the main culprit. While retail investors may have put more of their money on autopilot, hedge funds and other big investors seeking to carve out an edge can still make the life of a chief executive officer miserable. The number of so-called activist investors making demands on public companies swelled past 500 for the first time in the first half of 2018. That’s nearly double the level of five years ago, according to research consultant Activist Insight.
Few topics get the pros’ dander up like this one. If you’re looking for an anomalous era, look at the 1990s, when every 22-year-old with a Java compiler ran a half-billion-dollar company. People paid dearly for euphoria back then. If the market is more discriminating today, good for it.
Still, the market’s image has dimmed. It’s seen by many as a channel for social blight. Companies may spend a trillion dollars this year on share repurchases—money that critics say should be used to build factories and create jobs (though those investments are up, too). People sense they’re getting screwed as all the country’s economic bounty flows to the top. At times in the past 10 years, the difference between annualized returns in the S&P 500 and growth in wages has been the widest for any bull market since the Lyndon Johnson administration.

Total Market Value of Listed U.S. Companies

In constant 2015 dollars
Data: Journal of Applied Corporate Finance
Ten years after the worst meltdown since the Great Depression, all this is preventing rehabilitation of the idea of public company stewardship. If the sweet spot for entrepreneurship is somewhere around 30 years old, today’s best and brightest is an age cohort that graduated into the financial crisis. While this group’s Gen X forebears may remember a time when markets could be fun, now they’re a drag, a cesspool of high-frequency traders and at chronic risk of tipping over. What’s the point of going public when venture firms will hand you all the money you want?
That’s the big change: access to capital that doesn’t require a public listing. Right now, venture firms have about half a trillion dollars under management, roughly equivalent to all the money raised in IPOs over the last 10 years. Companies that would’ve gone public within a few years of being created in the 1990s aren’t even thinking about it now.
Disdain for public markets reached a kind of apotheosis last month with the story of Tesla Inc. CEO Elon Musk’s dalliance with going private. Tesla sits at the fulcrum of many of these market strains. Up about 40 percent a year since 2010, it’s a relatively recent IPO upon which the market confers a princely valuation. It’s also a favorite target of short sellers, who bet on the price of a stock falling, to the point where Musk was willing to forgo all the benefits he gets from public markets and consider leaving them. Technology companies trading at 100 times next year’s earnings didn’t used to consider going private. Apparently, they do now.
There’s talk of making markets more friendly to companies. Last month the Trump administration directed securities regulators to study a longer reporting cycle for corporate results. Instead of every quarter, earnings would be disclosed every six months. Job creation and greater flexibility were touted as possible benefits. And Jay Clayton, the Trump-appointed chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, wants to look at loosening restrictions on who’s allowed to trade shares in companies that have yet to go public.
Either proposal can be framed as a way of making equity investments a little less boring and predictable. Yet it’s strange to think that a market that’s created more than $20 trillion in value in less than a decade should need more strategies to burnish its image. If companies are so sick of the stock market after a run like this, the mind reels to consider what they’ll think after the crash of 2019, or 2020, or 2025.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigations Exam - Single Select

Last updated 4 Aug 11 Course Title: OWASP Top 10 Threats and Mitigation Exam Questions - Single Select 1) Which of the following consequences is most likely to occur due to an injection attack? Spoofing Cross-site request forgery Denial of service   Correct Insecure direct object references 2) Your application is created using a language that does not support a clear distinction between code and data. Which vulnerability is most likely to occur in your application? Injection   Correct Insecure direct object references Failure to restrict URL access Insufficient transport layer protection 3) Which of the following scenarios is most likely to cause an injection attack? Unvalidated input is embedded in an instruction stream.   Correct Unvalidated input can be distinguished from valid instructions. A Web application does not validate a client’s access to a resource. A Web action performs an operation on behalf of the user without checking a shared sec

CKA Simulator Kubernetes 1.22

  https://killer.sh Pre Setup Once you've gained access to your terminal it might be wise to spend ~1 minute to setup your environment. You could set these: alias k = kubectl                         # will already be pre-configured export do = "--dry-run=client -o yaml"     # k get pod x $do export now = "--force --grace-period 0"   # k delete pod x $now Vim To make vim use 2 spaces for a tab edit ~/.vimrc to contain: set tabstop=2 set expandtab set shiftwidth=2 More setup suggestions are in the tips section .     Question 1 | Contexts Task weight: 1%   You have access to multiple clusters from your main terminal through kubectl contexts. Write all those context names into /opt/course/1/contexts . Next write a command to display the current context into /opt/course/1/context_default_kubectl.sh , the command should use kubectl . Finally write a second command doing the same thing into /opt/course/1/context_default_no_kubectl.sh , but without the use of k

标 题: 关于Daniel Guo 律师

发信人: q123452017 (水天一色), 信区: I140 标  题: 关于Daniel Guo 律师 关键字: Daniel Guo 发信站: BBS 未名空间站 (Thu Apr 26 02:11:35 2018, 美东) 这些是lz根据亲身经历在 Immigration版上发的帖以及一些关于Daniel Guo 律师的回 帖,希望大家不要被一些马甲帖广告帖所骗,慎重考虑选择律师。 WG 和Guo两家律师对比 1. fully refund的合约上的区别 wegreened家是case不过只要第二次没有file就可以fully refund。郭家是要两次case 没过才给refund,而且只要第二次pl draft好律师就可以不退任何律师费。 2. 回信速度 wegreened家一般24小时内回信。郭律师是在可以快速回复的时候才回复很快,对于需 要时间回复或者是不愿意给出确切答复的时候就回复的比较慢。 比如:lz问过郭律师他们律所在nsc区域最近eb1a的通过率,大家也知道nsc现在杀手如 云,但是郭律师过了两天只回复说让秘书update最近的case然后去网页上查,但是上面 并没有写明tsc还是nsc。 lz还问过郭律师关于准备ps (他要求的文件)的一些问题,模版上有的东西不是很清 楚,但是他一般就是把模版上的东西再copy一遍发过来。 3. 材料区别 (推荐信) 因为我只收到郭律师写的推荐信,所以可以比下两家推荐信 wegreened家推荐信写的比较长,而且每封推荐信会用不同的语气和风格,会包含lz写 的research summary里面的某个方面 郭家四封推荐信都是一个格式,一种语气,连地址,信的称呼都是一样的,怎么看四封 推荐信都是同一个人写出来的。套路基本都是第一段目的,第二段介绍推荐人,第三段 某篇或几篇文章的abstract,最后结论 4. 前期材料准备 wegreened家要按照他们的模版准备一个十几页的research summary。 郭律师在签约之前说的是只需要准备五页左右的summary,但是在lz签完约收到推荐信 ,郭律师又发来一个很长的ps要lz自己填,而且和pl的格式基本差不多。 总结下来,申请自己上心最重要。但是如果选律师,lz更倾向于wegreened,