First off, I'd just like to point out that it's irrelevant if PE is a flawed metric or not. I think we all know that it is.

"The S&P500 is a not a growth index."

It's certainly not intended to be a growth index. But the predominance of tech stocks and their huge market caps have started to make it so.

So, there's the larger question, I think. Normally, a stock would only hit the size needed to get into the 500 after a huge growth spurt, and (I assume) it would normally spend some years afterwards growing into its valuation.

Today is odd. The 5 largest stocks in terms of market cap and their current PE's are:

MSFT 37

AAPL 35

AMZN 122

GOOGL 35

FB 34

I'm not so sure there's ever been a moment in market history where the top five stocks in terms of market cap had an average pe > 50,. and thus skewing the indexes to this extent.

This is kind of interesting, looking at the forward p/e's:

Image for post
Image for post

So, according to the FORWARD P/E’s of each sector…….there appear to be opportunities in a few sectors, where those p/e’s still indicate room for growth.

I’m not sure what happens next. I own AMZN and MSFT outright because I don’t see any obstacles to their continued growth, and I don’t think that (based on FORWARD P/E) they are egregiously overpriced — — they’ll come back to earth eventually, but not, IMO, anytime soon.

Healthcare does seem to be the place where there are still some bargains to be had. The aging of the developed world is a secular trend that doesn’t cease until the 2040’s.

Get the Medium app

A button that says 'Download on the App Store', and if clicked it will lead you to the iOS App store
A button that says 'Get it on, Google Play', and if clicked it will lead you to the Google Play store