首页 500强 活动 榜单 商业 科技 领导力 专题 品牌中心
杂志订阅

价值股与成长股,现在该买哪一种?

Shawn Tully
2020-08-24

价值股已经连续13年被成长股碾压,但2020年可能会出现逆转。

文本设置
小号
默认
大号
Plus(0条)
图片来源:GETTY IMAGES

价值股优先于成长股。要想在股票长线投资中有所收获,这个理论大概比其他任何理念都更管用。选择便宜、受冷落的价值股是股市中大多数有影响力的学生所奉行的策略:例如格雷厄姆和多德,以及沃伦巴菲特的多名资金管理人,还有丹尼尔•罗埃布。这一点在长线投资方面异常奏效:一个在过去6年中仅购买价值股的家庭如今比仅购买成长股的家庭富有4倍。

然而在最近几年中,这些长线优胜股却不断地败给这个传统上的输家,而且是惨败。价值股长期在超低价位徘徊,以至于华尔街很多人士都认为我们已经进入了一个新模式。多年来,超级明星科技股已经远超诸如银行和制造业领域那些平价股知名企业。此外,新冠疫情引发的大封锁也延长了成长股相对于价值股的优势,并创下了历史新高。随着消费者购买居家办公用数字产品,并像潮水般涌入线上购物平台,像苹果和亚马逊这样的公司一片欣欣向荣,而航空、零售和酒店等行业价值股的拥趸们则遭受了数十年以来最严重的打击。

短线投资者认为科技公司将继续在这一领域处于引领地位。持有这一观点的人越来越多:即便科技企业发展成了科技巨头,他们依然可以保持超快的增速,因为在开发突破性领域和产品方面,他们可选的内容太多。

成长股如今成为了投资热土,这一点不足为奇。在过去13年中,遭到冷落的价值股在这个光鲜亮丽的门类面前一直都是不堪一击,也创下了历史上股市特价股遇冷时长的新高。然而,尽管长期以来都处于连败状态,但有关价值股消亡的广泛讨论已经进入了歧途,而且在当前的市场环境下更是有点刚愎自用的意味。

加州大学洛杉矶分校的经济学博士维塔利•卡勒斯尼克说:“随着经济在未来几年的恢复,当前这个环境正是价值股表现远超成长股的绝佳时机。”维塔利还担任Research Affiliates的欧洲市场研究主任,该公司致力于为1480亿美元的共同基金和交易所交易基金设计投资策略。

价值股看起来如此有希望以及其与成长股对决输的一败涂地的原因很简单。在历史上,价值股相对于成长股以及大盘的价差越大,那么未来超越的幅度就越大。两者之间的鸿沟越大,价值股的反弹能力就越大。

在新冠疫情经济中,两者之间的差距之大可谓是前所未有。但差距如今只是发挥作用的三大推手之一。第二:价值股传统上在走出深度衰退之后会出现飙升,而且美国正在经历自大萧条以来最严重的经济下行时期。

第三个因素:当受影响的经济刺破股市泡沫时,价值股将成为最大的赢家。离此次泡沫破灭的时间可能不远了。受所谓的 FANMAG(即Facebook、苹果、Netflix、微软、亚马逊和谷歌母公司Alphabet)的引领,成长股如今已经达到了自2000年科技狂热盛会以来的最高价格。

来自于过去经济下行时期的教训

在一篇新发表的名为《经济萧条与恢复期间的价值股》的上好文章中,作者卡勒斯尼克与合著者阿瑞•波利克罗诺波罗斯探讨了为什么价值股的大幅下探以及成长股的持续大幅走高预示着财富的惊艳反转。他们审视了价值股在此前6个下行期间相对于大盘的表现,以及随后的反弹。我与卡勒斯尼克进行了对话,以了解如果以史为鉴,新冠疫情之后股市将以什么样方式的回归。

作者认为,这两股力量中的其中一个(或者同时两个,很罕见)都是其所研究的6次经济衰退的背后推手,分别是经济基本面受重大影响,或者股市泡沫的破灭。在其中四次衰退中,起因是经济基本面受到重创,1968年至1970年越战期间的财政紧缩;1980-1982年之间的伊朗石油危机;1990年中期至末期美联储一手导演的利率上调;以及2007-2009年初的全球金融危机。2000年的科技股崩盘是唯一一个由股市崩盘唱主角的事件。只有一次衰退源自于经济动荡与股市崩溃的合力,也就是1972-1974年间,欧佩克石油危机导致了“50只热门大盘股”的剧烈回调,这些公司包括IBM、Polaroid和露华浓,也就是当时的FANMAG。

对于每一个时期,作者都会建立一个“价值股”仓,其中涵盖30%的标普500市盈率最低的股票,意味着与其净价值相比,它们的市值已经处于最低点,也就是其资产超过了其债务。对于那些进入这一最末尾梯队的公司来说,投资者对其未来销售增长和盈利能力十分悲观。这些市净率较低的股票都是市场的失败者。它们与流星股截然相反,后者被给予了与其净值或营收非常不匹配的高市值,意味着投资者寄希望于这些公司在未来能够斩获远超当前销售和利润的史诗级业绩。

尽管仅有一次衰退源于狂暴股市的崩盘,但所有6次经济衰退都出现了熊市。总的来说,在抛售狂潮期间,价值股的跌幅要小于标普500的整体跌幅。平均来说,市净率最低的股票下跌了23.8%,而整个标普500的跌幅达到了32.2%,差距超过了8个百分点。

价值股表现真正突出的时段在于恢复期。在市场触底之后平均两年的时间中,价值股跃升了85.6%,大幅超越了标普500整体61.4%的增幅。从市场下行的开始到经济完全恢复的整个阶段,价值股的表现亦超出了平均水平。价值股全周期回报率为38.5%,是标普500整体水平的5倍多。

鉴于当前的环境,我们尤为有必要弄明白,当标普500在循环伊始出现股价过高现象后造成了什么后果。在此前的两个情形中,价值股超越股指的幅度最大。价值股在欧佩克危机期间的超越幅度达到了47%,而“50只大热股”则走下了高位;在科技泡沫破灭的2000年(纯粹的经济受股市崩盘拖累),价值股从熊市开始到经济在2004年秋季完全恢复这一期间增长了62.2%。在同一时期,标普下跌了20.3%,意味着购买那些超低价股的投资者斩获的收益高出大盘82.5%。

“我们进入了一个泡沫时期”

卡勒斯尼克警告说,如今的情形与二十年前科技股灾难之前的兴奋期十分相似。同时,他也十分反对互联网泡沫时期那种“这一次不一样”的论调。他指出,过去几年中股市的增长大多源于少数几家包括FANMAG在内的热门科技公司,以及那些快速增长的企业,例如特斯拉和PayPal。这六家巨头(FANMAG)的市值从2007年初的5260亿美元(占标普500总市值4%)飙升至如今的7.1万亿美元(占标普500总市值的24%)。如果没有这些公司巨大的贡献,自2007年初之后的大盘回报率将下滑30%。

卡勒斯尼克说:“我们进入了一个泡沫时期。四分之一的市值都集中在少数公司,它们的总体市盈率和市净率异常之高。支撑这个股价的背后希望是,这些公司在未来能够以其初创之时的速度无限发展壮大。”在他看来,这种市值高度集中在超高价股上的情况属于“危险现象”。

因此,这些高价FANMAG股以及包括特斯拉在内的其他火箭股,在大盘暴跌时异常脆弱。在这个理论的支撑下,可能出现的情况是,价值股的表现超越成长股的幅度甚至比此前大多数经济恢复期的幅度更大。此外,价值股应该还会受益于成长股高额股票折扣的收紧。

在过去57年当中,成长股的平均市净率是价值股的4.7倍。今年1月底之前狂暴的牛市期间,这个倍数飙升至9倍。然后3月出现的大幅抛售让标普暴跌了约35%。值得注意的是,价值股受到的影响甚至比成长股还要大,部分原因在于科技股发力了,而且理由十分充分:封锁期间,线上销售以及科技设备和服务的销售,从视频游戏到虚拟会议等一切的一切,呈现出一片欣欣向荣的景象。结果,截至3月底,两者之间的市净率比值达到了10.3。然后市场出现了反弹,成长股再次击败价值股。像能源、航空和金融这类行业恢复了些许元气,但远低于其今年年初的水平,而所有6家公司(FANMAG)的股价在标普升至创纪录水平的期间达到了历史新高。

因此对比成长股,价值股已经处于白菜价价位。但它真是划算的交易吗,还是在泡沫不断膨胀、占主导地位的科技公司大军面前看起来是个划算的交易。卡勒斯尼克说:“最终,成长股已经来到其历史上的最贵价位区间,而价值股则处于历史上的最便宜价位区间。”如今,价值股的市净率约为0.58,是过去60年平均水平的70%。在最近的2014年和2017年,其市净率是当前的两倍。

这一举措尤为有意义。当价值股看起来已经是毫无后劲时,它不仅仅是过热大市值股市中最值得推荐的股票,也是十分划算的股票,仅此而已。担忧能够带来不俗的折扣和较大的收益,而且担忧一直伴随着价值股。卡勒斯尼克说:“包括能源、金融和航空公司在内的公司终将恢复。当然,每一个行业都会有公司破产。但整体来说,它们才是经济的重要领域,而且其销售和利润会回归到以前水平。”

另一方面,如今的超级新星们将吸引饥饿的竞争者,而且已经引发了多起政治审查。与此同时,当投资者意识到它们无法满足华尔街超前的预测以及投资者膨胀的预期时,这些超级新星们便会敲响退堂鼓。此外,全球投资者对价值股的预期甚至要低于或远低于正常水平。因此,这些被低估的价值股很有可能会超过投资者微不足道的预期。有鉴于价值股展现了自己越过这一超低门槛的能力,因此它们将像此前几次经济恢复期间那样,提供可观的收益。最保险的赌注在于,历史将在未来重演,因此价值股也会再次成为冠军,而且以大幅优势夺冠。(财富中文网)

译者:Feb

价值股优先于成长股。要想在股票长线投资中有所收获,这个理论大概比其他任何理念都更管用。选择便宜、受冷落的价值股是股市中大多数有影响力的学生所奉行的策略:例如格雷厄姆和多德,以及沃伦巴菲特的多名资金管理人,还有丹尼尔•罗埃布。这一点在长线投资方面异常奏效:一个在过去6年中仅购买价值股的家庭如今比仅购买成长股的家庭富有4倍。

然而在最近几年中,这些长线优胜股却不断地败给这个传统上的输家,而且是惨败。价值股长期在超低价位徘徊,以至于华尔街很多人士都认为我们已经进入了一个新模式。多年来,超级明星科技股已经远超诸如银行和制造业领域那些平价股知名企业。此外,新冠疫情引发的大封锁也延长了成长股相对于价值股的优势,并创下了历史新高。随着消费者购买居家办公用数字产品,并像潮水般涌入线上购物平台,像苹果和亚马逊这样的公司一片欣欣向荣,而航空、零售和酒店等行业价值股的拥趸们则遭受了数十年以来最严重的打击。

短线投资者认为科技公司将继续在这一领域处于引领地位。持有这一观点的人越来越多:即便科技企业发展成了科技巨头,他们依然可以保持超快的增速,因为在开发突破性领域和产品方面,他们可选的内容太多。

成长股如今成为了投资热土,这一点不足为奇。在过去13年中,遭到冷落的价值股在这个光鲜亮丽的门类面前一直都是不堪一击,也创下了历史上股市特价股遇冷时长的新高。然而,尽管长期以来都处于连败状态,但有关价值股消亡的广泛讨论已经进入了歧途,而且在当前的市场环境下更是有点刚愎自用的意味。

加州大学洛杉矶分校的经济学博士维塔利•卡勒斯尼克说:“随着经济在未来几年的恢复,当前这个环境正是价值股表现远超成长股的绝佳时机。”维塔利还担任Research Affiliates的欧洲市场研究主任,该公司致力于为1480亿美元的共同基金和交易所交易基金设计投资策略。

价值股看起来如此有希望以及其与成长股对决输的一败涂地的原因很简单。在历史上,价值股相对于成长股以及大盘的价差越大,那么未来超越的幅度就越大。两者之间的鸿沟越大,价值股的反弹能力就越大。

在新冠疫情经济中,两者之间的差距之大可谓是前所未有。但差距如今只是发挥作用的三大推手之一。第二:价值股传统上在走出深度衰退之后会出现飙升,而且美国正在经历自大萧条以来最严重的经济下行时期。

第三个因素:当受影响的经济刺破股市泡沫时,价值股将成为最大的赢家。离此次泡沫破灭的时间可能不远了。受所谓的 FANMAG(即Facebook、苹果、Netflix、微软、亚马逊和谷歌母公司Alphabet)的引领,成长股如今已经达到了自2000年科技狂热盛会以来的最高价格。

来自于过去经济下行时期的教训

在一篇新发表的名为《经济萧条与恢复期间的价值股》的上好文章中,作者卡勒斯尼克与合著者阿瑞•波利克罗诺波罗斯探讨了为什么价值股的大幅下探以及成长股的持续大幅走高预示着财富的惊艳反转。他们审视了价值股在此前6个下行期间相对于大盘的表现,以及随后的反弹。我与卡勒斯尼克进行了对话,以了解如果以史为鉴,新冠疫情之后股市将以什么样方式的回归。

作者认为,这两股力量中的其中一个(或者同时两个,很罕见)都是其所研究的6次经济衰退的背后推手,分别是经济基本面受重大影响,或者股市泡沫的破灭。在其中四次衰退中,起因是经济基本面受到重创,1968年至1970年越战期间的财政紧缩;1980-1982年之间的伊朗石油危机;1990年中期至末期美联储一手导演的利率上调;以及2007-2009年初的全球金融危机。2000年的科技股崩盘是唯一一个由股市崩盘唱主角的事件。只有一次衰退源自于经济动荡与股市崩溃的合力,也就是1972-1974年间,欧佩克石油危机导致了“50只热门大盘股”的剧烈回调,这些公司包括IBM、Polaroid和露华浓,也就是当时的FANMAG。

对于每一个时期,作者都会建立一个“价值股”仓,其中涵盖30%的标普500市盈率最低的股票,意味着与其净价值相比,它们的市值已经处于最低点,也就是其资产超过了其债务。对于那些进入这一最末尾梯队的公司来说,投资者对其未来销售增长和盈利能力十分悲观。这些市净率较低的股票都是市场的失败者。它们与流星股截然相反,后者被给予了与其净值或营收非常不匹配的高市值,意味着投资者寄希望于这些公司在未来能够斩获远超当前销售和利润的史诗级业绩。

尽管仅有一次衰退源于狂暴股市的崩盘,但所有6次经济衰退都出现了熊市。总的来说,在抛售狂潮期间,价值股的跌幅要小于标普500的整体跌幅。平均来说,市净率最低的股票下跌了23.8%,而整个标普500的跌幅达到了32.2%,差距超过了8个百分点。

价值股表现真正突出的时段在于恢复期。在市场触底之后平均两年的时间中,价值股跃升了85.6%,大幅超越了标普500整体61.4%的增幅。从市场下行的开始到经济完全恢复的整个阶段,价值股的表现亦超出了平均水平。价值股全周期回报率为38.5%,是标普500整体水平的5倍多。

鉴于当前的环境,我们尤为有必要弄明白,当标普500在循环伊始出现股价过高现象后造成了什么后果。在此前的两个情形中,价值股超越股指的幅度最大。价值股在欧佩克危机期间的超越幅度达到了47%,而“50只大热股”则走下了高位;在科技泡沫破灭的2000年(纯粹的经济受股市崩盘拖累),价值股从熊市开始到经济在2004年秋季完全恢复这一期间增长了62.2%。在同一时期,标普下跌了20.3%,意味着购买那些超低价股的投资者斩获的收益高出大盘82.5%。

“我们进入了一个泡沫时期”

卡勒斯尼克警告说,如今的情形与二十年前科技股灾难之前的兴奋期十分相似。同时,他也十分反对互联网泡沫时期那种“这一次不一样”的论调。他指出,过去几年中股市的增长大多源于少数几家包括FANMAG在内的热门科技公司,以及那些快速增长的企业,例如特斯拉和PayPal。这六家巨头(FANMAG)的市值从2007年初的5260亿美元(占标普500总市值4%)飙升至如今的7.1万亿美元(占标普500总市值的24%)。如果没有这些公司巨大的贡献,自2007年初之后的大盘回报率将下滑30%。

卡勒斯尼克说:“我们进入了一个泡沫时期。四分之一的市值都集中在少数公司,它们的总体市盈率和市净率异常之高。支撑这个股价的背后希望是,这些公司在未来能够以其初创之时的速度无限发展壮大。”在他看来,这种市值高度集中在超高价股上的情况属于“危险现象”。

因此,这些高价FANMAG股以及包括特斯拉在内的其他火箭股,在大盘暴跌时异常脆弱。在这个理论的支撑下,可能出现的情况是,价值股的表现超越成长股的幅度甚至比此前大多数经济恢复期的幅度更大。此外,价值股应该还会受益于成长股高额股票折扣的收紧。

在过去57年当中,成长股的平均市净率是价值股的4.7倍。今年1月底之前狂暴的牛市期间,这个倍数飙升至9倍。然后3月出现的大幅抛售让标普暴跌了约35%。值得注意的是,价值股受到的影响甚至比成长股还要大,部分原因在于科技股发力了,而且理由十分充分:封锁期间,线上销售以及科技设备和服务的销售,从视频游戏到虚拟会议等一切的一切,呈现出一片欣欣向荣的景象。结果,截至3月底,两者之间的市净率比值达到了10.3。然后市场出现了反弹,成长股再次击败价值股。像能源、航空和金融这类行业恢复了些许元气,但远低于其今年年初的水平,而所有6家公司(FANMAG)的股价在标普升至创纪录水平的期间达到了历史新高。

因此对比成长股,价值股已经处于白菜价价位。但它真是划算的交易吗,还是在泡沫不断膨胀、占主导地位的科技公司大军面前看起来是个划算的交易。卡勒斯尼克说:“最终,成长股已经来到其历史上的最贵价位区间,而价值股则处于历史上的最便宜价位区间。”如今,价值股的市净率约为0.58,是过去60年平均水平的70%。在最近的2014年和2017年,其市净率是当前的两倍。

这一举措尤为有意义。当价值股看起来已经是毫无后劲时,它不仅仅是过热大市值股市中最值得推荐的股票,也是十分划算的股票,仅此而已。担忧能够带来不俗的折扣和较大的收益,而且担忧一直伴随着价值股。卡勒斯尼克说:“包括能源、金融和航空公司在内的公司终将恢复。当然,每一个行业都会有公司破产。但整体来说,它们才是经济的重要领域,而且其销售和利润会回归到以前水平。”

另一方面,如今的超级新星们将吸引饥饿的竞争者,而且已经引发了多起政治审查。与此同时,当投资者意识到它们无法满足华尔街超前的预测以及投资者膨胀的预期时,这些超级新星们便会敲响退堂鼓。此外,全球投资者对价值股的预期甚至要低于或远低于正常水平。因此,这些被低估的价值股很有可能会超过投资者微不足道的预期。有鉴于价值股展现了自己越过这一超低门槛的能力,因此它们将像此前几次经济恢复期间那样,提供可观的收益。最保险的赌注在于,历史将在未来重演,因此价值股也会再次成为冠军,而且以大幅优势夺冠。(财富中文网)

译者:Feb

Value beats growth. That's arguably the theme that, more than any other, has proved the long-term winner in equity investing. Picking the cheap and unloved over high-fliers is the strategy advocated by the most influential students of markets: Think Graham and Dodd, and a pantheon of money managers from Warren Buffett to Daniel Loeb. And it's worked brilliantly over the long haul: A family that for the past six decades bought nothing but value stocks is now four times richer than the clan that bet exclusively on growth.

But in recent years, the traditional loser has been famously thrashing the longstanding champ. Value has been experiencing a drought so deep and extended that many on Wall Street believe we've entered a new paradigm. Tech superstars have been far outperforming inexpensive names in such sectors as banking and manufacturing for years. And the Great Lockdown prompted by COVID-19 has lengthened growth's lead over value to an all-time record. The likes of Apple and Amazon are thriving as consumers buy digital gadgets for working at home and flock to online shopping, while value stalwarts in such sectors as airlines, retail, and hotels have taken their worst beating in decades.

Fans of the sprinters believe they'll keep lapping the field. The view gaining momentum: Even as the tech players mushroom into giants, they can keep growing incredibly fast, because they harbor such rich options for branching into groundbreaking fields and products.

It's hardly surprising that growth has gained cachet as the better place to be. Over the past 13 years, the glamour category has been handily beating unlovely value, the longest period in history for which what's supposed to be the market's bargain basement has lagged. But despite the long losing streak, the widespread talk of value's demise is misguided and especially wrongheaded at this moment in the markets.

"The conditions have never been more right for value to far outperform growth as the economy recovers over the next few years," says Vitali Kalesnik, a Ph.D. economist from the University of California, Los Angeles, who serves as director of research for Europe at Research Affiliates, a firm that designs investment strategies for $148 billion in mutual funds and ETFs.

The reason value looks so promising just as its record versus growth is hitting all-time lows is basic. Historically, the cheaper value becomes in relation to growth and hence the overall market, the more it outperforms going forward. The bigger the gulf between the two, the stronger the springboard for value.

In the COVID-19 economy, that gap has never been wider. But it's just one of three drivers that are now joining forces. The second: Value traditionally wins big coming out of deep recessions, and the U.S. is living through the worst downturn since the Great Depression.

Here's the third factor: Value wins biggest when a reeling economy explodes a stock market bubble. That giant pop could be looming. Led by what we'll call the FANMAGs (Facebook, Apple, Netflix, Microsoft, Amazon, and Google parent Alphabet), growth stocks are now at their most exuberantly priced since the tech craze's summit in 2000.

Lessons from downturns past

How value's steep descent and growth's ongoing explosion portend a stunning reversal of fortunes is the subject of an excellent new article, "Value in Recessions and Recoveries," by Kalesnik and coauthor Ari Polychronopoulos. They examined the performance of value compared to the overall market during six previous downturns and the rebounds that followed. I talked with Kalesnik to learn what history is likely to tell us about the road back from the COVID-19 cataclysm.

The authors note that one of two forces, or in rare cases both, drove all six recessions they studied: a shock to fundamentals, or the collapse of a bubble in stocks. In four episodes, the cause was a basic economic tremor: the fiscal tightening during the Vietnam War from 1968 to 1970; the Iran oil crisis of 1980 to 1982; the Fed-engineered interest rate increases in mid-to-late 1990; and the global financial crisis from late 2007 to early 2009. The tech crash of 2000 was the only instance when a crash in stocks was the principal dynamic. Only in one case did an economic tremor coincide with market meltdown, when the OPEC oil crisis of 1972 to 1974 caused a sharp pullback in the "Nifty Fifty" stocks, including IBM, Polaroid, and Revlon, the FANMAGs of their day.

For each period, the authors establish a "value" bucket consisting of the 30% of S&P 500 stocks with the lowest price-to-book-value ratios, meaning that their market caps are the most depressed compared to their net worth, the excess of their assets over their liabilities. For companies to fall in this lowest tier means that investors are pessimistic about their future sales growth and profitability. The low-price-to-book crowd are the market's dogs. They're the opposite of the shooting stars that are awarded huge valuations compared to their net worth or earnings, meaning investors are counting on epic performance in the years ahead that far exceeds today's sales and profits.

Although only one recession saw the bona fide busting of a frenzy, all six included bear markets. In general, value stocks fell less than the overall S&P 500 during the big selloffs. On average, the lowest price-to-book contingent fell 23.8%, while the entire 500 dropped over eight percentage points more, by 32.2%.

Where value really shines is in recoveries. Over the average two-year period following the market bottom, value jumped 85.6%, trouncing the S&P's rise of 61.4%. Value also beats the averages over the entire span of from the start of the down market to a full economic recovery. Value notched a full-cycle return of 38.5%, beating the 500 as a whole by more than five to one.

Given today's conditions, it's especially important to study what happened when the S&P 500 started the cycle radically overpriced. On those two previous occasions, value beat the index by the biggest margin. It outperformed by 47% during the OPEC crisis that included the Nifty Fifty's fall from the heights, and in the tech bubble of 2000—the pure-play case of collapsing stocks pounding the economy—value gained 62.2% from the start of the bear market in 2000 to the time the economy staged a full comeback in the fall of 2004. Over that period, the S&P dropped by 20.3%, meaning that the players that started out with the cheapest stocks bested the field by a stupendous 82.5%.

“We’re getting into a bubble period”

Kalesnik warns that today's scenario is reminiscent of the heady days before the tech disaster that struck two decades ago. He also cautions against buying into the kinds of "this time it's different" theories that crashed with the dotcoms. He points out that what has propelled most of the market's gigantic rise over the past few years is a narrow group of tech darlings encompassing the FANMAGs as well as other fast-growing names such as Tesla and PayPal. Those big six FANMAGs have seen their valuations rocket from $526 billion and 4% of the S&P 500 total valuation at the start of 2007, to $7.1 trillion and 24% today. In the absence of their huge contribution, the market's overall return since then would be 30% lower.

"We're getting into a bubble period," says Kalesnik. "You have one-fourth of the total market cap in a few companies that overall have extremely high multiples of price to earnings and book value. They're priced on the hopes they can grow at the same rate as giants as they did as tiny companies infinitely in the future." He brands that much concentration in extremely expensive stocks as "dangerous."

Hence, those richly priced FANMAGs, along with other rockets such as Tesla, are highly vulnerable to a steep fall. That prospect raises the odds that value will outperform growth by an even bigger margin than in most recoveries. Value should also benefit from the tightening of that yawning, steepest-ever discount to growth.

Over the past 57 years, the price-to-book for growth stocks has averaged 4.7 times that for value. By the end of January, in a raging bull market, that difference had jumped to nine to one. Then came the big selloff that sank the S&P by around 35% in March. Remarkably, value got hit even harder than growth, in part because tech stocks held up. And for good reason: Online sales and tech equipment and services, for everything from video games to virtual meetings, are prospering in the Great Lockdown. As a result, by the end of March, the growth-to-value price-book ratio hit 10.3. Then the market rebounded, and once again, growth beat value. Such industries as energy, airlines, and financials have recovered a bit but remain far below their levels of early this year, while all six of the FANMAGs hit all-time highs during the S&P's resurgence to record levels.

So value is dirt cheap compared to growth. But is it really a deal, or just what looks like a buy when stacked against a cohort dominated by bubbling tech? "Essentially, growth is at one of its most expensive levels in history while value is at one of its cheapest levels in history," says Kalesnik. Right now, value's price-to-book ratio stands at around .58. That's about 70% of its average over the past 60 years. As recently as 2014 and 2017, it was twice this expensive.

This measure is especially meaningful. Just when value looks like it has nothing going, it's not just the best buy in an overheated big-cap market—it's a good buy, period. Fear is what breeds terrific bargains and big gains, and fear is pounding value stocks. "Companies in areas like energy, financials, and airlines will recover," says Kalesnik. "Of course, in each sector, you could have bankruptcies. But overall, they're key sectors of the economy, and their sales and profits will bounce back."

On the other hand, today's superstars will attract hungry competitors, are already drawing lots of political scrutiny, and will retreat when investors realize they can never meet Wall Street's bluebird forecasts and investors' inflated expectations. Meanwhile, the world is expecting even less, far less, from value than usual. Chances are, the downtrodden will more than meet those paltry expectations. As value shows it can clear that super-low bar, value stocks will deliver strong gains, just as in past recoveries. The best bet is that we're going back to the future, and value will repeat as champ. And win big.

财富中文网所刊载内容之知识产权为财富媒体知识产权有限公司及/或相关权利人专属所有或持有。未经许可,禁止进行转载、摘编、复制及建立镜像等任何使用。
0条Plus
精彩评论
评论

撰写或查看更多评论

请打开财富Plus APP

前往打开