• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Discussion ***Official*** 2024 Stock Market Thread 💰

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Any specific year is a gamble, but valuation multiples in the U.S. seem elevated. The Shiller PE ratio can be seen here: https://www.multpl.com/shiller-pe

Valuation metrics don't cause the markets to move on any given day, month, or year, so I may totally wrong for 2024. I can just say that it's been tougher to find bargain investments. The situations in the Middle East and Europe add to uncertainty as it relates to war risk, trade of goods, etc. I also see an environment where crypto has rebounded significantly with bitcoin's ETF anticipation/approval and many SPAC's have seen their share prices rebound notably over the last year even though their prospects aren't really much changed - they continue to spend money and at least some don't have real business plans.

To put bluntly - I'm not thrilled by what I see overall... maybe a few bargains here or there, so I'm not a permabear and I remain invested in some individual securities I like best, but I've changed my default vanilla recommendation for friends/family to go from S&P500/cash blend to global index fund & more cash blend, closer to 50/50. With the yield on money markets today over 5%, equities, especially in the US look less attractive.

Seems like in these markets with expensive crypto (Bitcoin 40k+) and other signs of froth (elevated multiples), people don't agree or just aren't aware how far this stands out relative to history.

Sorry for my dour views.
 
jpiniero said:
It's the in the Fed's best interest to stave off a de facto default as long as possible. Cutting rates obviously makes servicing the debt cheaper.
Click to expand...
Even staving off a default is not part of the fed's mandate. That is only indirectly related to one half of their mandate. Full employment and stable prices. That is it. Full employment and stable prices. Nothing whatsoever about government problems.

You can argue that a governmental default will likely impact full employment. But even that is an unknown as it has never happened to the US before.
 
dullard said:
Even staving off a default is not part of the fed's mandate. That is only indirectly related to one half of their mandate. Full employment and stable prices. That is it. Full employment and stable prices. Nothing whatsoever about government problems.

You can argue that a governmental default will likely impact full employment. But even that is an unknown as it has never happened to the US before.
Click to expand...
Just to be a PITA, I'll add the Fed actually has a third mandate that is almost never brought up in the context of their frequently cited dual-mandate. The third mandate is to maintain moderate long-term interest rates.

I believe the third is ignored because it's just viewed as not always feasible, but you'd think that if the Fed is handling mandates 1 and 2 well, and the markets believe the Fed is credible in the long-term, they should be able to do #3 as well.

Just sharing for others' curiosity - I'm not disagreeing with what you wrote 🙂
 
AgaBoogaBoo said:
Just to be a PITA, I'll add the Fed actually has a third mandate that is almost never brought up in the context of their frequently cited dual-mandate. The third mandate is to maintain moderate long-term interest rates.

I believe the third is ignored because it's just viewed as not always feasible, but you'd think that if the Fed is handling mandates 1 and 2 well, and the markets believe the Fed is credible in the long-term, they should be able to do #3 as well.

Just sharing for others' curiosity - I'm not disagreeing with what you wrote 🙂
Click to expand...
That is true.

But the fed itself says that the concept of stable prices includes moderate long-term interest rates. It is hard to claim that prices are stable if interest rates are highly variable and/or through the roof. Thus, they call it a dual mandate.
 
dullard said:
That is true.

But the fed itself says that the concept of stable prices includes moderate long-term interest rates. It is hard to claim that prices are stable if interest rates are highly variable and/or through the roof. Thus, they call it a dual mandate.
Click to expand...
Thank you - I did not realize they included long-term interest rates at a moderate level as part of stable prices. Very insightful.
 
ASML reporting good returns and get a 10% boost today. Shouldn't be surprising with all the new fabs being planned.
 
Sometimes you can too far ahead of the curve and I think that describes Tesla. We're going to need a lot of hybrids before plug-in EVs become dominant. That's good because the price of gas becomes less of a concern, within reason of course. Plus it gives you time to build out the necessary infrastructure.

Obviously the cold weather glitch hasn't made them more popular. And to discover that at this stage of development is not what you want to call encouraging. There's also the limited battery lifespan not to mention the additional weight.
 
Charmonium said:
Sometimes you can too far ahead of the curve and I think that describes Tesla. We're going to need a lot of hybrids before plug-in EVs become dominant. That's good because the price of gas becomes less of a concern, within reason of course. Plus it gives you time to build out the necessary infrastructure.

Obviously the cold weather glitch hasn't made them more popular. And to discover that at this stage of development is not what you want to call encouraging. There's also the limited battery lifespan not to mention the additional weight.
Click to expand...

All of those issues are improving faster than if we'd wasted decades on more hybrids, plug in or otherwise. People forget where the EV market was 10 years ago.
 
Mr.IncrediblyBored said:
All of those issues are improving faster than if we'd wasted decades on more hybrids, plug in or otherwise. People forget where the EV market was 10 years ago.
Click to expand...
You may well be right. Technologies that CAN be implemented quickly, often are. Plug-in EVs aren't one of those. That's not to say what might be done with higher govt subsidies.

From my perspective, I see no reason to get an EV when a small gas powered car is both free and adequate.
 
My company ESPP has jumped a lot so far this year. Most of 2023 was sitting on negative return and now it's at 7% return. That number resets each year I think though, so it's based on what the stock price would have been Jan 1st.

Hoping it keeps up and continues to go up by summer, might have enough money to clear some land on my acreage. Either hire it out or rent an excavator.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top