Are you sure you want to change languages?
The page you are visiting uses a different locale than your saved profile. Do you want to change your locale?
Even with the slight stumble in late January, global equity markets are still less than 1% away from their all-time highs.1 With markets elevated, broad-based valuations are also stretched – most notably in the US. This has brought on more frequent “is this a bubble?” discussions, evidenced by Google Trends search ranking for the words “stock market bubble” recently hitting 1002 and a news headline scan for the same words also registering highs not seen since January 2018. Back then, the S&P 500 had spent 16 consecutive days over an RSI of 75 – the longest stretch ever – and hit a record RSI of 86.69.3
Setting aside the bubble talk, as market prognosticators have called five out of the last two bubbles, the stretched valuations are leading investors to wonder where there may be “value” right now.
Here, we analyze various metrics to uncover potential value opportunities – important right now, as cyclical, more value-oriented segments may have stronger relative performance than the broader market as the global economy recovers.
Dissecting global value opportunities
The weak performance of value strategies over the past decade encourages the “who cares” where there is value argument. As shown below, whether it is mega, large, mid, small, or foreign, value has spent most of the 2010s underperforming a “growth” led market. With performance like this, it is fair to say that value could have given an aspirin the headache of its life in the last decade. Yet, if there wasn’t interim pain, then there wouldn’t be a long-term premium. And one could argue that this dour performance has pushed the marginal buyer out, leading to the value premium being noticeably inexpensive as the 2020s began.4
Source: Bloomberg Finance, L.P. as of January 31, 2021. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.
To understand global value opportunities at the regional level, we utilize a composite approach of four different valuation metrics. Composite approaches help mitigate biases in one specific metric, a topic discussed in the blog on performing valuation analysis on innovative exposures. The metrics are analyzed both relative to their own 15-year history and relative to the S&P 500 Index over the past 15 years, bucketed into percentile ranks (with 100% being expensive and 0% being cheap). The table below lists the major regional and style exposures percentile ranks and the associated composite z-score of the current ranks. As shown, there are no negative composite z-scores (indicating all regions are stretched relative to their history), and not one of the metrics is below the 75% percentile.
|
|
Valuation to Region History (Percentile) |
Absolute Valuation Composite |
|||
P/E |
NTM P/E |
P/B |
P/S |
|||
US/Style/Region |
S&P 500 |
99% |
96% |
99% |
99% |
2.90 |
S&P Mid Cap 400 Index |
99% |
96% |
94% |
100% |
2.17 |
|
S&P SmallCap 600 Index |
98% |
88% |
68% |
83% |
1.53 |
|
S&P 500 Value |
96% |
97% |
99% |
99% |
2.09 |
|
S&P 500 Growth |
99% |
99% |
99% |
99% |
3.51 |
|
MSCI EAFE |
99% |
96% |
80% |
99% |
1.87 |
|
MSCI Europe |
95% |
96% |
79% |
99% |
1.49 |
|
MSCI EM |
100% |
100% |
81% |
99% |
2.89 |
When we break this down by major countries, we get the same result. However, some of the individual metrics fall below the 50%-tile mark.
|
|
Valuation to Region History (Percentile) |
Absolute Valuation Composite |
|||
P/E |
NTM P/E |
P/B |
P/S |
|||
Major Countries |
S&P 500 |
99% |
96% |
99% |
99% |
2.90 |
MSCI Canada |
93% |
82% |
48% |
88% |
0.76 |
|
MSCI Japan |
92% |
85% |
81% |
98% |
0.78 |
|
MSCI Germany |
94% |
95% |
66% |
99% |
1.51 |
|
MSCI France |
100% |
96% |
72% |
100% |
2.15 |
|
MSCI UK |
98% |
73% |
13% |
73% |
0.92 |
|
MSCI China |
96% |
96% |
88% |
93% |
1.50 |
|
MSCI Russia |
99% |
74% |
73% |
71% |
0.83 |
|
MSCI Brazil |
98% |
51% |
85% |
88% |
0.95 |
|
MSCI India |
99% |
97% |
38% |
85% |
1.40 |
Examining this on a relative basis to broad US large cap, however, shows where there may be relative opportunities. From a regional perspective, Europe screens the cheapest, with US value and US small cap also screening as potentially attractive. The metrics for small cap indicate why a composite approach is desirable, as based on the price-to-to-earnings ratio small caps trade in the 95th percentile. Yet, this is a function of poor trailing 12-month earnings from the pandemic. The other metrics are all in the bottom decile.
|
Valuation Relative to S&P 500 (Percentile) |
Relative Valuation |
|||
P/E |
NTM P/E |
P/B |
P/S |
||
S&P 500 |
— |
— |
— |
— |
— |
S&P Mid Cap 400 Index |
39% |
3% |
6% |
13% |
-1.42 |
S&P SmallCap 600 Index |
95% |
2% |
7% |
6% |
-1.01 |
S&P 500 Value |
17% |
3% |
4% |
5% |
-1.61 |
S&P 500 Growth |
84% |
100% |
100% |
100% |
2.65 |
MSCI EAFE |
36% |
3% |
3% |
5% |
-1.25 |
MSCI Europe |
10% |
3% |
2% |
4% |
-1.66 |
MSCI EM |
55% |
86% |
25% |
49% |
-0.10 |
At this level, it’s clear that value, small cap, and Europe are the most attractive relative value options. And for US small cap, these constructive valuations are being met with increasing positive earnings sentiment, evidenced by climbing 2021 upgrade-to-downgrade ratios and expected 60% growth in full-year 2021.5 Emerging markets (EM) is approaching a neutral level based on the z-score above, driven by the upward move in valuations from China – where all metrics trade at the 50 percentile. Given China’s expected growth and the potential for more cooperative trade relations with the US under the Biden administration, these valuations are still constructive.
Dissecting US sector value opportunities
Broad-based valuations are stretched, there is no denying that. But perhaps they are stretched because bond rates are so low, which continues to perpetuate the There is No Alternative (TINA) theory of investing. Comparing the earnings yield on stocks to the US Treasury 10-year Yield is one way to showcase the relative valuations of stocks to bonds. An earnings yield equivalent to the US 10-year yield would indicate stocks could be expensive, as the cash flows passed through by stocks in terms of earnings are no different than the rate you receive on less volatile bonds – leading to greater preference for bonds, all else equal.
In the chart below, the higher percentile rank indicates lower earnings yield premium and more expensive valuations. As shown, the earnings yield premium for some sectors and growth stocks rank above the 50 percentile, indicating slightly more expensive valuations relative to the past 15 years. Yet, small caps once again screen attractive. From a sector perspective, however, Financials is the most attractive.
Source: Bloomberg Finance, L.P. as of January 31, 2021. Communication Services and Real Estate sectors are excluded as historical GICS reclassifications on the two sectors made valuations incomparable.
More data indicate the potential value opportunity in Financials, and that these metrics are not a value trap. In our monthly sector scorecard, we perform a quantitative analysis for valuation (using the same process for the regions and styles), momentum, and earning sentiment. Financials ranks in the top three across all metrics. The positive earnings sentiment is reinforced by 2021 earnings-per-share estimates increasing by 7 percentage points, following financial firms beating earnings by 29 percentage points in Q4 20206 – only energy stocks had better rates on both, given the easy comparables that sector has from vastly negative figures and estimates.
Unlike Energy, however, the Financials sector has not seen forward price-to-earnings ratios expand over the past year. In fact, Financials is the only cyclical sector, as shown below, that has not seen that much multiple expansion based on expected earnings for the next two years, indicating stronger value prospects looking ahead as recent price increase have been met with equivalent earnings increases – with one not getting ahead of the other.
Source: FactSet, as of January 31, 2021. Characteristics are as of the date indicated, are subject to change, and should not be relied upon as current thereafter. EPS estimates are based on Consensus Analyst Estimates compiled by FactSet.
Value hunting in 2021
With broad valuations stretched, the data above portends more attractive value opportunities in US Financials and US small caps, as well as overseas equities – in particular, Europe and EM. And in our 2021 Outlook we provide the macro case for Financials to complement the fundamental tailwinds discussed in this post.
The global equity markets will continue to evolve as our society seeks to navigate a once-in-a-lifetime recovery following a once-in-a-lifetime crisis. Continue following our SPDR Chart Pack to see how valuations and these value opportunities evolve along with it.
1 Bloomberg Finance L.P. as of 2/3/2021 per the MSCI ACWI Index
2 This is the highest level it can reach
3 Not to say this was a bubble then, but very frothy and overheated technical market.
4 Based on a four factor composite of price-to-book, price-to-earnings, price-to-sales, and price-to-next-years-earnings for the S&P 500 Value Index, S&P 500 Index, and S&P 500 Growth Index since 1995 to 2020, the current valuation discount of S&P 500 Value to S&P 500 is in the bottom 17th percentile and versus S&P 500 Growth it is in the bottom 7th percentile based on Bloomberg Finance L.P. data and SPDR Americas Research calculations as of February 4, 2021
5 Source: FactSet, as of January 31, 2021. Characteristics are as of the date indicated, are subject to change, and should not be relied upon as current thereafter. EPS growth estimates are based on Consensus Analyst Estimates compiled by FactSet.
6 Source: FactSet, as of January 31, 2021. Characteristics are as of the date indicated, are subject to change, and should not be relied upon as current thereafter. EPS growth estimates are based on Consensus Analyst Estimates compiled by FactSet.
The views expressed in this material are the views of SPDR Americas Research Team and are subject to change based on market and other conditions. This document contains certain statements that may be deemed forward-looking statements. Please note that any such statements are not guarantees of any future performance and actual results or developments may differ materially from those projected.
The information provided does not constitute investment advice and it should not be relied on as such. It should not be considered a solicitation to buy or an offer to sell a security. It does not take into account any investor’s particular investment objectives, strategies, tax status or investment horizon. You should consult your tax and financial advisor.
All material has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable. There is no representation or warranty as to the accuracy of the information and State Street shall have no liability for decisions based on such information.
All the index performance results referred to are provided exclusively for comparison purposes only. It should not be assumed that they represent the performance of any particular investment.
Passively managed funds hold a range of securities that, in the aggregate, approximates the full Index in terms of key risk factors and other characteristics. Passively managed funds invest by sampling the index, holding a range of securities that, in the aggregate, approximates the full Index in terms of key risk factors and other characteristics. This may cause the fund to experience tracking errors relative to performance of the index.
Actively managed funds do not seek to replicate the performance of a specified index. The strategy is actively managed and may underperform its benchmarks. An investment in the strategy is not appropriate for all investors and is not intended to be a complete investment program. Investing in the strategy involves risks, including the risk that investors may receive little or no return on the investment or that investors may lose part or even all of the investment.
Equity securities may fluctuate in value in response to the activities of individual companies and general market and economic conditions.
Volatility management techniques may result in periods of loss and underperformance may limit the Fund's ability to participate in rising markets and may increase transaction costs.
A momentum style of investing emphasizes securities that have had higher recent price performance compared to other securities, which is subject to the risk that these securities may be more volatile and can turn quickly and cause significant variation from other types of investments.
Investments in small-sized companies may involve greater risks than in those of larger, better known companies.
Companies with large market capitalizations go in and out of favor based on market and economic conditions. Larger companies tend to be less volatile than companies with smaller market capitalizations. In exchange for this potentially lower risk, the value of the security may not rise as much as companies with smaller market capitalizations.
Value stocks can perform differently from the market as a whole. They can remain undervalued by the market for long periods of time.
Because of their narrow focus, sector funds tend to be more volatile.