Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Eelco Ubbels's avatar

A CAPE of 42.5 alongside Q1 earnings growth of 22% year-on-year is the uncomfortable combination that most valuation frameworks were not designed to navigate. The multiple looks extreme by historical standards. The earnings trajectory justifies a premium by almost any forward-looking measure. Both can be true, and the allocation consequence depends entirely on which one you weight more.

What most allocators are signalling, 65% overweight equities in the June consensus, is that the earnings momentum is winning the argument over the valuation concern, at least for now. The dissenting note worth holding is that the overweight has been accumulating while conviction breadth has narrowed. A high multiple supported by broad earnings is durable. A high multiple supported by a handful of AI names compressing while the A/D line lags is a different risk profile.

If the breadth breakout you identify in the A/D ascending triangle confirms, the valuation concern becomes manageable.

If it fails, the 1987 reference earns more attention than most readers will give it today.

No posts

Ready for more?