The price-earnings calculus
“The price-earnings ratio is a popular tool for investors,” says Ben Steverman in BusinessWeek.com, but with today’s wildly fluctuating share prices and earnings, is it really “the best way to gauge stocks?” The p-e ratio is supposed to answer one question: Is a stock cheap enough to be a bargain for long-term investment? But the answer depends on how you look at earnings. If you look at forward earnings projections for S&P 500 shares, for instance, the p-e ratio is 12.2—“cheap by most historical comparisons”—but the trailing p-e ratio is a nebulous 16.6. On the whole, today’s p-e ratios suggest investors with the “stomach to handle a wild ride” over a few years would do well to buy.
Shooting the short messenger
Until recently, U.S. policymakers were actually doing pretty well in this financial crisis, says Sebastian Mallaby in The Washington Post. “Now Washington is losing it.” The Securities and Exchange Commission is clamping down on short selling, starting today, but that will just defang a key market watchdog. Short sellers publicly bet against a stock they think is overvalued, and as with all pessimists, people don’t like them for it—we prefer bubble-feeding stock boosters, even if they’re wrong. The “anti-short witch hunt” is dumb, and potentially tragic. Because “despite popular myth, the strength of the American economy does not lie in boundless optimism. It lies in optimism spiked with honesty.”
THE WEEK'S AUDIOPHILE PODCASTS: LISTEN SMARTER
- Why atheism doesn't have the upper hand over religion
- 31 TV shows to watch in 2014
- The world's dumbest idea: Taxing solar energy
- He said he was leaving. She ignored him.
- Why would a young person today be religious?
- What would a U.S.-Russia war look like?
- Why I'm a pro-life liberal
- How Captain America won over China
- Attack of the invasive species
- Why we can't stop procrastinating, according to science
Subscribe to the Week