returns dont mean revert fundamentals do

7/21/2019 Returns Dont Mean Revert Fundamentals Do

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/returns-dont-mean-revert-fundamentals-do 1/7

Newfound Research LLC | 425 Boylston Street, 3rd Floor | Boston, MA 02116 | p: 617-531-9773 | w: thinknewfound.com

Case #4070466

Returns Don’t Mean Revert, Fundamentals Do

"#$#%&#' ()* (+),

SUMMARY

•

While prior 5-year returns for the S&P 500 have been spectacular, prior 10-year returns are still muted. Does this

mean the bull market still has room to run?

• Prior returns, however, are not a great predictor of future returns.

• Fundamentals, not returns, tend to be mean-reverting.

•

Current fundamentals are historically expensive: Shiller PE currently sits in the 89 th percentile. This implies

muted forward returns over the next decade.



December 21, 2015


Case #4070466

We read a lot of blogs. They are a great source of alternative thoughts and one way to shock ourselves out ofconfirmation bias.

One of our favorites is The Reformed Broker, by Josh Brown. Josh is a pre-eminent financial personality and his bloghas a tremendous amount of variety.

One of his posts this week, re: Expected Stock Returns – from the RWM Client Conference Call , caught my eye.

To quote the post,

But the number one reason investors believe returns will be muted is the fact that we’ve rallied 200%

over the last 5 years.

This reasoning is dead wrong and is symptomatic of the Gambler’s Fallacy, as in “the roulette wheel

landed on black five times, so the next one just has to be red!”

…

But something interesting happens when you broaden out the time horizon and focus on rolling returns

as opposed to calendar-year returns, which are pedestrian and meaningless in real life. We know that

stock market returns are mean-reverting in the long run, even if we don’t know how far they’ll be

stretched in one direction or another over the short run.

In the post he shows a graph of realized 10-year returns, which we’ve recreated here.



December 21, 2015


Case #4070466

The idea is that while the last 5-years have been spectacular in terms of total return, the last 10-years have been sub-par. Since long-term returns are mean reverting, our expectation should be that the next 10 years would be better.

Except this logic is wrong for a number of reasons.

First, it invokes the very same Gambler’s Fallacy that Josh argues against. Re-consider the first sentence I highlighted:“ [b]ut the number one reason investors believe returns will be muted is the fact that we’ve rallied 200% over the last 5

years.” Now just swap in the results over the last 10-year period and adjust some of the language: “ [b]ut the number one

reason investors believe returns will be better is the fact that we’ve only rallied 121% over the last 10 years.” The logic isfaulty no matter the time horizon or the order of gains and losses.

Second, the argument fails to hold up in data. Let’s examine a scatter plot of past 10-year returns versus forward 10-year returns.

If long-term returns were mean reverting, we should see a sharply negative relationship. While a slightly negativerelationship exists, the variance around it is so large that it is impossible to rely on, especially since investors only have a

few decades in their investment horizon.

Finally, it has no economic merit. Let’s ask ourselves this: why would returns be mean-reverting over the long run?Theoretically, over the long run the market should be tied to a fundamental measure like earnings growth and thediscount rate. So if the market returns 600% over the last decade, the question we should ask is “was the growth justified?” If it was, then why would we expect the long-term returns to mean-revert?



December 21, 2015


Case #4070466

So how can we reconcile the slightly negative relationship we saw in the prior 10-year vs. forward 10-year scatter plot?Surely that means there is some mean reversion?

The answer lies in the final point. Returns are not mean-reverting, but valuations are. Below we plot Shiller PE’s versusforward change in Shiller PE. Notice the much, much tighter negative relationship.

And this relationship makes economic sense: if stocks are underpriced relative to fundamentals, their valuations shouldincrease and if stocks are overpriced, their valuations should decrease.

Now this is all complicated by the fact that fundamental metrics usually have two levers: the numerator and thedenominator. In this case, the numerator is price and the denominator is earnings. So a high PE could revert back to alow PE because (a) price falls, (b) earnings grow, or (c) some combination of the two. But when stocks are expensive, itdoesn’t matter whether prices fall or prices sit still while earnings grow: forward returns will still be muted.

The reversion of fundamentals, therefore, has historically been a great guide for future returns – especially since pricestend to be the volatile piece of the equation.

Below we plot Shiller PE versus forward 10-year returns.



December 21, 2015


Case #4070466

The takeaway here is that just because the prior 10-years were nothing noteworthy from a return perspective does notimply that the market necessarily has room to run. The slight mean-reversion we saw in historical returns was a factor ofcoincidental data: the extremes in returns lined up with fundamental extremes.

Quite simply, prior returns are not predictive of future returns. The fundamental data is the driver.

What we should be asking ourselves is whether we believe the market is currently cheap, expensive, or somewhere inbetween. Based on the Shiller PE, fundamentals are in the 89th percentile: a fairly expensive reading.

Based on this data, we wouldn’t bet on U.S. equities being the engine of growth for the next 10 years.

Corey Hoffstein & Justin Sibears



December 21, 2015


Case #4070466

To read other commentaries or to subscribe to future posts, please visit blog.thinknewfound.com/category/weekly-commentary .

This material contains the opinions of the managers and such opinions are subject to change without notice. This material has been distributed for

informational purposes only and should not be considered as investment advice or a recommendation of any particular security, strategy or investment

product. The investment strategy and themes discussed herein may be unsuitable for investors depending on their specific investment objectives and

financial situation. Please note that changes in the rate of exchange of a currency may affect the value, price or income of an investment adversely.

Information contained herein has been obtained from sources believed to be reliable, but not guaranteed. Forward-looking statements are not

guarantees of future results. They involve risks, uncertainties and assumptions, there can be no assurance that actual results will not differ materially

from expectations. Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No part of this material may be reproduced in any form, or referred to in any

other publication, without express written permission from Newfound Research. © Newfound Research LLC, 2015.

Information contained on third party websites Newfound Research LLC, (“Newfound”) may link to is not reviewed in its entirety for accuracy and

Newfound assumes no liability for the information contained on these websites.

returns dont mean revert fundamentals do

Documents