Quotes About Market

all suggest looking at the daily list of new 52-week lows in the Wall Street Journal or the similar table in the "Market Week" section of Barron's. That will point you toward stocks and industries that are unfashionable or unloved and that thus offer the potential for high returns once perceptions change.

At some point in its life, almost every stock is a bargain; at another time, it will be expensive. Although there are good and bad companies, there is no such thing as a good stock; there are only good stock prices, which come and go.

implied that "at normal levels of the market" the investor should be able to obtain an  initial  dividend  return  of  between  31?2%  and  41?2%  on  his  stock purchases, to which should be added a steady increase in underly- ing value (and in the "normal market price") of a representative

Evidently it is not only the tyro who needs to be warned that while enthusiasm may be necessary for great accomplishments elsewhere, on Wall Street it almost invariably leads to disaster.

A company can be a giant, or it can deserve a giant P/E ratio, but both together are incompossible.

Of course, wonders can be accomplished with the right individual selections, bought at the right levels, and later sold after a huge rise and before the probable decline. But the average investor can no more expect to accomplish this than to find money growing on trees.

Finally, most of the high returns on IPOs are captured by members of an

también existe la posibilidad más probable de que vayamos a ser testigos de otro gran aumento especulativo en el valor de mercado que no tenga una justificación real en los valores subyacentes.

In June 1949 the S & P composite index sold at only 6.3 times the applicable earnings of the past 12 months; in March 1961 the ratio was 22.9 times. Similarly, the dividend yield on the S & P index had fallen from over 7% in 1949 to only 3.0% in 1961, a contrast heightened by the fact that interest rates on high-grade bonds had meanwhile risen from 2.60% to 4.50%. This is certainly the most remarkable turnabout in the public's attitude in all stock-market history.

Conversely, sound procedure would call for reducing the common-stock component below 50% when in the judgment of the investor the market level has become dangerously high.

Once you lose 95% of your money, you have to gain 1,900% just to get back to where you started.

In our own stock-market experience and observation, extending over 50 years, we have not known a single person who has consistently or lastingly made money by thus "following the market." We do not hesitate to declare that this approach is as fallacious as it is popular.

Once you lose 95% of your money, you have to gain 1,900% just to get back to where you started. 1

When changes in the market level have raised the common-stock component to, say, 55%, the balance would be restored by a sale of one-eleventh of the stock portfolio and the transfer of the proceeds to bonds. Conversely, a fall in the common-stock proportion to 45% would call for the use of one-eleventh of the bond fund to buy additional equities.

In June 1970 the question "How much?" could be answered by the magic figure 9.40%—the yield obtainable on new offerings of high-grade public-utility bonds. This has now dropped to about 7.3%, but even that return tempts us to ask, "Why give any other answer?

The more a stock has gone up, the more it seems likely to keep going up. But that instinctive belief is flatly contradicted by a fundamental law of financial physics: The bigger they get, the slower they grow. A $1-billion company can double its sales fairly easily; but where can a $50-billion company turn to find another $50 billion in business?

Looking back, you can always see exactly when you should have bought and sold your stocks. But don't let that fool you into thinking you can see, in real time, just when to get in and out. In the financial markets, hindsight is forever 20/20, but foresight is legally blind. And thus, for most investors, market timing is a practical and emotional impossibility.5

Why do you suppose the brokers on the floor of the New York Stock Exchange always cheer at the sound of the closing bell—no matter what the market did that day? Because whenever you trade, they make money—whether you did or not.

In the last 20 years the "profitable reinvestment" theory has been gaining ground. The better the past record of growth, the readier investors and speculators have become to accept a low-pay-out policy. So much is this true that in many cases of growth favorites the dividend rate—or even the absence of any dividend—has seemed to have virtually no effect on the market price.

Jeremy Siegel's Stocks for the Long Run (1994)—culminating

The new-era doctrine - that good stocks (or blue chips) were sound investments regardless of how high the price paid for them - was at the bottom only a means of rationalizing under the title of investment the well-nigh universal capitulation to the gambling fever/

Robert Shiller, a finance professor at Yale University, says Graham inspired his valuation approach: Shiller compares the current price of the Standard & Poor's 500-stock index against average corporate profits over the past 10 years (after inflation). By scanning the historical record, Shiller has shown that when his ratio goes well above 20, the market usually delivers poor returns afterward; when it drops well below 10, stocks typically produce handsome gains down the road.

No compre nunca una acción inmediatamente después de una subida sustancial, ni tampoco la venda inmediatamente después de una bajada sustancial».

El mercado es un péndulo que oscila constantemente entre un optimismo insostenible (que hace que las acciones sean demasiado caras) y un pesimismo injustificado (que hace que sean demasiado baratas). El inversor inteligente es un realista que vende a optimistas y compra a pesimistas. E