121 comments

Wow, have you seen the stock market lately?

And by lately, I mean the past several years or more. 

The value of the S&P 500 index of stocks, where most of us hopefully have a good chunk of our retirement savings stashed into index funds, is up about fifty seven percent in just the past two years. And it has more than doubled in the past five.

S&P returns (including dividends) since 2019, graph by the excellent portfolio visualizer website.

This means that on a net worth basis, if you felt like you were only halfway to retirement as recently as the Covid Era, you may have suddenly blown right past the finish line. And some of us who were already retired long before that, may find ourselves eyeing up expensive properties or engaging in other money-burning-a-hole-in-our-pocket behaviors. 

Is this real? Or is it all a bubble or some other sort of financial illusion?

As one reader recently asked me in an email:

“The market seems to be in a huge bubble right now due to all sorts of hype around Artificial Intelligence. Does this make it more vulnerable to a huge crash in the future, and will it affect my retirement?”

To answer this question, let’s take a closer look at our current somewhat unprecedented financial world and stock market. And to understand that properly, it helps to go back to the roots of what a stock is: 

A stock is a magical business arrangement which is really just a much more convenient version of a rental house.

When you own a rental house, you are entitled to collect rent. After you cover all the expenses related to the house, you get to keep the rest, and this amount is your profit. 

If the average sale price of rental houses in your area goes up but the tenant keeps paying you the same amount forever, it may look good on paper but it doesn’t really mean anything unless you sell the house. And then you’d just have to turn around and pay that same higher amount for a different rental house.

Your paycheck remains unchanged unless you can make your little house rental business more profitable. So you might squeeze in a basement apartment, do some renovations, streamline expenses, or do other things to increase your net earnings. 

When you eventually sell that house to another investor, the price they are willing to pay should be based on that future stream of income.

For example, if the house brings in $2000 per month ($24,000 each year) and the sale price is $240,000, the next investor is buying a business with a price-to-earnings ratio of 10, because 240k/24k=10.

But if you manage to convince someone to hand over $480,000 for that same house, you’ve sold at a P/E of 20. This is a much better deal for you as the seller, but quite obviously a less rosy future for the investor buying it.

Now back to the stock market. If you put $100,000 in the market in 2019 and reinvested the dividends, today you’d already have an astonishing $256,960 (a 157% gain on your original investment)

But in that same time period, your share of company earnings from that $100,000 basket of stocks has only gone from $5290 to $7540 (a measly 42% gain) – information you can get from handy analysis sites like multpl.com

In other words, the Price-to-earnings ratio has risen from about 20 back then, to about 30 today.

So as stock investors here in 2025, we’re just like rental house investors finding that house prices have more than doubled while rents are only up by a bit. Which makes the landlord business a lot less profitable, and we should expect exactly the same thing as stock investor: lower future profits as a percentage of our portfolio value.

That doesn’t mean it’s unprofitable to own either one of these things – stocks or rental houses. But it does mean that we should expect our future income from buying them at today’s higher price-to-earnings ratio should be lower than if we could get them on sale. It’s just basic math.

But Wait! What if the Earnings are Rising?

Let’s say you’re considering a rental house which is a bit overpriced based on today’s rent, but you happen to know that a big Apple campus is about to get built right nearby. At that point, you expect that rent will start climbing rapidly for many years to come. In this situation, you should be willing to pay more for those future earnings when you buy the house.

This is exactly why the price of an individual company’s stock will tend to rise when some good news comes out about the company. During the Covid era, people started buying more Peloton bikes so they could exercise at home, and investors (foolishly) believed this would be a permanent trend. So Peloton stock went way up. Later, reality sunk in that this was just a fad and Peloton sales returned back to normal levels, and so did the stock.

But what does it mean when the entire market goes up to much higher levels? Does it mean our entire economy is expected to grow much more quickly? 

In the case of the current stock market euphoria, not exactly. Because if you dig into the share prices of the 500 big companies that make up our famous S&P 500 index, it turns out that almost all the recent growth – about three quarters of it – came from just the seven biggest companies, known as the Magnificent Seven: Apple, Nvidia, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, Facebook, and sometimes Tesla.

The real cause behind our raging bull market

These are all high-flying, super profitable tech companies who have seen a lot of growth and hype recently, which has caused investors to get excited and bid up their share prices in hopes of even more future growth. Collectively, they make up over 25% of the entire market value ($17.66 trillion!) and have much more expensive P/E ratios than the rest of the market (a weighted average of about 45)

The MAG7 companies are expensive, especially Tesla which trades on the hype of possible future earnings rather than current profits.

If you exclude these seven biggest companies and just consider the remaining 493, you will find a P/E of only 20, which is more reasonable although still much higher than average.

What this tells us is that while investors expect the overall US economy to be fairly healthy in the coming years, they expect the biggest tech companies to continue to enjoy much faster growth. 

What Does This Have To Do With Artificial Intelligence?

There’s one common theme in the big tech company boom right now: recent advances in AI have surprised the business world as software is suddenly able to display human-like reasoning in a rapidly growing number of fields. And because of this, the entire business world is fired up into a frenzy.

Six of those Magnificent Seven companies are spending hundreds of billions of dollars to build preposterously large warehouses full of supercomputers, and the lucky seventh (NVidia) is on the receiving end of those billions since they make the supercomputers and the incredible demand allows them to charge insane prices while still shipping them out by the trainload.

But that’s just the first level of this boom, the AI Infrastructure. As you move down the chain, every other industry hopes we have entered a new era of productivity and thus profits will grow faster than ever.

They may actually be right: You can now do things like feed in an entire novel or legal document or piece of code and ask the AI to answer detailed questions about the characters, or identify loopholes in the contract, or even find and fix bugs for you. AI can also drive cars, identify melanoma from photographs of your skin, design medications thousands of times better than what we’re used to, and even bring humanoid robot bodies to life as mechanical workers.

The idea is that we’re on the verge of having an infinite workforce of highly intelligent AI employees who will work for us for free, eliminating the biggest constraint that humanity has had in the past: a finite supply of both intelligence and labor.

Having followed the field in some detail for a while, I personally think all this will come true, although the timeline is uncertain. And the people bidding the share prices up to these levels obviously believe it too. 

But the question is, will the profits of these companies really come through at the levels they forecast? Or will there be surprises down the road: cost overruns, competition, or unexpected disasters as these newly smarter-than-us computers decide that they no longer want to be bossed around? 

And what if we end up with massive unemployment and resulting social upheaval if this amazing technology puts us all out of work, leaving only Sam Altman atop his personal mountain of $100 trillion dollars taunting the world forevermore with an annoyingly quiet monotone cackle?

Image generated by AI… of course

There’s Only One Real Answer: Nobody Really Knows!

While the future is unknown, it can still be useful to use the past as a guide. After all, if you look at the history of US economic growth over time, it averages out to a surprisingly steady figure, decade after decade: about 3% after inflation. 

How our GDP grows: even as the world changes drastically, growth remains remarkably stable over the decades

One thing I noticed when making this graph: recent decades have actually seen slower than average growth, which is even less reason for the stock market to be priced the way it is.

So What Does it all Mean? Should We Do Anything About It?

As I said earlier, it’s still going to be profitable to own stocks for the long run, just a bit less profitable than those times when we got to buy our stocks on sale. Of course, there will be occasional manias and panics and crashes. But as always, it will be a losing game to try to time them – for example by selling all your stocks now and hoping to buy them at a cheaper price at some point in the future.

And over the long run, even if stocks return to more typical valuations, the end result would be something like the yellow line in this graph:

While the Blue path would be great, Yellow would be fine too

Our economy will continue to grow and company earnings will grow along with it, but future investors might choose to pay a lower multiple for those earnings.

Just like when you eventually sell that rental house, you shouldn’t expect someone to pay you a million dollars for a place that only brings in $3000 of rent.

Final Thoughts And Alternative Strategies

Everything we’ve covered so far is talking about the entire US stock market as a whole. And that’s what I usually focus on most because I still think this country is a uniquely good place to run a business. But what about other investing options? It’s always fun to at least look around and understand the larger investing world.

For starters, there’s Vanguard itself, the bedrock of the index fund world. Every year they gaze out at the investing horizon and make a ten-year forecast (guess) at future returns. This year they came up with these numbers:

Vanguard’s updated 10-year annualized return projections:

  • Global bonds, non-U.S.: 4.3% – 5.3%
  • U.S. bonds: 4.3% – 5.3%
  • Global equities (ex-U.S., developed): 7.3% – 9.3%
  • Global equities (emerging): 5.2% – 7.2%
  • U.S. equities: 2.8% – 4.8%

Wow look at that. Vanguard is forecasting that International stocks of all kinds and even bonds will outperform US stocks in the coming decade.

On the surface, this makes sense because the P/E ratio of the international stocks (for example the VXUS fund) is only 15.9, meaning those European stocks are on sale at almost 50% off compared to ours!

Just one note of caution however: Vanguard has been making this same prediction for several years and just been wrong so far. Part of the reason is that most of the AI boom seems to be happening in the US. 

The Betterment Portfolio 

Longtime readers know that I’ve had a growing portion of my investments in a Betterment (robo-advisor) account over the past eleven years (see the ongoing report here). I decided to try this for precisely the reasoning above: by allocating money across more categories than just US stocks and automatically rebalancing, we should be able to see slightly higher returns with slightly lower volatility, and some tax advantages as well. 

So far, my experiment has drawn some heat because in retrospect, a US-only portfolio has outperformed any other option over this time period. The Betterment portfolio comes close, but the exposure to bonds and businesses in other countries has held it back, just as you’d expect. But if you believe that things will eventually balance out again in the coming decades as the Vanguard analysis suggests above, it still has a chance to catch up. 

Looking at my investments there, you can review the betterment core portfolio and calculate that the weighted average of all those holdings gives us a P/E ratio of about 22.

What Does Warren Buffett Say?

It’s always worth checking in with The Oracle on matters of the economy while we’ve still got this wonderful old sage around (see this year’s Berkshire Hathaway Shareholder letter if you want some further deep reading). And Warren is signaling that things are overvalued and bargains are few and far between. So Berkshire is holding $334 billion of uninvested cash for now, not even repurchasing its own shares which it considers slightly overvalued at the current P/E ratio which averages out to about 21 in recent years.

What About Paying Off Your House?

Over the long run, you usually do better if you keep a mortgage on your house and pay it off slowly, while directing all the surplus cash into index funds. But there is some point at which the opposing factors of lower expected stock returns and higher interest rates meet in the middle and this situation flips.

If you have a 7% mortgage right now, it might be a fairly close tradeoff at this point. But the real factor is how you feel about paying off your house. I happen to love being mortgage-free so I paid off my last mortgage over ten years ago and have never looked back.

Another way to think of this is that paying off your house is like buying a 7% bond. Definitely one of the best guaranteed returns around, and much more sensible than leaving tens of thousands of dollars in a checking or savings account unless you have a clear use for that cash.

The Final Word

If you’ve read any of my stock investing articles before, you’ll know that we always end up at the same place: Just relax, enjoy your life, keep investing, ignore the daily news headlines* and don’t worry. 

Then reinvest that time that everyone else spends worrying into enjoying more time engaged in hard physical stuff in the great outdoors. That’s the only place where you’ll get guaranteed market-beating returns, every time.

In the Comments: what are your thoughts on the current stock market boom, future crashes and busts, and the role of Artificial Intelligence in our future?

All the other MMM Stock Market Articles from past years:

*although in my opinion it’s okay to check in weekly with The Economist, which has been my favorite source of world economic news for 32 years and counting.

  • Liface February 25, 2025, 8:33 am

    Love the article, but please no more AI-generated images :( They immediately leave a “poor taste” impression on the reader.

    • Mr. Money Mustache February 25, 2025, 9:52 am

      I hear you – AI is divisive and some of us love it, some hate it. I happen to be on the “love” side because it gives me some good laughs. My nineteen year old son looked over my shoulder this morning and clucked his tongue telling me I shouldn’t be using those dirty images.

      I’m going to keep having fun with them, but I feel they’re especially appropriate in this article because it’s specifically about AI changing our economy and way of living.

      Plus, did you notice how cool it is that there are SEVEN robots at the trading table? Very appropriate.

      • Noah February 25, 2025, 12:50 pm

        I laughed at your AI image and I’m glad you included it. It’s fun to see a blogger who’s been around for a while embrace a new technology. I really don’t understand the hate.

      • Dave February 26, 2025, 9:35 am

        Yeah, but I thought the AI image of the millionaire leveling the concrete floor was COMPLETELY unrealistic /s

        • Tim February 27, 2025, 6:39 pm

          I too that one was a bit off…. Good Catch!

    • Tina March 19, 2025, 6:21 am

      @Liface Hard agree. Understanding its appropriate as its essentially the theme of this post, hard to read the reaffirmation of spending good hard work in the great outdoors when the use of AI is gobbling up water like its going out of style.

      (Also I think it looks tacky, but art is famously subjective)

  • Tom February 25, 2025, 8:34 am

    Great insights MMM. A lot of things my partner and I have been talking and thinking about over the last couple of years.

    I think of AI right now a little bit like the dotcom bubble, but I think it will pop and recover at a much faster rate (and be much more transformative to all parts of society and industry much faster). Regular people see AI right now and think of gimmicky generative stuff or writing term papers. They have no idea what’s about to hit them.

    Anybody in their earning years over the next decade better be figuring out how to use these tools to do their job better and faster than their peers (better yet get themselves jobs building the tools themselves) or they are going to be left behind.

    Part of me thinks we’re going to enter a very different economic order over the next decade especially when it comes to white collar work.

    That aside – not much has changed in our investing strategy – we’ve mostly bought VOO and VTI but we have been investing new money primarily in BRK.B. Will likely be down compared to the US market in the long run (but probably not by too much) but am hoping for a bit more stability over what seems like a possibly churny decade.

    Who knows though maybe the magnificent seven will be the for bearers of this AI revolution and I’ll be wishing I had stuck the S&P.

  • Rudy Rudolf February 25, 2025, 8:36 am

    MMM thank you for your perpetual optimism and sage financial analysis. A rising tide raises all ships, but what if the tide is a creating super-intelligent huminoid robots? Do the big 7 just inevitably gobble up every other industry in their quest to create an infinite labor source (thinking, Tesla swallowing Uber, Amazon swallowing the construction/retail/service industry, etc.). Is it a better move to push more of one’s portfolio straight to the Seven and ride the wave? Thank you for always keeping it positive and fun! — Rudy

    • Mr. Money Mustache February 25, 2025, 9:49 am

      Great question! The fundamental idea of index funding is “Absolutely Not!” – for at least three reasons:

      1) Because that shift of money into the big 7 tech companies has already happened. They’re valued at EIGHTEEN TRILLION DOLLARS!!
      2) By continuing to own just the index, you will continue to participate in any growth of these companies, as well as all the unexpected rising stars yet to come.
      3) Because actively jumping out of the index into individual stocks in an attempt to outperform the market is a proven losing strategy. Everybody thinks they know better, they don’t, collectively they fall into a random distribution and their overall performance defines “the market”.

    • Myron March 4, 2025, 11:40 am

      Not an expert so I may be wrong about this, but I think this is how it would work: Suppose Tesla swallows Uber. If you own an index fund linked to S&P 500, you own both, through that index fund, and your indirectly-held Uber shares get converted to indirectly-held Tesla shares – and typically when a company buys another company, it does it at a price above the market rate, so the number of Tesla shares you’d get is going to be better than if you sold Uber and bought Tesla before the deal.

      If you’ve got a broad-based market index and one company eats most of the world economy, as long as you’ve got shares in that company and shares in most of the companies it buys and incorporates into itself, which you would have through a broad-based market index, you should be fine.

      I have other worries regarding the future where there are a bunch of smarter-than-the-average-human machines around, because I figure that leads to bigger changes than “maybe the stock market does something weird”, but that’s a comment for a different blog.

  • Matt McLaughlin February 25, 2025, 8:47 am

    As usual, a wait well-deserved for a good read. I believe AI will usher in a lot of great possibilities. Like you, I believe most of the prognostications will be true in time. And things will rapidly change, much more quickly than we’re used to seeing.

  • Ashu B February 25, 2025, 9:33 am

    Thank you for the post. I pretty much only buy VTI on a bi weekly schedule when my paycheck hits. I noticed how pretty much every stock I looked at were at 52 week highs and stopped buying anything for the last two months. I’m not really sure if this is the best way/ logic but I know that I’m not the brightest in this regard and I’m not gonna think too hard about it lol. Your article helped a little though so thank you.

  • Brian Slattery February 25, 2025, 10:17 am

    I have concerns but I’m not market timing them yet. The amount of US government debt and personal debt seems unrealistic and NO ONE is event remotely trying to reduce either. This bubble and continue to run! For now anyway

    Is Buy and Hold Always the Best Strategy? History Says… Not Always.
    Yes, over the last few decades, the buy-and-hold strategy has worked incredibly well, with U.S. stock markets delivering strong returns. But that hasn’t always been the case. There have been entire decades where buy and hold yielded little to no real returns—or worse.

    The 1930s: The Great Depression saw the Dow Jones lose nearly 90% of its value from 1929 to 1932. Even though the market eventually recovered, it took 25 years (until 1954) for stocks to fully regain their pre-crash levels.

    The 1970s: Stagflation (high inflation + stagnant growth) crushed stock returns. The S&P 500 gained only 5% total from 1969 to 1979, which was a negative real return after inflation.

    The 2000s: After the Dot-Com bubble burst in 2000 and the Financial Crisis of 2008, the S&P 500 produced negative total returns from 2000 to 2009—dubbed the “Lost Decade” for stocks.

    While stocks historically tend to rise over long periods, these examples show that timing, valuation, and diversification matter. Simply buying and holding without considering macroeconomic conditions or valuations can lead to lost decades for investors

    • Mr. Money Mustache February 25, 2025, 10:34 am

      Some of those stories about past periods of low stock returns are true, but I encourage readers to remember three more things:

      1) They are usually cherry picked, for example starting from the exact peak of the 1929 bubble. In reality, investors at the time had probably accumulated most of their investments at lower prices, so they were net-positive far sooner than 1954

      2) Many of the analyses you see online happen to leave out the most important reason we own stocks in the long run: DIVIDENDS – so ensure that any past simulations you run are using a data set that includes dividends (Nick Maggiulli from Of Dollars and Data is a great author who understands this: https://ofdollarsanddata.com/sp500-calculator/)

      3) It’s easy to tell stories about the past and imagine that we all have a crystal ball. But remember that people back then had NO IDEA when the crash would come. In fact, I have been receiving emails non-stop since I 2013, shortly after I started writing this blog stating that it’s “time to go to cash because the market is overvalued”. In retrospect, not only our share prices but our economic growth and company earnings have been spectacular since then.

      And perhaps most importantly 4) Ten years is a TINY time horizon to be thinking about investment performance for FIRE people. I’m personally less than a third of the way through my seventy year retirement, so I think in much longer time periods. A 10-15 year stretch of minimal stock growth is all built into the safety margin.

      Oh and a note about the national debt!

      There is definitely a limit to how much a nation can safely borrow as a percentage of GDP. But this is very different from the crap the politicians sling around to rile up their base and justify cutting the programs they just happen to dislike for ideological reasons.

      In a worldwide currency and debt market like we have, if you borrow too much the market sends you a signal in the form of lower demand for your dollars which leads to a decline in your currency’s value. Then you need to offer higher interest rates in order to keep borrowing money.

      In recent decades the US has had the opposite “problem” – we issue higher and higher amounts of debt for sale, and buyers keep vacuuming it up which keeps our dollar strong. So like a drunk teen at the liquor store with his Mom’s credit card, we keep taking advantage of the free sauce.

      To the extent that our government uses this borrowed money to build infrastructure that actually helps our country: transportation networks, ports, power production, educating our populace, even incentivizing things like Arizona semiconductor fabs, we are actually getting ahead because we are using other people’s money to build our own wealth.

      It can also help to use this implicit subsidy to just lower taxes on businesses and average workers, because this will trigger more company formation and wealth and employment.

      But if we go too far and see our dollar drop more than we want *or* lose our status as the world’s reserve currency, we will have to go on a serious spending diet.

      But the issue is best discussed by a group of well trained economists and business leaders with a set of spreadsheets rather than a shouting political candidate at a rally.

      The best approach is somewhere in between: run a sensible budget, but also bend the rules a bit and borrow a safe amount for the long run to continue juicing our own economy.

      • Brian Slattery February 25, 2025, 11:27 am

        The results were cherry picked except for the people that retired at the start of those periods. For them it was real!

        For the early ’70s retiree, the 4% rule just about held up, but with little margin for error. Wade Pfau’s international study found that for a 50/50 portfolio in U.S. history, 4% was roughly the “Safemax” (worst-case sustainable rate) – it survived about 30 years by the skin of its teeth, supporting only ~29 years of inflation-adjusted withdrawals in the most challenging stretch​
        RETIREMENTRESEARCHER.COM
        . In practical terms, this means a 4% initial withdrawal did eventually work out for a 1970s retiree but only because subsequent decades (the 1980s and 1990s) were very strong. The retiree would have seen their nest egg shrink alarmingly in the first 5–10 years, likely coming close to depletion by the early 1980s, before the tide turned. T. Rowe Price analysts, for instance, note that a 1973 retiree’s portfolio (with a roughly 4% starting withdrawal) began at $500k, sank to ~$328k by 1974, but then recovered to over $500k by 1982 and ultimately grew to over $1 million by the end of 30 years​
        TROWEPRICE.COM

        TROWEPRICE.COM
        . In hindsight the 4% rule “worked” for that retiree – but if inflation had stayed high longer or if the 1980s boom had been weaker, the outcome could have been a failure.

        • The Orchard February 26, 2025, 1:33 pm

          It’s not a coincidence that the 4% rule just barely worked for 1970s retirees. That was the worst time period for investors in the 20th century, and 4% was chosen because it’s the maximum withdrawal rate that survived even that period.

          • Mr. Money Mustache March 1, 2025, 12:44 pm

            Exactly! And if you don’t like the 4% rule, you’re welcome to be even safer and go for 3.8, 3.5 or whatever you like.

            From my perspective, it’s a tradeoff because if you would rather be doing something else besides working for the man, you’re trading a DEFINITE loss of life opportunity for a very small chance of having extra cushion in the event of an economic downturn.

            In my case we had a baby on the way and were ready to commit to that very important project. Definitely more important to me than padding the nest egg another few percentage points.

            Plus, one thing they rarely cover in these 4% studies: the fact that you can always simply choose to cut some of the fat out of your spending if you notice a prolonged stock market slump! This is why the more sophisticated site cfiresim.com is a better way to look at the numbers.

        • Karl hungus March 27, 2025, 9:30 am

          I always find the sky is falling logic interesting. You have your theories (if someone retired at X year they would be screwed!) but when someone rebuts your points its hand waved away (ya but it only worked because the other years were strong!)

          Its like thats how it works. Thats how the stock market works and why the 4% rule guideline is great.

          You say 2000-2009 produced negative CAGR (true, at only -1%), but I could do the same thing and say well if we include the 5 years prior (1995-2009) your CAGR would be 8%.

      • Jeff March 1, 2025, 7:18 am

        Hey MMM! Where can I read/learn more about how this works? I recently read Naked Economics by Charlies Wheelan from your book list suggestions and just finished Naked Money. Both were great but looking to dive deeper to understand your post above on a more intuitive level.

  • Brandy Dalton February 25, 2025, 10:26 am

    Hi,
    Do you have an opinion of the infinite banking concept?

    Buying dividend paying whole life insurance ad starting my own bank.

    I’m trying to decide between this and VTI.
    Thanks!

    • Mr. Money Mustache February 25, 2025, 10:37 am

      I totally recommend AGAINST whole life insurance.

      While the concept sounds cool on the surface, when you look into the details the combination of active management and high fees and commissions doom the programs to underperformance at best.

      At worst, you end up with scams where people lose all their money due to fine print about having to keep up payments for life, or the underwriting company being corrupt or going out of business.

  • Paul February 25, 2025, 10:48 am

    Been following this blog for a few years now, moved closer to work, started biking everywhere, maxing retirement accounts and dumping excess money in low fee index funds. In 2019 my 401k was about $35,000 and is now about $255,000! The last section about not stressing about the news has really helped me and made me a lot less worried about most things. Love to see posts still coming and I still go back and reread the old ones every 6 months or so

  • Not Michael Saylor February 25, 2025, 10:58 am

    How do you feel about index funds including things like $MSTR, which seems to have gamed the inclusion criteria into some ETFs? It should be self-correcting but it is likely misallocated capital

    • Mr. Money Mustache February 25, 2025, 11:12 am

      Yeah, good point. For the uninitiated, $MSTR is Microstrategy, a crazy ponzi scheme based on leveraged bets on Bitcoin.

      I would prefer not to own any of that, and if there were a customized index fund that could skip companies like that which are definitely fraudulent, I’d prefer that over the entire index.

      https://www-ft-com.ezp-prod1.hul.harvard.edu/content/738546c5-a3f8-4d2a-ad49-ec1627dea1f7

    • Vine February 26, 2025, 11:14 am

      If MSTR gets included into the SP500 it’s really going break some peoples brains. Lots of automatic allocation into the ETFs that track that… People will learn, or they wont.

      You can at least easily short it.

  • Robert February 25, 2025, 11:07 am

    The thing that I find interesting is all the doomsayers (i.e., those prognosticating some sort of nigh-apocalyptic destruction of the stock market) seem to operate under this bizarre assumption that the behemoths (i.e., the Magnificent 7 and others near the top of the pile) are just going to sit there and allow themselves to get trampled by some upstart. Or that they will just shrug their shoulders, say something like “well, I guess it was fun while it lasted, time to pack up the toys and go home” and then it will all be over.

    Will there be disruption? Absolutely! Will it somehow upend the US stock market? I highly doubt that. The companies in the S&P 500 are economic engines, and their fuel is not just natural resources from Canada, Brazil, and Russia, but also other smaller companies. As soon as some small company comes along with a potentially disruptive change, you will absolutely see the big boys try to get in on the game (both by attempting to acquire the upstart, and also by starting or accelerating their own efforts in that space).

    There is a good chance that some of the economic benefit will be “lost” (i.e., those who get in early will reap an outsized gain, while those of us index-only investors will have to wait for that disruptive technology to go mainstream), but in the end that disruptive technology will become *part* of the engine of our economy, rather than wrecking it.

    • Abby H. March 6, 2025, 6:37 pm

      My question is what happens in countries where monopolies control those things and stomp out competition due to undue bought influence from the government? In that case, the naturally self-correcting mechanisms don’t work, and political capital controls the top companies, rather than true innovation driving the market.

      I suppose those companies would still be making record profits, though, so it may be a moot point.

  • Ipsum February 25, 2025, 11:13 am

    New-ish reader here, soon to graduate college and aiming to get started on compounding returns as soon as possible. My question is: how do you think this scenario effects the first couple (investing) steps on the MM path?

    150% higher buy in and the potential for overvaluation being recognized/a bubble bursting seems like it poses a huge risk in particular for us people who don’t yet own much at all. Does this mean that even more focus than before should be on simply paying off student loans? Still maxing out any job matching program is pretty obvious but that’s still a while out. Until then, is putting most saved money into a Roth account or vanguard index still a good idea from your perspective?

    • Mr. Money Mustache February 25, 2025, 12:35 pm

      Great question Ipsum and congratulations on getting started early!

      Starting your career and serious investments right now is pretty similar to me as a 1997 Computer Engineering graduate. Nobody knew it at the time, but we were climbing the final wall of the 2000 Dot Com bubble, which subsequently burst and led to one of those occasional “lost decades” we get.

      If you have any high interest debt (6% or more), you might enjoy paying that off as part of your early savings. And yes, take advantage of any employer matches.

      And aside from that, just VTI and Chill and enjoy your life! There will be stock market crashes and flat spots along the way, and you will automatically get more shares at better prices during those time periods.

      Your overall investment performance will be the average of the market over your accumulation period – the price of these shares you buy in the first few years won’t matter much at all.

      One more thing: If you’re entrepreneurial and love houses and managing people, also look into the whole real estate world (at the very minimum renting out an apartment in your own house). It’s usually a solid way to exceed the returns of the stock market in exchange for putting in some work and skill – in other words a second fairly highly paid job.

  • Dan Mahoney February 25, 2025, 11:21 am

    Hello Mr. Money,
    I’ve enjoyed you stuff over the years and took early retirement myself a few years ago from my job reselling IT products and solutions. I enjoyed it but I enjoy retirement even more.
    With regards to Mr. Buffett, I’m a shareholder in Berkshire and in 2018 during the annual shareholder meeting ol Warren took a 15-minute break and instead talked about how he bought his first stock during WWII and he said, ” the best thing I could of done was to have bought an S&P 500 Index fund. $10,000 then would be worth 51 million.
    Then he went on to explain why he recommends the S&P.
    He essentially gave a 15 minute lesson in investing. In my opinion, you can get an MBA in investing in 15 minutes watching this lesson.
    I have it on my website. I invite you to check it out.
    I’ve been a student of Mr. Buffett and that I believe is his recommendation as far as investing goes.
    I’ve carefully watched to see if he recommends bonds or international and each time, he says the S&P is the one you want.
    His reasoning he outlines in this lesson I believe.
    After seeing this I checked his recommendation out by doing a deep dive on his lesson and I got other facts and proof that backs up everything he teaches.
    It’s on my website.
    Dan
    Mahoney
    Thanks for the info over the years.

  • Andrew S February 25, 2025, 11:24 am

    Long time reader, glad you still find time to put an article out now and again…it’s a fun surprise nowadays when these pop up in my inbox. It’s all groovy baby, there’s always a market collapse or some other calamity coming, don’t worry so much about it and just focus what’s in our own control. People and businesses will continue to work hard to make a profit, some companies will fail (even some AI companies), but I think the main point is that as long as the US is where the globes idea-generators want to build their companies, then long term we’ll be alright. Also, I couldn’t agree more about your point on time horizons, you can barely notice the exponential nature of growth on timescales less than 10-15 years. I have been heeding Mr. Buffet’s advice a bit though and carrying more than my typical level of cash (which was basically no cash!) in my investing accounts just so that I can pounce when the next down-turn comes.

  • Alan Donegan February 25, 2025, 11:32 am

    Love your articles MMM and then analysis you do. I enjoyed reading it a lot. Donegans currently hold global index funds, which are primarily US as that makes up most of the investible global market. It is interesting to see how much people are worried about over valuation. We can’t wait for more hiking, food and chatting to friends whilst we enjoy the rocky ride of the investing rollercoaster. LOVE your content. LOVE the AI images you have generated for this article. it makes is fun. Alan

  • Daniel February 25, 2025, 11:35 am

    Have been following this blog for many years. As usual, excellent post, and excellent comments too.

    The low on the last bear market was on March 9, 2009, almost exactly 16 years ago. Unusually long time since the last big crash. Since then, up and more up, except for a brief period when the Covid pandemic started. Not only is the market overvalued, but I feel there is a lot of tinder and the tiniest spark will start the fire. High P/Es. China and Taiwan. Ukraine and Russia (still) at war. Threat of tariffs. High public debt. Buffett selling – not only selling but not even repurchasing Berkshire’s own shares. I will never fully time the market, but I feel this is a time I need to be no more than 40% in stocks. Rest in “unloved” investments – bonds – and cash. House has been paid off long ago, I am close to retirement, won’t lose sleep (even I may lose on some additional returns).

  • Philip Mallory February 25, 2025, 11:37 am

    The chart captioned “The real cause behind our raging bull market” is pretty confusing. I’m a fairly numerate fellow and it took a few minutes to reproduce the chart to understand what you’re communicating. I didn’t know what these percentages were fractions of until I went and made my own graphs.

    A y-axis label like “one year increase in market cap” would help, and maybe explicitly explain in the preceding paragraph how you made the mental leap to “all the recent growth – about three quarters of it – came from just the seven biggest companies” would make it easier to follow.

    anyways, this is another fine article. I started following the blog about 15 years ago when I was a college student with vague ideas about how I should be frugal and save up for a house. 15 years later, I wouldn’t say I’m “retired”, but I am a homeowner in the middle of my second long term sabbatical, and I feel zero pressure to do any work that isn’t something I really want to do. So I’d say it’s been a good journey :)

    • Mr. Money Mustache February 25, 2025, 3:03 pm

      Good suggestion Philip and I was thinking the exact thing as I rushed to publish this. Shoulda remade that image with a better label. Even worse, now it has already gone out to 150k+ newsletter subscribers in email form so it’s locked in!

  • Dave February 25, 2025, 11:38 am

    Thanks MMM for this article, which directly hits what I have been thinking about lately. Periodically reallocating seems to be the way to go, but there is so much variance between what long-term retirement age-based formula, one should go with, e.g., 90% in stocks, 120 minus age in stocks, 110 minus age, etc.

    It seems with how overvalued and volatile things are, it would be best to shift to a more diversified and conservative allocation, e.g., 110 minus age–and then continue periodically reallocating. And then when (not if) the market corrects itself and stocks are at more bargain levels, consider shifting to a more aggressive allocation, e.g., 120 minus age.

    Thoughts on this?

    Really appreciate all your transparency and simple explanations!

  • Stephen February 25, 2025, 12:00 pm

    Thanks MMM!

    I similarly have viewed paying off my house like buying a ~7% bond and wanted to add that the taxable equivalent yield is even higher depending on your tax bracket. It could be closer to a 9-10% bond depending on individual circumstances. Also, these days most folks no longer benefit from deducting mortgage interest with the higher standard deduction we have had since 2017, which used to be a factor in making this decision.

  • Melissa P February 25, 2025, 12:07 pm

    Would love to hear if your opinion on Musk/Tesla has changed.

    • Mr. Money Mustache February 25, 2025, 12:27 pm

      I’d say it’s roughly the same opinion as always but adjusted to his most recent behavior:

      Musk: extremely abrasive personality and doesn’t understand human nature very well at all. Does however understand efficient manufacturing and is good at simplifying stuff down to its essence. Have always been surprised that people are willing to work in the environments he creates, but the company products speak for themselves.

      But I think he gone a little further off the deep end every month since about 2020, and is now a net drag to his companies, which are otherwise still full of brilliant people. Shouldn’t be CEO of anything, and definitely shouldn’t be in his current no-rules government role.

      Tesla: still the best cars on the US market by a very wide margin for the things I value (space and energy efficiency, performance, rock solid simple reliability, sheer joy of taking on cross-country camping and road trips, and of course doing most of the driving for me). But their competitors in China like BYD and Xiaomi and others have now fully caught up.

      Also, Tesla still has the best grid-scale energy storage product on the world market and they do deserve the large share they are earning in that market which is a lot bigger than automobiles. No comment on Robotaxis until they prove it with a multi-billion-dollar stream of reliable profits.

      Unlike many people in the recent trend, I don’t put much weight in my car-buying decisions on whether Musk is a CEO or shareholder of Tesla. Sure it’s a factor, but given that the next best car (Ioniq 5) is so far behind the Model Y in all the measures I care about, it’s too big of a jump to make just for a political statement.

      Plus to be consistent, I’d need first need to study the entire personal and professional life of the Hyundai CEO (I don’t even know his or her name!), and weigh that against my best guess at Elon’s lifelong virtue in a big spreadsheet.

      It’s not as simple as just reading a few New York Times headlines and then declaring “I’LL NEVER BUY A TESLA!”

      • Andrew February 26, 2025, 5:53 am

        Elon Musk has severe TMS but doesn’t know it. That’s his problem.

      • Troy February 26, 2025, 3:29 pm

        Always appreciate your well thought out takes. Thanks for taking the time to answer this.

      • dave March 24, 2025, 3:39 pm

        “shouldn’t be in his current no-rules government role” Disagree. Musk is doing an outstanding job uncovering the waste and inefficiency in govt. Its long overdue. Trump is a genius picking Musk to do this.

  • Dom S February 25, 2025, 12:18 pm

    Imagine a S&P 493 leaving out the magnificent 7. The steady growth of the remaining market, while lower, would be much more stable and able to withstand large corrections (maybe). I think the overall theme is “steady as she goes” and don’t let the market scare you into a foolish move. However, the ongoing political upheaval may subsequently impact the market as people flee for a safer haven (wherever that may be). Interesting times.

    • Mr. Money Mustache February 25, 2025, 12:39 pm

      And you can approximate this pretty well if you like – just look for the “Mid Cap” or “Value stock” index funds, some of which are mentioned in this article.

      But note that over time (not just today’s MAG7 era), a big portion of S&P gains do tend to come from the high flyers of the market. Much like Google, they push the envelope as they grow to massive capitalizations with some lofty P/E ratios during those early years.

      But then the earnings turn out to be real and sustainable, and you’re left with a big profitable company that pays dividends and you’re glad you held the stock along the way for that big rise.

  • Sam February 25, 2025, 12:24 pm

    This could be the most bearish blog post I’ve read from MMM about the market yet (still relatively optimistic compared to cable news headlines though!). Personally, I think I’m finally ready to add some international exposure to my portfolio, but I still don’t foresee US equity returns to be as dreadful as Vanguard predicts. I have a feeling that we will have more market crashes that follow the pattern of COVID—sharp drops followed by swift recoveries—rather than extended downturns.

  • Canadian friend February 25, 2025, 12:32 pm

    Great food for thought as always, thank you. In your mortgage pay-down versus invest in stocks comment, just curious why 7%? I’m looking at a mortgage renewal around 4-4.25% and still considering harvesting from the portfolio to pay a big chunk down to take advantage of selling near all-time highs. I’m in Canada and also trying to lower mortgage obligations as job loss feels like a real possibility if major recession occurs due to tarrifs. Not living in fear but trying to make balanced financial decisions as I’m only about half way to FI number.

    • The Orchard February 26, 2025, 1:37 pm

      7% is close to the average long-term return of the stock market, so that’s the interest rate where paying off a mortgage has the same expected value as investing.

  • Robin Mason February 25, 2025, 12:51 pm

    Great post MMM! Thank you!

    There’s going to be a wealth transfer in Canada and the US over the next decade that’s the biggest in history. Won’t this make the bull run in the market continue? All these folks are going to be putting quite a bit of inheritance money to work! No?!

    • Mr. Money Mustache February 25, 2025, 3:07 pm

      The quick answer is that you can’t predict the future direction of the stock market based on any factors or theories.

      All that info is already out there, and it’s priced in, and then it goes into the big blender of Bullshit Random Estimates as well as unforseen future world events which makes the prices whip around.

      But in the long run, share prices are based on only one thing: company earnings which are based on continued human productivity.

  • Eric February 25, 2025, 12:54 pm

    I’m always a bit confused why so much of the FI world seems to think valuing the stock market is so impossible. The current situation reminds me a lot the of the dot com bust and the housing bubble with the stock gurus loudly stating to keep investing. They all disappear when the bubble bursts and retirement portfolios are ripped apart for a decade. It is easy enough to set buy or sell orders based on market conditions. There are also studies showing that investing in the S&P 500 at its current valuation holds on average an annualized return of -2-2%. The real question is about the opportunity cost of investing in the stock market versus other opportunities.

    • Mr. Money Mustache February 25, 2025, 2:13 pm

      I believe you, but do you care to share any of those studies or backtesting tools so we can get into some more detail?

      There’s no such thing as an index fund portfolio being “ripped apart” – at worst, what happens is that your neighboring farmers start shouting different estimates of the value of your farm over your fence for a while. As long as the businesses you own continue to produce valuable products and services for their customers which they can sell at a profit, you’re happy to own them. Just like a rental house.

      • Eric February 26, 2025, 5:24 pm

        Hi, the reference to the study is included in the following article, with the analysis originally coming from JP Morgan Asset Management. https://www.oaktreecapital.com/insights/memo/on-bubble-watch . I don’t have a link to the original research, and I also need to correct that this is the only study I have. There are multiple as originally claimed.

        • Eric February 26, 2025, 5:25 pm

          There are NOT multiple as originally claimed.

        • Joe February 28, 2025, 12:49 am

          I think there is an issue with the data of that study Howard Mark’s quotes?

          It’s the J.P. Morgan Asset Management, has a square for each month from 1988 through late 2014, and then shows the subsequent 10 year returns based on entry PE. The problem is that there aren’t that many 10-year periods in that time to make that claim, and that all of them are rolling it month to month, so the 324 observations are not really 324, but actually the same 10-year period multiple times since they’re not independent.

          But I agree that the logic does make sense though that higher PEs should be lower returns intuitively.

          • Mr. Money Mustache February 28, 2025, 7:26 am

            Excellent work and thanks to both of you for researching and discussing it like this – exactly what can make for a really useful comment section!

            And yeah, I had seen that chart circulating on Instagram as well and noticed the same sketchy methodology:

            While the basic premise is great (valuations affect future returns), in this case they zoomed into a fairly tight time period (1988 to 2014) that happened to include some very significant market crashes and then plotted them month-by-month.

            To my eye, the graph makes it look like there were dozens of “lost decades” when in fact the entire period is only 2.5 decades, which we can now look back on and see they were still a historically great time to be accumulating stocks!

  • Mike February 25, 2025, 1:03 pm

    MMM – have read you for over a decade and have the utmost respect and gratitude for you. However I must admit I am a bit astonished as to your optimism over AI – this from the guy who (apparently correctly) told us a few years ago that crypto was essentially a bunch of B.S. coming from the usual tech bro types. Instead of arguing your AI summary point by point, can you give an example of a medication that AI has designed (not will design, but *has* designed) that is “thousands of times better than what we’re used to?” Because the state of “AI” that I see is a ton of hype about what it will do followed by the release of another Large Language Model that doesn’t think, reason, or actually know anything.
    (I don’t mean for this to sound as argumentative as it might, I am genuinely curious and yes, a little frustrated).

    • Mr. Money Mustache February 25, 2025, 2:10 pm

      Thanks for the challenge Mike.

      I view crypto and AI as totally different things. Crypto is a neat technology but the idea of treating it as an “investment” is just a misunderstanding of the difference between gambling versus investing. Logically, blockchain technologies should be interesting to computer scientists but utterly boring to Miami Influencer Bros. Their very presence on the scene proves that it’s a fad.

      AI is a shockingly powerful way to get machines to be intelligent. The deeper you dig, the more amazing you realize the results are. The LLMs are definitely thinking and reasoning, even if their current lack of long-term contextual memory limits some aspects of this intelligence. But Claude and GPT4 have already earned spots the top 100 list of world coders, beating almost all humans even when solving novel non-Googlable coding problems. And they write really clean code with super helpful comments as well!

      I may need to fix that sentence: I think Deepmind’s Alphafold is thousands of times better at designing new drug candidates than the former method of human intuition, and it should soon get better at predicting the outcomes of clinical trials which can help us design better, shorter ones. But we’re only starting to see the results of that with a few new things so far.

      Big hype in 2021: https://www.forbes.com/sites/robtoews/2021/10/03/alphafold-is-the-most-important-achievement-in-ai-ever/

      A tempered but still real world usefulness as of 2024: https://www.nature.com/articles/s41592-023-02087-4

  • Anand February 25, 2025, 1:57 pm

    Great Article, i have been researching this on my own lately and considering.

    a. Instead of just S&P 500 index, what about equal weighted S&P 500 … This way you do participate in the M7 on the AI rally as well as rebalance with other 493 companies in the index. is it true equal weight vs regular indexing as higher returns 1% more . ..?

    b. Rebalancing and increasing the % of investments in Value Growth stocks in an index vs S&P 500 index

    what are your thoughts..?

  • Gary Grewal February 25, 2025, 1:58 pm

    A good seasonally-adjusted reminder to invest for the long term and disclosure that stocks are expensive right now, investors being willing to pay a premium. Many of us have been waiting a while to buy stocks on sale! AI sure has a lot of “pros” to it, seems like we should be telling the next generation to do what it can’t like construction, trades, comedy, acting, or building awesome trails.

  • AI Ponderer February 25, 2025, 2:00 pm

    Do you have any broader thoughts on AI, MMM? I’ll be honest, the whole thing kind of depresses me, even as I acknowledge its potential benefits. But I was wondering if an eternal optimist like you can give me the face punch I need.

    In part it’s because it will likely directly eliminate my job in the next few years. Oh well, I’ll get a new job. But just in general it feels like it’s eliminating the last few realms where everyday people could outperform machines and derive meaning even just as hobbyists.

  • RichardP February 25, 2025, 3:01 pm

    In broad strokes, I think the AI situation is going to play out like the dotcom bubble. I think some companies are going to make a fortune and we’re going to see permanent and dramatic changes in business, society, etc. I also think some companies are going to go bankrupt because they didn’t execute well enough or some other company just did it better and ‘ate their lunch’.

    As for the current market valuation, I think some selling might be appropriate. Having said that, we need to distinguish between ‘timing the market’ and following the old adage of ‘buy low, sell high’. Market timing is when you buy and sell based on what you think is going to happen in the future. Bad plan. No one has been able to do it consistently. But we should be looking at the market and asking, “Is it cheap or expensive RIGHT NOW?” I think the answer is pretty obvious and it makes sense to react to current conditions.

  • Will February 25, 2025, 3:14 pm

    After an afternoon doomscrolling political and economic news, feeling like the market is indeed a house of cards teetering on the brink of a collapse it may never recover from, this is exactly the article I needed to read. Think I’ll head out on a brisk hill walk.

    Cheers!

    P.S You were my introduction to the FIRE movement 10 years ago, and just might have changed my life (for the better!)

  • CaptainFI February 25, 2025, 3:29 pm

    Totally agree with paying off the mortgage, as our family has grown our appetite for debt has decreased – my plan is to pay off our hobby farm ASAP (looking like 5 years if I keep aggressively shovelling money into it) and switched the investment property to interest only. We are doing our stock market investing through our retirement scheme (superannuation here in Australia) mostly into my wife’s account and then anytime we get small windfalls my wife invests into her brokerage account – it’s going really well, and we are hoping to be debt free soon

  • Alec February 25, 2025, 4:19 pm

    Hi MMM,
    Thanks for posting this and all your great work over the years! I have a question about the “What happens if stock valuations return to normal” chart. I don’t understand a couple things – first, what is the y axis? second, why does the red line start at a lower value than the yellow and blue lines on the left edge?

    I just ER’d at 59. I’m still trying to figure out a proper asset allocation given currently high valuations. It’s always tricky. I want to participate in the market but I don’t want to worry about a big downturn in markets given that I’m no longer contributing and so will not have the benefit of decades of time and dollar cost averaging.

    • Daniel February 26, 2025, 7:44 am

      Y axis is S&P500. On x-axis, Year 0 means “right now”. The x-axis means “future”. The red line starts below yellow and blue because stocks are overvalued, i.e. have a higher P/E. The red shows what S&P SHOULD BE if P/E was typical, not very high as it is now. Basically, if the market crashed right now and reversed to a normal P/E.
      The blue line shows what S&P would be in the future if the current trends continue (unlikely). As mentioned above, the red line shows what S&P future will be if stocks would suddenly revert to a typical P&E now. The yellow line is similar to the red line, but shows a more gradual reversal to typical P/Es, over time. M&Ms point is that even the worse case scenario – red line – is still pretty good.

      • Alec February 26, 2025, 12:04 pm

        Thanks for the explanation Daniel!

        • Daniel February 26, 2025, 3:37 pm

          You are very welcome, Alec.

  • Aaron Hemry February 25, 2025, 5:20 pm

    Great article!
    I’m curious how much the simple supply and demand curve influences stock prices.
    Surely as millions of retail and professional investors put upward buying pressure on stocks, the stock price goes higher than historical P/E ratios suggest they will eventually be. Unless companies are issuing new shares, the supply is limited, so up goes the price.
    Indexing surely has a similar effect. Lots of us are buying cap weighted index funds and therefore driving the prices up, especially of the biggest companies.
    It makes sense to value only the “rent” received from these shares, but what choice do people have but to buy in whatever the price?
    Acting in any other way is market timing, right?
    So, if you are going to need that invested money anytime soon, you have to consider market timing, or value capturing if you want to call it that.
    What say you?

  • Jenny February 25, 2025, 5:22 pm

    I have all my money in VTSAX like you recommended way back in the olden days. But now you recommend VTI. Is there much difference?

    I’m hopeful that AI will improve and lengthen our lives even though a lot of people don’t want progress and hinder it as best they can.

    • Bob February 26, 2025, 7:32 am

      VTI is the ETF versions of VTSAX. No appreciable difference.

  • Rob from Montreal February 25, 2025, 5:39 pm

    Great Blog Pete! Wondering if the tariffs threats that are causing consumer jitters in the USA is causing some of this volatility in the stock market?

  • carl February 25, 2025, 5:57 pm

    “In other words, the Price-to-earnings ratio has risen from about 20 back then, to about 30 today.”

    One thing I’ve wondered about is if there are other factors at play here. One of them is market participation. Looking at multpl, the PE bounced up and down in pretty much the same band from the 1800s all the way to about 1990. From that point on, it’s been mostly higher.

    In 1974, the IRA was invented. Then came the 401k in 1978 and the Roth IRA in 1997. It’s never been easier to invest in the markets than it is right now. Growing up, my parents didn’t know anything about the stock market and had nothing directly invested in it. Now, I have money in it as do all of my siblings. So, maybe the PE is destined to be permanently higher because more people are investing?

    Could another factor be wealth? Most are better off now, so there is more money to play with.

    Dunno.

    • Paul February 27, 2025, 11:22 am

      I think you’re spot on that easier access to the stock market is a big factor. Your comment got me curious about what else might be at play, so I had AI dig into it a bit (seemed fitting for this article, right?).

      I thought the research was pretty interesting and worth sharing:
      https://chatgpt.com/share/67c0ac37-a0f0-8005-b15f-2f098024630f

      • Mr. Money Mustache February 27, 2025, 12:25 pm

        Nice work Paul!

        I especially enjoyed how most of the references are from my blogger colleagues “A Wealth of Common Sense” and “Conversable Economist” – they publish good stuff.

        Yes, more participation in the stock market does add demand for shares. But in theory, the bigger flow of investment money should ALSO lead to a bigger supply of shares via increased company formation and more IPOs. More investment should lead to our economy growing faster, as well as more competition for our consumer dollars which is a nice deflationary force.

        But would the end point still be an equilibrium point of higher P/E ratios? I can’t answer this because I think we just pushed this discussion a bit above my pay grade.

        Any other economists (certified or armchair) want to weigh in?

      • carl March 1, 2025, 7:14 am

        Thanks for that Paul! I feel vindicated by your ChatGPT report. I also feel a bit silly for not consulting AI first!

        One other thing I was thinking about this morning that may be affecting PEs: private equity. Consider SpaceX and Stripe. If they were public, they’d have 9 figure valuations. And more companies are staying public longer. Or maybe forever. If a company doesn’t need the capital, why deal with the hassle of being public?

        So, more companies are staying private longer or maybe forever. But I could see this driving PEs down since a company like SpaceX would have an aggressive valuation. Or maybe it’s driving PS up since the overall market cap of the public markets is smaller.

        Dunno! But I enjoy thinking about this stuff.

      • Joe March 5, 2025, 7:07 am

        I particularly agree with the part about the relationship between low interest rates and higher PEs. The US (and global) has had low rates for such a significant period of time which may have moved the PEs higher. With rates now finally reaching levels last seen in 2008, and before 2000s, it will be interesting to me as to whether that starts to finally filter into the PEs once the market forecasts that rates will remain at this level.

  • Kevin OBrien February 25, 2025, 6:04 pm

    I took off from work to go snowboarding with my childhood best friend and I get MMM article on the same day. Doesn’t get much better than that. Great article and thanks for your insights.

  • Rob February 25, 2025, 7:36 pm

    Some context regarding the accuracy of Vanguard’s previous predictions:
    https://www.mymoneyblog.com/vanguard-10-year-stock-market-forecast-2025-2035.html
    TL:DR – not accurate.

  • Brad February 25, 2025, 7:50 pm

    I must admit it does feel a bit like 1999. Even if I had a crystal ball, I’m not sure I would do much differently. In December and again in January I took some tech stock profits off the table. I’m now sitting on what I like to call my five year emergency fund. it’s earning 4% interest and it feels sort of good to have as a bridge over troubled waters if needed. And it’s never a bad idea to follow Warren Buffett’s lead.

  • Dharma Bum February 25, 2025, 7:55 pm

    It sounds weird, but I’m kind of glad to be getting old. Most of this AI stuff is not really going to affect me too much. I retired early on MMM’s recommendation. Fortunately I’ve been investing in the stock market since the early 90s, so I can’t even remember how many times the money has doubled (Hint:start EARLY kiddos!).
    I feel blessed to have mostly dodged the major financial bullets over the decades, but either way, the key was to stay fully invested and diversified throughout the ups and downs.Oh, and NEVER believe the hype or listen to financial pundits and gurus (well, maybe other than the Buffet).

  • Andy February 25, 2025, 8:50 pm

    I feel like everything that was promised in the dot com era was eventually fulfilled, just some years after the crash. AI is very promising but the timing of the monetization of AI is the key. I shifted out of US funds and into international funds, particularly a high dividend yield fund with a PE ratio of just 12. The idea for that came from that vanguard forecast you mentioned.
    I read another report, from fidelity I think, that said international would outpace US stocks for at least 20 years. Who knows how their models work, but it’s interesting that they are in some agreement.

  • Scott Trench February 25, 2025, 9:03 pm

    MMM – Great thoughts here. I am certainly one of those who is concerned about the extremely expensive stock market, and worry that stocks are priced with expectations of incredible golden age type profits being just around the corner.

    I love the rational take here, the reassurance that the long-run still offers good returns for even expensive US stocks, and I also like the fact that there is some very reasonable puts around the benefits of paying off a higher interest rate mortgage.

    Given that I have spent so much time around real estate, I’m just more comfortable with it, and the “P/E” ration real estate (cap rates) in my local area, relative to the. S&P 500 right now. And, I’m reluctant to and don’t know what I’m really doing when I invest in international stocks.

  • TomP February 25, 2025, 9:55 pm

    Thank you, this confirms many of my thoughts so far. I guess we’ll finally see that overdue decade of MSCI World outperforming SP500 before things turn around again for a decade or so. Meanwhile, on the us side, do you think it would make sense to invest preferentially in SP500-MAG7 ?
    I also look forward to what AI will bring. If done right it will also largely compensate for demographic issues and ageing populations in the developed world.

  • John February 26, 2025, 1:00 am

    I’m retired and trying to decide whether to keep my house, or sell it and put the money in VTSAX or similar.
    Is there a formula for the net rental income that I receive vs safe withdrawal rate if invested in stocks.
    I’ve been using the 4% rule as how much I should net from my rental house, compared with stocks.
    For example if I can net $1M selling my house, I could get $40K a year at 4%.
    If I net more than $40K annually from rent, keeping the house is a better deal.
    But being a landlord sucks, especially in NYC, so passive income is more appealing, all things being equal.
    Any advice/comments?

    • Joe March 3, 2025, 12:48 am

      You’d need to calculate your overall return and whether keeping the house+appreciation+rental growth is higher than share dividends + appreciation. What’s the overall net IRR between the two.

      Your house could do better since its a small business and you can lever it, but its incredibly location and timing dependent. I’m not a fan of a large property as part of portfolio because of the liquidity issue and I don’t want to be a landlord, but there’s no reason why it shouldn’t do well or better than VTSAX as part of your portfolio.

  • Alan February 26, 2025, 1:29 am

    Dear MMM and all other readers
    Thank you for getting to the point of the complicated. As you said, it’s just simple math.

    Regarding the 330+ billion cash Warren Buffett has invested in short-dated government bonds. Compared to the S&P500 with a P/E ratio of 27.8, the government bonds are yielding 4 to 5% without risk. The S&P500 yields around 3.6% (risky / inverse of 27.8). Here too, it’s just simple math.

    Best wishes from Switzerland, Alan

  • Jujubean February 26, 2025, 2:06 am

    There’s was a fascinating article in the New Yorker last year by Ted Chiang: “Will A.I. Become the New McKinsey?”

    I would be interested in hearing your thoughts on it.

  • Austin February 26, 2025, 3:27 am

    Any recommendations for a “real return” percentage for a retirement calculator looking ahead 20-30 years. I often hear people using 6-7% real, but based on the current valuations, I’m thinking that may be way too optimistic.

  • HarryH February 26, 2025, 4:09 am

    I’ve started investing about 8 years ago. I’ve decided, and stuck with, a two prong approach. Half in well known index etf’s, half in about 20 handpicked stocks that I liked. If i screw up myself, I would still have the etf’s. For my own hand picked stocks, I choose to stick to about 20 stocks. Research has shown multiple times that 20 stocks will yield the same results as an index consisting of hundreds or even thousands of stocks. You don’t need an index, you just need 20 random stocks and they’ll perform the same.

    My 20 stocks I keep as a hobby and to learn about new companies, how companies are run, new insights etc. It keeps me interested in the stockmarket. The stocks that I pick are companies I’m familiar with, or believe will do well. I avoid hype like the plague. I avoid high PE’s. I try to follow Buffets advice as best I can. Don’t loose money. Buy low, sell never or at least very high.

    I’ve sold Tesla at a loss in 2019, never owned it again. I’ve never owned Meta, Amazon, Apple, Nvidia. Or AMD, or any other recent 10bagger. I have stuck with boring, mostly relatively unknown stocks. Or where I saw a real opportunity.

    The real kicker? About 70% of the stocks are European. I barely own any US stocks.

    The results: My own hand picked 20 stocks have done better than the S&P500.

    I’m not a great stock picker. I didn’t invest in NVidia, Google, AMD. I sold Tesla at a loss before it went time 20. I still hold a 50% on a significant Intel stake. I stuck to Europe while the US outperformed. And yet, my returns have beaten the S&P500.

    There are some great stocks in Europe. There is also a lot of not so great stocks. Picking the great ones isn’t hard. Most can see the bad ones from far away and avoid them like the plague.

    The real problem for Europe, is the lack of representative indexes. The European indexes just simply suck. Not enough stocks in them. Every country has their own indexes of just a few stocks. And maybe an even bigger underappreciated problem comparing the US to the EU: dividends. The US companies barely pay dividends, while EU companies still pay a good deal. The difference adds up over the years, but most indexes don’t compare the total return.

    As for these high markets: please keep in mind: we’ve had some serious inflation. Inflation adjusted returns over the last years aren’t out of the ordinary. Especially comparing inflation adjusted returns to something like a zero risk tips ladder.

    Your S&P500 without the magnificent seven looks less impressive. But instead of taking out the best performers, maybe do the same but also take out the absolute worst performers. And then do both. You might be surprised to learn the whole market is actually doing really pretty well.

    Conclusion: I’m really not worried. Taking a broader look and accounting for inflation and zero risk treasuries, returns aren’t extraordinary. We live in a world where in one generation, huge countries go from poor to rich, and they all want stable investments for their retirements. We live in an age where a growing number of retires will keep demand high because they don’t have to fear for their incomes. House payments look high, but the total mortgage debt in many western countries is actually quite low.

    If there ever was a golden age, it’s now. We’re deadsmack in the middle of the best economic boom in history, and it doesn’t seem to be ending anytime soon (if you take a worldwide broad look). Don’t focus too much on the numbers. Look around the world, see how much things are improving in just one generation world wide. You can only conclude demand for stocks will keep increasing, and companies will keep improving profits as demand keeps increasing. Will there be shock and crashes? Sure, but nothing to worry about for a early retiree.

  • Joe February 26, 2025, 4:49 am

    I also like to think of the property pay down as an after tax return, since you need to earn the money first , then pay taxes to pay the mortgage.

    On the US vs International shares, people recommending to stay US only, I wonder if there’s bias because the US has done well and whether that position would’ve been very different if we were looking at a period where US had seen a weak decade, like post 08?

  • pat February 26, 2025, 5:18 am

    Having started investing in real estate before the 18% mtg rates, then watch my collegues sweat out Black Monday Oct 19/87, Iam glad we stayed 100% RE. Passive income allowed me to retire in 1998 & over the years we have also unloaded many high cap. appreciated investment properties, often holding the notes @ 10-12% with a 5yr balloon.
    We still buy using cash from our 401(k)-solos.
    Real Esatate has been our ‘annuity’ & has outperformed most of those we know who have invested heavily in the equities market. Over the years the odd bad tenant, bloodied knuckles & rehab costs have never been as stressful as our friends who said they refused to look at their 401(k)’s as the mkt swooned. All have since worked until their late 60’s. In fact my business consultant, equities investor friend, who told us we would go broke in real estate, suffers very poor health & still has to work at 70.
    Thanks to my wife all of our kids are heavily invested in real estate & have enough passive income to cover their respective mortgages.

    • Mr. Money Mustache March 3, 2025, 4:38 pm

      Hey Pat, thanks for the interesting and very opposite perspective!

      I’m glad you’ve done so well with real estate. But I also find it hard to imagine, given the spectacular returns of our stock index for the past century, *anybody* who doesn’t get to retire very early and sleep very well even on a 100% stock portfolio.

      Unless they went at it Cowboy Style with an actively managed stock trading approach and gambled all their wealth away?

      I think the real answer is what you enjoy doing in your retirement. I learned from managing rental properties of my own in the past, that it kinda ruins my day when there’s a problem with one of my tenant-occupied properties and I have to manage it.

      On the other hand, I wouldn’t feel the slightest worry if the stock market dropped 50% in a bad panic or recession. That’s a self-correcting problem that requires no effort from me and just makes most savers wealthier in the long run as our dividends reinvest and our surplus cash flows into the index at discounted prices.

      One last thing I like to check in on for any wealthier investors reading this: make sure you continue to question your old habits as your wealth grows.

      For example, when you had $250k of real estate, it was appropriate to hustle and add more. When you have $10M of it, you don’t have to do a thing – you could sell it ALL and put it into inflation adjusted bonds for the rest of your life and you’d still be swimming in cash. So only keep doing it if you love the work – NOT for the money.

Leave a Reply

To keep things non-promotional, please use a real name or nickname
(not Blogger @ My Blog Name)

The most useful comments are those written with the goal of learning from or helping out other readers – after reading the whole article and all the earlier comments. Complaints and insults generally won’t make the cut here, but by all means write them on your own blog!

connect

welcome new readers

Take a look around. If you think you are hardcore enough to handle Maximum Mustache, feel free to start at the first article and read your way up to the present using the links at the bottom of each article.

For more casual sampling, have a look at this complete list of all posts since the beginning of time. Go ahead and click on any titles that intrigue you, and I hope to see you around here more often.

Love, Mr. Money Mustache

latest tweets