
Forecasts predict a dismal decade for stocks. Here's what to do.
What if those days are over?
In recent forecasts, Vanguard projects the stock market will rise by only 3.3% to 5.3% a year over the next decade. Morningstar sees U.S. stocks gaining 5.2% a year. Goldman Sachs forecasts the broad S&P 500 index will gain only 3% a year.
Those numbers aren't outliers. A roundup of market prognostications, charted by Morningstar, finds no one projecting annual returns higher than 6.7% for the domestic stock market in the next 10 years.
In June, USA TODAY noted that many analysts predict the stock market will end the year with only meager gains.
Some readers reacted with surprise, others with disbelief. Stock indexes have been posting record highs, despite lingering inflation, a softening job market and rising import tariffs.
As it turns out, those record highs are one reason forecasters don't expect much from the stock market over the rest of this year, nor in years to come.
Here, then, is a closer look at why economist have dim hopes for the stock market in the next decade, and what everyday investors can do about it.
Stocks are overpriced
The simple reason forecasters don't expect much from the U.S. stock market over the next decade: stock prices are already very high.
Stock indexes have been breaking records. To analysts, that means many stocks are overpriced. Bargains are fewer. The indexes have less room to grow.
Just how overpriced is the stock market? Economists have a yardstick to measure that. It's called the cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings ratio, or CAPE ratio. It measures a stock's price against corporate earnings. It tells you, in effect, whether the stock is overvalued or undervalued.
Right now, the CAPE ratio for the S&P 500 stands at 38.7. That means stock prices are very expensive, relative to earnings.
'Right now, the U.S. stock market is trading at more than double the post-World War II average price-to-earnings ratio,' said Randy Bruns, a certified financial planner in Naperville, Illinois.
There are two prior moments over the past century when the CAPE Ratio was really high. One was in 1929. The other was in 1999. In the decades that followed those peaks, the stock market sank like a stone: The Great Depression of the 1930s, and the dot-com bust and Great Recession of the 2000s.
'Our projection is that that ratio is going to somehow come down,' said Paul Arnold, global head of multi-asset research at Morningstar.
Investors forget to buy low
No one is forcing anyone to purchase expensive stocks. Why, then, do investors keep buying them?
It's easy to recite that old investing adage about buying low and selling high. It's harder to follow the rule, especially when you don't know how high is too high.
Purchasing stocks when the market is high sounds like a flagrant violation of the buy-low rule. And yet, investment advisers routinely encourage consumers to keep buying stocks when prices are high.
The reason: Stocks tend to rise over time. Even if you buy high, you can bet the market will eventually climb even higher.
All those headlines about stock-market records function like ads for stocks. And investors keep buying them, pushing prices up.
'When stocks are going up, investors have this tendency to think that now's the time to get in,' said Todd Schlanger, senior investment strategist at Vanguard. 'Stocks are one of the few things people don't like to buy on sale.'
The stock market is too 'concentrated'
Here's another reason many forecasters are down on U.S. stocks, and especially the monster stocks known as the Magnificent Seven: Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta and Tesla.
Together, the Seven represent 34% of the overall value of the S&P 500, up from 12% in 2015, Motley Fool reports. That's called market concentration, and it can be a bad thing.
Investors are urged to diversify: Not to hold only stocks, and not to hold too much of any one stock.
The problem with the Magnificent Seven, Goldman Sachs reports, is that their massive growth is unsustainable: 'It is extremely difficult for any firm to maintain high levels of sales growth and profit margins over sustained periods of time.'
Those seven stocks are 'already priced to perfection,' Schlanger said. That's a gentle way of saying that they are expensive.
Vanguard forecasts that growth stocks, the category dominated by the Magnificent Seven, will grow by only 1.9% to 3.9% a year over the next decade.
That does not mean the Magnificent Seven stocks are going to crash.
'I find it hard to believe that something would happen that would throw one of those companies into a tailspin,' said Catherine Valega, a certified financial planner in Winchester, Massachusetts. 'The larger companies have resources to pivot, if they need to.'
Forecasters question, though, whether the Magnificent Seven will continue to grow at the same fevered pace of the past.
'If those companies are booming, that's great,' Bruns said. 'But when the writing on the wall hits for those seven companies, it'll be bad news for the S&P 500 as a whole.'
What to do about those gloomy stock forecasts?
If you want to avoid market concentration and overpriced stocks, forecasters say, here are some places to look:
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


CNBC
23 minutes ago
- CNBC
S&P 500 futures rise after benchmark snaps losing streak, Palantir pops on earnings: Live updates
Traders work at the New York Stock Exchange on July 30, 2025. NYSE Stock futures are slightly higher on Monday night, following Wall Street's rebound, as investors followed the latest batch of corporate earnings. Dow Jones Industrial Average futures added 79 points, or 0.2%. S&P 500 futures and Nasdaq 100 futures each also added 0.2%. In extended trading, Palantir shares jumped more than 3% as the defense technology company said revenue surpassed $1 billion for the first time. On the other hand, Hims & Hers Health fell more than 12% after second-quarter revenue missed Wall Street's expectations. Monday night's moves come after a winning day on Wall Street that allowed stocks to recover losses from the prior session. The market tanked on Friday as the latest policy rollout on tariffs and a weak jobs report left investors questioning the health of the economy. All three of the major indexes ended the week in the red. But the S&P 500 was able to jump about 1.5% on Monday, snapping a four-day losing streak. More than four out of every five members of the benchmark average advanced in the session. The technology-heavy Nasdaq Composite surged nearly 2%, while the Dow climbed about 585 points to erase its Friday loss. The small-cap focused Russell 2000 jumped more than 2%. "You have to respect the momentum that the market has had. We're still in a very powerful uptrend," said Cameron Dawson, investing chief at New Edge Wealth, on CNBC's "Closing Bell." But, "it wouldn't be surprising to see some chop as we move through August." Investors on Tuesday will watch for more earnings reports. Pfizer , Yum! Brands and Fox are among the companies reporting before the bell, followed by Snap , Advanced Micro Devices and Rivian after the close. They'll also monitor economic data on the trade deficit and purchasing due Tuesday morning. These are some of the stocks making the biggest moves after hours: Palantir — The defense technology stock advanced 4% after second-quarter earnings exceeded Wall Street's expectations. Palantir said it reported adjusted earnings of 16 cents per share on $1.00 billion in revenue, while analysts polled by LSEG anticipated 14 cents per share and $940 million, respectively. — The defense technology stock advanced 4% after second-quarter earnings exceeded Wall Street's expectations. Palantir said it reported adjusted earnings of 16 cents per share on $1.00 billion in revenue, while analysts polled by LSEG anticipated 14 cents per share and $940 million, respectively. Vertex Pharmaceuticals — The biotech stock sank 14% after second-quarter earnings topped estimates. Vertex posted adjusted earnings of $4.52 per share on revenue of $2.96 billion, while analysts surveyed by LSEG had penciled in $4.26 per share and $2.91 billion. — The biotech stock sank 14% after second-quarter earnings topped estimates. Vertex posted adjusted earnings of $4.52 per share on revenue of $2.96 billion, while analysts surveyed by LSEG had penciled in $4.26 per share and $2.91 billion. Hims & Hers Health – Shares tumbled 12% after the telehealth company issued disappointing guidance. Hims sees third-quarter adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation and amortization ranging from $60 million to $70 million, while StreetAccount consensus estimates called for $77 million. Click here for the full list. — Alex Harring Futures tied to the Dow, S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 all added around 0.2% shortly after 6 p.m. ET. — Alex Harring


CBS News
23 minutes ago
- CBS News
How unusual are jobs numbers revisions? According to experts, they're a common feature.
The Bureau of Labor Statistics last week issued a steep downward revision to May and June's hiring numbers, prompting President Trump to call the edits "miscalculations" by the department's commissioner, whom he subsequently fired, in a social media post on Aug. 1. While the downward revision of May and June payroll growth by 258,000 marked the largest two-month revision to the jobs numbers since 1968, revisions themselves are not uncommon. Revisions are "a feature, not a bug" of the agency's reporting process, according to Erica Groshen, former BLS commissioner under the Obama administration told CBS MoneyWatch. Larger revisions have been recorded, but only when the economy has been in a recession, according to a Goldman Sachs analysis for BLS data. The BLS surveys both households and businesses for its monthly jobs report. After releasing an initial report, it's common for the agency to issue revisions to the prior monthly figures, as more accurate data is collected over time. That's because while some survey recipients respond to the agency's surveys immediately, others report data late. In the interest of reporting employment information in a timely manner, though, the BLS will issue its monthly jobs report based on the responses it is given by a certain time. "The BLS wants to get the information as accurate as possible, but it doesn't want to wait too long to put out information that's useful," Groshen said. "So it puts out preliminary numbers, saying they are an estimate, then it gathers more information and improves that estimate." "If you send out a survey to a bunch of people, some will turn it back in on time and some of them won't," Michele Evermore, a former Department of Labor employee and senior fellow at The Century Foundation, a progressive, independent think tank told CBS MoneyWatch. "The faster you make a determination, the more you're going to have to fill in the blanks," she said. In the interim, the BLS relies on scientific modeling to paint a more complete picture of the state of the job market. "You have to fill in the gaps, and the more reports you get back, the more holes you can fill, and the more accurate a report you get." Eventually, the inclusion of late responses to surveys by both employers and workers enables the agency to provide a more accurate picture of the state of hiring and unemployment in the U.S., Evermore explained. The cuts to the number of jobs that were added in May and June were spread out across both public- and private-sector jobs. The downward revision to public-sector payroll growth "mostly reflected lower state and local government job gains," Goldman Sachs analysts wrote in a research note. Private-sector job gains were previously overstated because of incomplete response data, according to the analysts. Groshen acknowledged that the revisions were "definitely on the large side," but that "they happen, and are the product of the same monthly process. Cuts pertaining to government jobs were driven primarily by reductions in hiring by state and local education establishments, according to the BLS. Groshen attributes the job cuts to the expiration of pandemic-era government subsidies that are leading to a pullback in hiring. "These subsidies were cut, so they are not hiring as many people as they had been in the past, and state and local governments often report late, so that information came in late," she said. Evermore, of The Century Foundation, noted that the BLS revisions only apply to jobs that were added in both May and June, and not to "the pool of all the jobs in the U.S." "While it seems like a big revision, percentage-wise, it's floating on top of the entire labor market. So while it's big, it's not as dramatic as some people are acting like it is," she said. In his Truth Social post on Friday, Mr. Trump, accused the agency's Commissioner Erika McEntarfer of political bias before announcing her dismissal in response to the downward revision of jobs numbers. "I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY. She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified. Important numbers like this must be fair and accurate, they can't be manipulated for political purposes," the president wrote. Even though it has been asked a number of times since Friday, the White House has not provided any evidence that the numbers were manipulated for political purposes. According to Groshen, the drastic revise of the job numbers don't reflect a "failure" of the BLS to do its job. "It's not a failure and it's not bias. It's not like the commissioner said, 'Oh, I think I'm going to change that numbers.' The commissioner has no power, no ability to do that." Evermore concurred. "Having worked with BLS for years, it's impossible to cook the books as things stand," she told CBS MoneyWatch. For years, it's become increasingly difficult to collect complete data based on surveys fielded to hundreds of thousands of employers and individuals, according to Groshen. "There is a very long-term term trend of a declining response rate, which is bedeviling the system," she said. That's in part because some surveys are fielded over the phone, and American households are increasingly ditching landlines. Jeff Strohl, director of the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, a research policy institute, echoes others in noting that BLS releases monthly jobs numbers knowing that they'll be revised. But the agency prioritizes timeliness over 100% accuracy because "the currency of the data is still important," he said. Low response rates — only about 70% of employers surveyed respond on time — make revisions inevitable. according to Strohl. "A month later, the response rate goes up to 90%-95%, so you have 25%, or 150,000, more firms reporting their data," he said. Additionally, weekly shocks to the economy, such as created by tariffs, adds another layer to the challenge of releasing accurate jobs data each month. "The U.S. economy is going through a huge number of shocks on a weekly basis," Strohl told CBS MoneyWatch. "Tariffs are being threatened and applied, and there is a level of economic uncertainty affecting the job market." For example, he said, some job seekers are having offers rescinded as major universities lose research grants. "That's stopping hires from working on projects the money was going to feed," he said.
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Oil prices fall on Trump's India tariff threats, OPEC+ output
Oil prices (CL=F, BZ=F) are under pressure on Monday after US President Trump threatened to raise tariffs on India due to its purchase of Russian oil and OPEC+ lifted production numbers. Yahoo Finance Senior Reporter Ines Ferré outlines what investors need to know. To watch more expert insights and analysis on the latest market action, check out more Market Domination. Oil futures are sliding this coming against the backdrop of OPEC plus hiking oil production and potential supply disruptions linked to Russia. For more, bring in Yahoo Finance senior market reporter, Ines Ferre. Ines. Yeah, Josh, we saw Brent today down more than 1 and a half percent, and WTI also down almost 2%. This is because of that September output hike from OPEC Plus. Now, Goldman Sachs says that they do not expect any more hikes from OPEC Plus. This pretty much now unwinds the 2.2 million barrels per day, those voluntary cuts that they had installed over the last couple of years. So, for now, this should be the last output hike. As far as Brent futures are concerned and where they're going for the rest of the year, well, Goldman Sachs is saying that they're going to go lower. They're predicting $64 per barrel for Brent by the fourth quarter of this year. So we're about $4 away from that. And also, as far as 2026 is concerned, they're predicting that Brent is going to go down to $56 per barrel. They're talking about more supply coming into the market with non-OPEC members that have new production coming on, like US shale, like Brazil, also Norway, as well. So that really limits the amount of more output hikes that OPEC Plus could do without creating a surplus, Josh. And Ines, we also saw some headlines about India's oil purchases from Russia. What can you tell us about that? Yeah. So, well, President Trump has really been pressuring India to stop purchasing oil from Russia. Essentially, basically saying that they are funding Russia, Russia's initiatives in Ukraine, in the war in Ukraine. So, Trump saying that he will substantially increase tariffs on India. But Indian Prime Minister Modi has said they're going to continue buying Russian oil. He also said that Indians should purchase domestic products. I will say that what Wall Street is looking at is if Russian production were to somehow be compromised, or if that would be decreased, then you would see an upside risk to oil prices. In this case, India is kind of stuck in this sort of push that Trump has been doing in order to end the war in Ukraine, and him using tariffs and pointing to oil purchases because India has been a big buyer of Russian oil since the war in Ukraine started. All right. Thank you, Ines. Appreciate it.