
Just how expensive are stocks after all the ups and downs? We check the math.
Following outsize gains in recent years, some analysts entered 2025 concerned that high valuations left share prices especially vulnerable to any hint of trouble in the economy. And so far, stocks have delivered slightly worse returns than bonds this year—even after their recent rebound.
Here is a look at how expensive stocks are currently, and what that might mean for their future performance:
P/E ratios
There are myriad ways to value stocks. The most well-known is the price/earnings ratio.
The most common applications of this metric compare stock prices with a company's past 12 months of corporate earnings, analysts' expectations for its next 12 months of earnings or so-called cyclically adjusted earnings: the average annual earnings of the past 10 years, adjusted for inflation.
When the whole S&P 500 is looked at, all three currently show investors paying a high price for every dollar of earnings compared with what they have paid in the past.
Earnings yield vs. Treasury yield
Wall Street analysts often like to flip the price/earnings ratio upside down, creating an earnings-to-price ratio. Known as the earnings yield, it is expressed as a percentage and sometimes used as a rough guide to the annual return that investors can expect over an extended period.
Investors can then compare stocks' earnings yields with yields on U.S. Treasurys. That offers a sense of how much investors are being compensated to hold riskier investments over ultrasafe government bonds.
Based on real cyclically adjusted earnings, the S&P 500's earnings yield is currently around 2.8%, or 1.4 percentage points above the inflation-adjusted 10-year Treasury yield, according to data from the economist Robert Shiller. That gap, sometimes known as the excess CAPE yield, is well below its historical average, suggesting investors are so eager to buy stocks that they are willing to accept a smaller premium for the risk of losses.
History as a guide
Just because stocks look expensive by these measures doesn't mean they are about to plunge. In periods such as the Roaring '20s and the 1990s tech bubble, frothy markets defied gravity for years.
Still, those rallies eventually ended, leading to years of price declines. There is, as a result, a fairly tight relationship between valuations and what stocks have historically returned over longer periods, such as 10 years.
Measures of relative valuation, like the excess CAPE yield, have been especially good at predicting the relative performance of stocks versus bonds. A smaller excess yield has typically led to a smaller return compared with bonds over the next 10 years; a bigger premium has led to a bigger excess return.
The drawbacks
Aswath Damodaran, a professor at the Stern School of Business at New York University, is widely known on Wall Street as 'the dean of valuation." He says one drawback of a standard S&P 500 earnings yield is that it doesn't account for future earnings growth, effectively treating stocks like bonds with fixed annual payments. He has seen little evidence that valuations can be used to time swings in the market.
Damodaran has devised his own estimate of the risk premium that stocks offer over bonds. His incorporates analysts' expectations for companies' earnings growth. Right now, that calculation suggests that stocks are more reasonably priced than other metrics—although Damodaran says that he uses it as a tool to value individual stocks, rather than a guide to buying or selling the overall index.
Putting them to use
Others are happy to employ valuation metrics in their investment strategies.
As a reasonable guide to future returns, valuations are one tool that investors can use to build portfolios that match their risk tolerance and to make adjustments over time, said Victor Haghani, founder of Elm Wealth. It might make sense for a young person to own 100% stocks, but most people by the middle of their careers want something less volatile, he said.
An investor who put $1 into the S&P 500 some 60 years ago could have outperformed the market by switching completely to 10-year Treasurys when the excess CAPE yield fell to particularly low levels, according to a Wall Street Journal analysis of the data compiled by Shiller.
For example, investing in bonds after any month that the excess CAPE yield averaged less than 1.75%—and stocks otherwise—would have yielded a real annualized return of 6.6%, or 0.5 percentage point more than holding stocks the entire time.
Write to Sam Goldfarb at sam.goldfarb@wsj.com
Hashtags

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


Mint
23 minutes ago
- Mint
Nasdaq tumbles as Jackson Hole jitters hit tech stocks
Magnificent Seven stocks fall Home Depot up after retaining annual forecasts Intel jumps on SoftBank investment Indexes: Dow flat; S&P down 0.59%; Nasdaq down 1.46% (Adds closing percentages, market details) By Johann M Cherian, Sanchayaita Roy and Carolina Mandl The Nasdaq and S&P 500 slid on Tuesday driven by tech stocks, as investors gear up for what Federal Reserve chair Jerome Powell will say about the path of interest rates at a key conference later in the week. The Nasdaq fell as megacaps lost, after having rallied for much of the year. Nvidia fell 3.5%, the biggest drop in nearly four months. The key event this week is the Fed's annual symposium at Jackson Hole, Wyoming, from Aug. 21-23, where Powell's comments will be scrutinized for any clues on the central bank's outlook on the economy and monetary policy. "It seems like folks are hedging a little going into Jackson Hole, thinking Powell might be more hawkish than markets currently appreciate," said James Cox, managing partner at Harris Financial Group. Interest rate futures point to a total of two rate cuts this year worth 25 basis points each, with the first expected in September, according to data compiled by LSEG. Some market participants also expressed some concerns about AI-related stocks after OpenAI's CEO Sam Altman said they are in a bubble in an interview with "The Verge" late last week. The Dow Jones Industrial Average rose 10.45 points, roughly flat, to 44,922.27, the S&P 500 lost 37.78 points, or 0.59%, to 6,411.37 and the Nasdaq Composite lost 314.82 points, or 1.46%, to 21,314.95. Steve Sosnick, chief strategist at Interactive Brokers, said some investors are taking some profits from tech stocks and rotating into other sectors. "(This move) spills into the broader market because of those stocks' weight in major indices," he added. Still, six of the S&P 500 sectors rose. Real estate led the pack, up 1.8%, helped by better-than-expected . On the other hand, technology and communications services lost over 1.9% and 1.2%, respectively. A Reuters poll showed on Tuesday that the S&P 500 will end 2025 just below current near-record levels , at 6,300 points, reflecting tempered optimism amid ongoing concerns over the economic impact of President Donald Trump's global tariffs and uncertainty surrounding Fed rate cuts. The blue-chip Dow briefly hit a record high on Tuesday, aided by a rise in Home Depot's shares after the retailer kept its annual forecasts intact. Home Depot rose 3.17% despite quarterly results estimates, while rival home-improvement chain Lowe's also gained 2.18%. Earnings from Lowe's and big-box retailers Walmart and Target later this week are now in focus as investors await more insight on the health of the American consumer. "Consumers are still not really spending at full speed ahead, they're a little bit cautious," said Peter Cardillo, chief market economist at Spartan Capital Securities. "They're waiting to see the full results of the tariffs' impact on the upcoming holiday sales in a couple of months from now." Intel jumped roughly 7% after the chipmaker got a $2 billion from Japan's SoftBank Group. Palo Alto Networks rose 3.06% after the cybersecurity fiscal 2026 revenue and profit above estimates. Medtronic lost 3.13%, after the company said it would to its board after Elliott Investment Management took a large stake in the medical-device maker. Advancing issues outnumbered decliners by a 1.06-to-1 ratio on the NYSE. There were 205 new highs and 62 new lows on the NYSE. The S&P 500 posted 13 new 52-week highs and one new low while the Nasdaq Composite recorded 56 new highs and 88 new lows. (Reporting by Carolina Mandl, in New York, Johann M Cherian and Sanchayaita Roy in Bengaluru; Additional reporting by Saeed Azhar; Editing by Devika Syamnath and Aurora Ellis)


Hindustan Times
23 minutes ago
- Hindustan Times
Donald Trump imposed ‘sanctions on India' to end war in Ukraine, says White House
White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said that US President Donald Trump took several actions, including the secondary tariffs on India, to bring the war in Ukraine to an end. White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt asserted that Donald Trump wants to move forward and bring the war in Ukraine to an end as quickly as possible.(AFP) This reiteration comes as a top US official said that India made "huge" profits on the sale of Russian oil during and after the war in Ukraine, and Trump said that his sanctions on New Delhi probably played a role in Russian President Vladimir Putin meeting him. Addressing a press briefing, Leavitt said, "The President has put tremendous public pressure to bring this war to a close. He has taken actions as you seen sanctions on India and other actions as well. He has made himself very clear that he wants to see this war and he has rejected the ideas of others that have been raised that we should wait another month before any meetings takes place." She asserted that Donald Trump wants to move forward and bring the war in Ukraine to an end as quickly as possible. Earlier on Tuesday, Trump met Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the White House, with the former signalling his openness to a trilateral meeting with Putin to negotiate an end to the war in Ukraine. Trump said that he had a very successful day, while Zelensky noted that this was the "best conversation" he had with the US President so far. Scott Bessent on India tariffs US treasury secretary Scott Bessent, while speaking to CNBC, argued why China has not yet seen any penalties for buying Russian oil, while the case for India has been otherwise. He said that the treatment is different because India has been "profiteering" and "making billions" from its reselling of the oil. Bessent said India had "less than 1 per cent" of its oil from Russia "and now its up to 42 per cent". He added, "India is just profiteering, they are reselling... They made 16 billion in excess profits, some of the richest families in India." "This is a completely different thing. Indian arbitrage, which is buying cheap oil and reselling it, has just sprung up during the [Ukraine] war. This is just unacceptable," Bessent added. Top US advisor criticises India over Russian oil trade Meanwhile, White House trade advisor Peter Navarro criticised India for purchasing Russian energy and defence equipment, pledging to "hit India where it hurts" to get New Delhi to change its policy. He termed India's oil trade with Russia 'opportunistic' and 'corrosive' to global efforts being made to end the war in Ukraine and isolate the Russian economy. 'As Russia continues to hammer Ukraine, helped by India's financial support, American (and European) taxpayers are then forced to spend tens of billions more to help Ukraine's defence. Meanwhile, India keeps slamming the door on American exports through high tariffs and trade barriers. More than 300,000 soldiers and civilians have been killed, while Nato's eastern flank grows more exposed and the west foots the bill for India's oil laundering,' Navarro wrote in an opinion piece for the Financial Times. Before his meeting with Putin in Alaska last week, Trump had told a Fox News Radio show that his 'penalty' on India prompted the Russian President to meet him, saying that "everything has an impact". The US President said that when he told India about the doubled tariffs, it "essentially took them out of buying oil from Russia". He noted that India is the second largest purchaser of Russian oil and said it was getting pretty close to China, the largest buyer of oil from Russia. Before Trump doubled India's tariff to 50 per cent by imposing an additional 25 per cent levy on the previously announced 25 per cent, he said that India was "fueling the war machine" by buying oil from Russia.


India.com
23 minutes ago
- India.com
Why India Can't Accept China's ‘Zero-Tariff' Offer Despite Its Market Appeal
New Delhi: After U.S. President Donald Trump signalled the possibility of higher tariffs on Indian exports, China renewed its pitch to bring India into a zero-tariff Asian trade market. Extending access to a massive consumer base, the offer has been positioned as a strategic opportunity. Analysts say the proposal, however, could pose a far more significant challenge for India than Trump's tariff threats. India's market is enormous. A population of 1.4 billion, coupled with a growing middle class and strong purchasing power, makes it one of the most attractive markets in the world. Global powers cannot achieve maximum economic leverage in the region without India's participation. In response to the rising pressure from Washington, China has once again invited India to join the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP). Beijing has been lobbying for New Delhi's inclusion in the RCEP since 2019, offering zero tariffs as a key incentive. Still, India has repeatedly declined. It is wary of Beijing's ambitions and the potential risks to its domestic industries. Understanding RCEP The RCEP is a free-trade agreement encompassing 15 countries: 10 ASEAN members and five of their Free Trade Agreement (FTA) partners – China, Japan, South Korea, Australia and New Zealand. The RCEP is the world's largest trade bloc, representing nearly 30 percent of global GDP and covering roughly three billion people. The agreement aims to simplify trade rules, reduce barriers and integrate the markets of its member nations. Signed in November 2020, the RCEP came into effect on January 1, 2022. Its primary goals include lowering or eliminating tariffs, easing non-tariff restrictions and facilitating cross-border investment and commerce. China's Perspective China's state-run Global Times highlighted India's growing vulnerability due to its heavy reliance on the U.S. market, especially in light of Trump's proposed 50 percent tariff increases. The newspaper argued that diversifying toward Asian markets could not only mitigate risks but also provide India with strategic flexibility and greater market opportunities. According to the daily, India must actively explore alternative markets. Asia's expansive economies and untapped potential could provide India with a more stable path for growth. The paper suggested that joining the RCEP would represent a critical step toward restructuring India's trade orientation within the region. The publication also emphasised 'long-term benefits'. Over next 10 to 15 years, it says, RCEP's zero-tariff framework could apply to 90 percent of goods. For India, the daily says, this could act as a protective buffer against the volatility of U.S. trade policies, while opening access to a dynamic and growing market. India's Concerns India has consistently expressed reservations about the RCEP. The government believes the agreement does not adequately reflect India's interests and could have unbalanced outcomes. A primary concern is the potential impact on domestic industries. Cheap imports from China and other Asian nations could flood the Indian market, undermining local manufacturing and making it difficult for Indian products to compete. China's production efficiency exacerbates this risk. India had proposed mechanisms to limit imports of certain goods exceeding set thresholds, but negotiations failed to yield consensus. India also faces a significant trade deficit with China, which reached $99.2 billion in the 2024-25 fiscal year. Joining the RCEP without safeguards could worsen this imbalance. For China, India's inclusion is both an economic and geopolitical priority, supporting regional dominance and the Belt and Road Initiative. India continues to prioritise national interests, self-reliance and strategic autonomy. The government aims to maintain control over supply chains and assert a strong position in any scenario that may challenge its trade or geopolitical stance vis-à-vis China.