logo
The investment chief at $10 trillion giant Vanguard says it's time to pivot away from U.S. stocks

The investment chief at $10 trillion giant Vanguard says it's time to pivot away from U.S. stocks

Yahoo24-07-2025
Greg Davis visited Fortune this month dressed like a Wall Street titan—and bearing a very un-Wall-Street message about a tepid future for U.S. stocks.On July 11, Davis––the president and chief investment officer of Vanguard Group––came to our offices in Manhattan's Financial District for a chat with this reporter. Though Davis works from Vanguard's mother ship (its buildings are all named for British vessels from the Napoleonic wars) in the tiny hamlet of Malvern, Pa., west of Philadelphia, he arrived attired in a tailored gray suit and purple silk tie combo that would have fit right in with the most formal of the investment banking cadre and portfolio managers headquartered nearby.Yet Davis's message couldn't have been more contrary to the fashionable view among the neighborhood's rosy prognosticators.
The 25-year Vanguard veteran's outlook contradicts the prevailing position advanced by the big banks, research firms, and TV pundits that despite serial years of big gains, U.S. stocks remain a great buy. That bull case rests mainly on optimism that the Big Beautiful Bill's deregulatory agenda and tax cuts will spur the economy, and that the AI revolution promises a new world of efficiencies that will shift earnings to super-fast track going forward. The powerful momentum that has driven the Nasdaq and S&P 500 to all time highs this week bolster their argument for more to come.
Davis follows the Vanguard mindset that, arguably more than any other, revolutionized the investing world over the past half-century. The company's founder, John Bogle, created the first index funds for ordinary investors in 1975, following the conviction that funds choosing individual stocks regularly fail to beat their benchmarks after fees, and that a pallet of diversified index funds, and later ETFs, that hold expenses to an absolute minimum, provide the best platform for achieving superior gains over the long-term.
The top testament to the enduring validity of the Vanguard model: Over 80% of its ETFs and indexed mutual fund beat their peer-group averages over the past 10 years, measured by LSEG Lipper, largely courtesy of those super-tight expense ratios. The Vanguard model's won such overwhelming favor that it now manages 28% of the combined U.S. mutual fund and ETF universe, and it's gained 7 points in market share in the past decade. At $10 trillion in AUM, it ranks second only to BlackRock among all U.S. asset managers.
Besides offering over 400 super-low-cost funds worldwide, Vanguard also provides investment advice as a firm, and through its army of financial advisers. A big part of the Vanguard formula: Periodically rebalancing from securities that get extremely pricey by historical standards into areas that are undervalued versus their norms. In our discussion, Davis provided a master class on how the dollars in profits you're getting for each $100 you're paying for a stock influences future returns, and why now is such a crucial time to shift from what's highly, even dangerously expensive into safe areas that look like screaming buys.
Put simply, Davis argues that U.S. equities are a victim of their own success. For Davis, the fabulous ride in recent years virtually guarantees that future returns will prove extremely disappointing versus outsized, double-digit gains investors have gotten used to, and that the investment pros predict will persist. The reason is simple: U.S. stocks have simply gotten so costly that their forward progress is destined to radically slow. 'Our investment strategy group's projection is that U.S. equity market returns are going to be much more muted in the future,' Davis warns. 'Over the past ten years, the S&P returned an average of 12.4% annually. We're predicting the figure to drop to between 3.8% and 5.8% (midpoint of 4.8%) over the next decade.'
The basic market math, he contends, points to that outcome. Davis notes that the official price-to-earnings multiple on the S&P now stands at an extremely lofty 29.3. And when Vanguard uses a preferred gauge based on Nobel Prize-winning economist Robert Shiller's Cyclically Adjusted Price-to-Earnings multiple, or CAPE––a measure that adjusts the PE by normalizing for spikes and valleys in earnings––it concludes that US stocks hover 49% over the top end of the group's fair value range.
Davis also points out that corporate profits are now extremely high by historical levels, and hence won't grow nearly as fast from here as their jackrabbit pace of recent years. In other words, don't count on an EPS explosion to solve the valuation problem. In fact, this reporter notes that contrary to what we're constantly hearing about forthcoming double-digit increases in profits, the sprint has already slowed to a stroll. From Q4 of 2021 to Q1 of this year, S&P 500 EPS grew from $198 to $217, or 9.6% in over three years, a puny pace that doesn't even match inflation.
Huge gains have knocked portfolios out of balance
Davis explained how the longstanding bull market has wildly distorted the standard '60-40' portfolio. That classic construction of 60% stocks and 40% bonds has worked well in many periods, he notes. But today, folks who started at 60-40 a decade ago, and didn't rebalance into bonds as equity prices swelled year after year, are now banking far too heavily on those richly-valued U.S. equities. 'In the past 10 years, interest rates have mainly been very low, so bonds returned only around 2% a year, or 10% less than stocks,' declares Davis. 'So the stock portion kept compounding at a high rate and getting bigger, and the bond portion kept shrinking as a share of the total. As a result, what started as a 60-40 mix is now 80-20 in favor of stocks.'
To make matters worse, says Davis, 'U.S. stocks outperformed international equities by 6 percentage points a year in the past decade. So 10 years ago, if you started with the standard split 70% U.S. and 30% foreign, you'd now be at 80% U.S. and 20% foreign.' Hence, sans rebalancing, an investor's overall share of U.S. stocks would have gone from 42% to around two-thirds, a gigantic leap.
Those weightings, he says, are lopsided in the wrong direction, in two ways—by holding far too big a percentage of stocks and not enough bonds, and within the equity portion, not owning enough foreign shares. 'If you look at the bond market today and the way yields have risen, we're projecting that you're going to pick up very similar returns in a mix of U.S. and foreign bonds as you'll get in U.S. equities, or also 4% to 5%. So the expectations are comparable, but you'll have much less volatility on the bond side,' avows Davis, adding, 'What's the big advantage to betting on risky stocks when you can get 4.3% on three-month Treasuries?'
Hence, Davis makes a daring recommendation: Investors should reverse the classic blend and go with 60% bonds and 40% stocks. For the fixed income portion, he notes, Vanguard's Total World Bond ETF (BNDW) offers a blend of domestic and international fixed income, encompassing government bonds, corporates, agencies, mortgages, and asset backed securities.
In addition, Vanguard projects that foreign shares over the next ten years will generate average returns of 7%, waxing the 5% or so for U.S. equities. Hence, Davis recommends that in the 40% dedicated to stocks, investors lean heavily to the international side by splitting the allocation evenly, or 20% and 20%, between stateside and international stocks. The Vanguard FTSE All World ex US ETF (VEU) would fit the slot reserved for the international allotment.
In summary, Davis is advising a radical rebalancing for folks who let their U.S. stocks swallow a bigger and bigger part of their portfolios as bonds and international shares underperformed year after year. So here's are allocations he'd recommend for the decade ahead: 60% fixed income, 20% international equities, and—gulp—just 20% in U.S. stocks. Once again, that number compares to the around two-thirds you'd hold in U.S. equities if you'd started at 60-40 ten years ago and just let your gains on U.S. stocks rip without any rebalancing.
I ran some numbers on the returns you'd garner in the two scenarios: First, if you don't rejigger and keep holding two-thirds of your portfolio in U.S. stocks, and second, if you do what Davis advocates and put 60% in bonds, and park more of the equity share abroad. In both cases, the projected future return is just over 5% yearly. No big difference in returns over the next decade.
So why choose the Davis formula? The edge in making the big shift: The path will be much smoother, predictable, and less nerve-rattling that sticking with a huge over-weighting in U.S. stocks. Of course, Davis recommends rebalancing gradually, and funding as much of it as possible with fresh savings and reinvestment of dividends and high interest payments from fixed income assets.
Davis is no fan of cryptocurrencies
Davis isn't recommending crypto investing as a means of boosting your returns at a time when U.S. stocks won't come close to matching their past performance. 'I got into this business around the time of the dot.com era,' he told me. 'Anything with a dot.com behind it went to the moon. Some were actually really good businesses, however the majority were not. Good things can come out of crypto like blockchain, and that technology can reduce costs in the financial sector and improve speed, so we think there are some good fundamental components to it. But to us investing in Bitcoin is speculation.'
For Davis, Bitcoin offers none of the advantages of traditional investments that generate interest payments, or earnings that feed capital gains and dividends. 'It's not investing in a cash flow generating business, it's not investing in bonds where you have a commitment to getting a coupon payment every six months, then principal at maturity,' he explains. 'It's basically looking to sell to someone willing to pay more than you did. And the whole idea that a limited supply of Bitcoin will drive up its value is questionable when you consider that there's an unlimited supply of new types of crypto that could be created. So I personally don't get it. Vanguard won't launch a Bitcoin fund. We just don't see it as a core part of an investment portfolio.'
Davis grew up on an Army base near Nuremberg, Germany, the child of a father in an Airborne division and a German mother. As a kid, he mainly spoke German, including with his grandmother, and didn't live in the U.S. until age 7. 'When I go to Germany and speak the language, people can tell I've kept the Bavarian dialect,' he declares. He started at Penn State pursuing aeronautical engineering, but lack of skill in mechanical drawing forced him to switch—to a major in insurance. 'Penn State was one of the few schools that offered that unusual major,' he says. Davis went on to get an MBA at Wharton, and after a brief stint in a Merrill Lynch training program, got an offer from Vanguard that would require a move from Wall Street to the sleepy suburbs of Philly.
Davis took the job in part because Vanguard was then a fast-growing shop, where he figured his chances of advancement would be better than at a huge bank or brokerage. He was especially attracted to Vanguard's highly unusual 'cooperative' model, where the funds––meaning the investors––are the shareholders. 'So because we have economies of scale where over time our revenues grow faster than expenses, we can rebate that money back to investors by lowering fees,' he says. Davis proudly notes that Vanguard has made 2,000 such reductions in its history, and especially that in February it announced the biggest decrease ever—a cut of $350 million across 68 mutual funds and ETFs in equities and fixed income.
Vanguard's whole approach where the objective is to constantly lower fees is highly un-Wall Street. So is Davis's contrarian counsel to follow what the valuations and history tells us, to shift from stocks that are extremely expensive and whose prices can't grow to the sky, despite what the bulls are saying. It's a sobering, cautionary tale. But it's one that makes eminent sense.
This story was originally featured on Fortune.com
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Tandem Diabetes (NASDAQ:TNDM) Exceeds Q2 Expectations But Stock Drops 17%
Tandem Diabetes (NASDAQ:TNDM) Exceeds Q2 Expectations But Stock Drops 17%

Yahoo

time23 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Tandem Diabetes (NASDAQ:TNDM) Exceeds Q2 Expectations But Stock Drops 17%

Diabetes technology company Tandem Diabetes Care (NASDAQ:TNDM) reported Q2 CY2025 results topping the market's revenue expectations , with sales up 8.5% year on year to $240.7 million. The company expects the full year's revenue to be around $1 billion, close to analysts' estimates. Its GAAP loss of $0.78 per share was significantly below analysts' consensus estimates. Is now the time to buy Tandem Diabetes? Find out in our full research report. Tandem Diabetes (TNDM) Q2 CY2025 Highlights: Revenue: $240.7 million vs analyst estimates of $237.1 million (8.5% year-on-year growth, 1.5% beat) EPS (GAAP): -$0.78 vs analyst estimates of -$0.39 (significant miss) Adjusted EBITDA: -$1.85 million vs analyst estimates of $2.34 million (-0.8% margin, significant miss) The company reconfirmed its revenue guidance for the full year of $1 billion at the midpoint Operating Margin: -21.5%, down from -13.9% in the same quarter last year Sales Volumes rose 5% year on year, in line with the same quarter last year Market Capitalization: $1.01 billion Company Overview With technology that automatically adjusts insulin delivery based on continuous glucose monitoring data, Tandem Diabetes Care (NASDAQ:TNDM) develops and manufactures automated insulin delivery systems that help people with diabetes manage their blood glucose levels. Revenue Growth Examining a company's long-term performance can provide clues about its quality. Any business can have short-term success, but a top-tier one grows for years. Over the last five years, Tandem Diabetes grew its sales at an impressive 19.5% compounded annual growth rate. Its growth beat the average healthcare company and shows its offerings resonate with customers. We at StockStory place the most emphasis on long-term growth, but within healthcare, a half-decade historical view may miss recent innovations or disruptive industry trends. Tandem Diabetes's annualized revenue growth of 12.4% over the last two years is below its five-year trend, but we still think the results suggest healthy demand. Tandem Diabetes also reports its number of pump shipments, which reached 21,000 in the latest quarter. Over the last two years, Tandem Diabetes's pump shipments averaged 2.9% year-on-year growth. Because this number is lower than its revenue growth, we can see the company benefited from price increases. This quarter, Tandem Diabetes reported year-on-year revenue growth of 8.5%, and its $240.7 million of revenue exceeded Wall Street's estimates by 1.5%. Looking ahead, sell-side analysts expect revenue to grow 4.8% over the next 12 months, a deceleration versus the last two years. This projection is underwhelming and suggests its products and services will see some demand headwinds. Unless you've been living under a rock, it should be obvious by now that generative AI is going to have a huge impact on how large corporations do business. While Nvidia and AMD are trading close to all-time highs, we prefer a lesser-known (but still profitable) stock benefiting from the rise of AI. Click here to access our free report one of our favorites growth stories. Adjusted Operating Margin Adjusted operating margin is one of the best measures of profitability because it tells us how much money a company takes home after subtracting all core expenses, like marketing and R&D. It also removes various one-time costs to paint a better picture of normalized profits. Tandem Diabetes's high expenses have contributed to an average adjusted operating margin of negative 7.9% over the last five years. Unprofitable healthcare companies require extra attention because they could get caught swimming naked when the tide goes out. It's hard to trust that the business can endure a full cycle. Analyzing the trend in its profitability, Tandem Diabetes's adjusted operating margin decreased by 15.6 percentage points over the last five years. The company's two-year trajectory also shows it failed to get its profitability back to the peak as its margin fell by 1.6 percentage points. This performance was poor no matter how you look at it - it shows its expenses were rising and it couldn't pass those costs onto its customers. Tandem Diabetes's adjusted operating margin was negative 13.2% this quarter. Earnings Per Share Revenue trends explain a company's historical growth, but the long-term change in earnings per share (EPS) points to the profitability of that growth – for example, a company could inflate its sales through excessive spending on advertising and promotions. Tandem Diabetes's earnings losses deepened over the last five years as its EPS dropped 34.2% annually. We tend to steer our readers away from companies with falling EPS, where diminishing earnings could imply changing secular trends and preferences. If the tide turns unexpectedly, Tandem Diabetes's low margin of safety could leave its stock price susceptible to large downswings. In Q2, Tandem Diabetes reported EPS at negative $0.78, down from negative $0.47 in the same quarter last year. This print missed analysts' estimates. Over the next 12 months, Wall Street expects Tandem Diabetes to improve its earnings losses. Analysts forecast its full-year EPS of negative $3.09 will advance to negative $1.00. Key Takeaways from Tandem Diabetes's Q2 Results It was encouraging to see Tandem Diabetes beat analysts' revenue expectations this quarter. On the other hand, its EPS missed and its sales volume fell short of Wall Street's estimates. Overall, this was a softer quarter. The stock traded down 17% to $12 immediately after reporting. Tandem Diabetes may have had a tough quarter, but does that actually create an opportunity to invest right now? If you're making that decision, you should consider the bigger picture of valuation, business qualities, as well as the latest earnings. We cover that in our actionable full research report which you can read here, it's free. Inicia sesión para acceder a tu cartera de valores

Mckesson lifts annual profit forecast on robust demand for specialty drugs
Mckesson lifts annual profit forecast on robust demand for specialty drugs

Yahoo

time23 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Mckesson lifts annual profit forecast on robust demand for specialty drugs

(Reuters) -U.S. drug distributor McKesson raised its annual profit forecast and beat Wall Street earnings estimates on Wednesday, banking on robust demand for specialty medicines. High profit margins for specialty medicines, which treat complex conditions such as rheumatoid arthritis and cancer, have encouraged companies to expand in the market. Texas-headquartered Mckesson expects per-share profit in the range of $37.10 to $37.90 for fiscal 2026, compared to its previous expectation of $36.90 to $37.70. Analysts on average expect a profit of $37.41 per share, according to data compiled by LSEG. Earlier in the day, peer Cencora also raised its annual profit forecast and posted quarterly earnings that topped Wall Street estimates. Mckesson reported first-quarter revenue of $97.83 billion, beating analysts' average estimate of $96.08 billion. The company said it benefited from increased prescription volumes from retail national account customers, growth in the distribution of specialty products and contributions from acquisitions. On an adjusted basis, McKesson earned $8.26 per share, compared with estimates of $8.15. The drug distributor's U.S. pharmaceutical unit — its largest segment by revenue — recorded sales of $89.95 billion. That was 25% higher than the year earlier and beat analysts' estimate of $89.52 billion. Last quarter, Mckesson said it would spin off its medical-surgical solutions unit into an independent company to focus on its core drug distribution business. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Exact Sciences (NASDAQ:EXAS) Reports Strong Q2 But Stock Drops 15.2%
Exact Sciences (NASDAQ:EXAS) Reports Strong Q2 But Stock Drops 15.2%

Yahoo

time23 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Exact Sciences (NASDAQ:EXAS) Reports Strong Q2 But Stock Drops 15.2%

Diagnostic company Exact Sciences Corporation (NASDAQ:EXAS) reported Q2 CY2025 results exceeding the market's revenue expectations , with sales up 16% year on year to $811.1 million. The company's full-year revenue guidance of $3.15 billion at the midpoint came in 1.7% above analysts' estimates. Its non-GAAP profit of $0.22 per share was significantly above analysts' consensus estimates. Is now the time to buy Exact Sciences? Find out in our full research report. Exact Sciences (EXAS) Q2 CY2025 Highlights: Exact Sciences will pay $75 million in cash (plus up to $700 million in additional payments) to secure the rights to Freenome's blood-based screening tools for colorectal cancer. Exact will also pay royalties up to 10% and $20 million annually for the next three years in joint R&D costs Revenue: $811.1 million vs analyst estimates of $773.1 million (16% year-on-year growth, 4.9% beat) Adjusted EPS: $0.22 vs analyst estimates of $0.05 (significant beat) Adjusted EBITDA: $138.2 million vs analyst estimates of $108.7 million (17% margin, 27.2% beat) The company lifted its revenue guidance for the full year to $3.15 billion at the midpoint from $3.10 billion, a 1.8% increase EBITDA guidance for the full year is $465 million at the midpoint, above analyst estimates of $437.4 million Operating Margin: -0.3%, up from -3.8% in the same quarter last year Free Cash Flow Margin: 5.8%, down from 10.2% in the same quarter last year Constant Currency Revenue rose 16% year on year (12.4% in the same quarter last year) Market Capitalization: $8.93 billion 'The Exact Sciences team continues to build momentum, advancing our mission through earlier detection,' said Kevin Conroy, chairman and CEO. Company Overview With a mission to detect cancer earlier when it's more treatable, Exact Sciences (NASDAQ:EXAS) develops and markets cancer screening and diagnostic tests, including its flagship Cologuard stool-based colorectal cancer screening test. Revenue Growth A company's long-term performance is an indicator of its overall quality. Even a bad business can shine for one or two quarters, but a top-tier one grows for years. Thankfully, Exact Sciences's 21.1% annualized revenue growth over the last five years was excellent. Its growth beat the average healthcare company and shows its offerings resonate with customers. We at StockStory place the most emphasis on long-term growth, but within healthcare, a half-decade historical view may miss recent innovations or disruptive industry trends. Exact Sciences's annualized revenue growth of 13% over the last two years is below its five-year trend, but we still think the results suggest healthy demand. We can better understand the company's sales dynamics by analyzing its constant currency revenue, which excludes currency movements that are outside their control and not indicative of demand. Over the last two years, its constant currency sales averaged 13.3% year-on-year growth. Because this number aligns with its normal revenue growth, we can see that Exact Sciences has properly hedged its foreign currency exposure. This quarter, Exact Sciences reported year-on-year revenue growth of 16%, and its $811.1 million of revenue exceeded Wall Street's estimates by 4.9%. Looking ahead, sell-side analysts expect revenue to grow 11.8% over the next 12 months, similar to its two-year rate. Despite the slowdown, this projection is noteworthy and indicates the market is forecasting success for its products and services. Unless you've been living under a rock, it should be obvious by now that generative AI is going to have a huge impact on how large corporations do business. While Nvidia and AMD are trading close to all-time highs, we prefer a lesser-known (but still profitable) stock benefiting from the rise of AI. Click here to access our free report one of our favorites growth stories. Operating Margin Operating margin is an important measure of profitability as it shows the portion of revenue left after accounting for all core expenses – everything from the cost of goods sold to advertising and wages. It's also useful for comparing profitability across companies with different levels of debt and tax rates because it excludes interest and taxes. Although Exact Sciences broke even this quarter from an operational perspective, it's generally struggled over a longer time period. Its expensive cost structure has contributed to an average operating margin of negative 29.8% over the last five years. Unprofitable healthcare companies require extra attention because they could get caught swimming naked when the tide goes out. It's hard to trust that the business can endure a full cycle. On the plus side, Exact Sciences's operating margin rose by 29.2 percentage points over the last five years, as its sales growth gave it operating leverage. Zooming into its more recent performance, however, we can see the company's margin has decreased by 16.6 percentage points on a two-year basis. If Exact Sciences wants to pass our bar, it must prove it can expand its profitability consistently. Exact Sciences's operating margin was negative 0.3% this quarter. Earnings Per Share Revenue trends explain a company's historical growth, but the long-term change in earnings per share (EPS) points to the profitability of that growth – for example, a company could inflate its sales through excessive spending on advertising and promotions. Although Exact Sciences's full-year earnings are still negative, it reduced its losses and improved its EPS by 33.1% annually over the last five years. The next few quarters will be critical for assessing its long-term profitability. In Q2, Exact Sciences reported adjusted EPS at $0.22, up from negative $0.06 in the same quarter last year. This print easily cleared analysts' estimates, and shareholders should be content with the results. Over the next 12 months, Wall Street is optimistic. Analysts forecast Exact Sciences's full-year EPS of negative $0.33 will flip to positive $0.73. Key Takeaways from Exact Sciences's Q2 Results Exact Sciences will pay $75 million in cash and make up to $700 million in additional payments to secure the rights to Freenome's current and future blood-based screening tools for colorectal cancer. Exact will also pay sales royalties up to 10% and $20 million annually for the next three years in joint research and development costs. So do we think Exact Sciences is an attractive buy at the current price? The latest quarter does matter, but not nearly as much as longer-term fundamentals and valuation, when deciding if the stock is a buy. We cover that in our actionable full research report which you can read here, it's free. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store