Demographics and stock prices

<p><a href=“http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/[/url]”>http://www.calculatedriskblog.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p><a href=“http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economics/letter/2011/el2011-26.html[/url]”>http://www.frbsf.org/publications/economics/letter/2011/el2011-26.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>“From the San Francisco Fed: Boomer Retirement: Headwinds for U.S. Equity Markets?
This Economic Letter examines the extent to which the aging of the U.S. population creates headwinds for the stock market. We review statistical evidence concerning the historical relationship between U.S. demographics and equity values, and examine the implications of these demographic trends for the future path of equity values.

[E]vidence suggests that U.S. equity values are closely related to the age distribution of the population. Since demographic trends are largely predictable, we can forecast the path that the P/E ratio is likely to follow in the next few decades based on the predicted M/O ratio.

What does the model say about the future trajectory of the P/E ratio? … To obtain this future P/E* path, we calculate the projected M/O ratio from 2011 to 2030 by feeding Census Bureau projected population data into the estimated model. Figure 2 shows that P/E* should decline persistently from about 15 in 2010 to about 8.4 in 2025, before recovering to 9.14 in 2030.
There are two diagrams in the economic letter. This is probably another reason many boomers will never retire.”</p>

<p>I suppose a demographically-adjusted stock market study might be useful to an academic projecting long-term (i.e., multi-decade) trends. Even those results would be most applicable to Buy-and-Hold investors. But the reality is that the well-managed company (John) Deere Inc was $100/share three years ago, down to $22/share two years ago, up to $100/share earlier this year, and is now under $70/share this year. It’s a pretty lazy investor that can’t make money in this environment … and Baby Boomers aren’t renowned for sloth. JMHO of course. YMMV.</p>

<p>I guess I am lazy. ;)</p>

<p>The bigger question, [ in my mind anyway] is what % of US stocks are currently owned by what % of the population? Given that recent studies have shown that 5% of the population owns 85%[ or so] of the wealth in this country, which I’m assuming includes equities, I don’t see that they will have to sell much of their holdings in order to retire. So I don’t see a strong headwind in the near future. Just my 2 cents anyway.</p>

<p>I think it is the mutual funds that are the major investors.</p>

<p>Mutual funds are but a pathway for others- individuals, pension funds, etc, etc, to buy BUNDLES of stocks-they are not the OWNERS or INVESTORS of those accounts.</p>

<p>Go to yahoo or google or msnbc finance page and look up a stock - each one has the major shareholders.</p>

<p>yes but the shares in the Mutual funds are OWNED by investors.
I, as an investor, can directly buy individual stocks, OR I can buy shares of groups of stocks [ i.e mutual funds] that are actively managed by others.<br>
Either way, I am still the owner of the shares of those individual stocks OR shares of mutual funds bought with my $$. get it??</p>

<p>Let’s see, today’s Dow volume was 225 million shares. If evenly spread across all 30 stocks in the Dow, that’s about 10 trillion dollars. One day. Dow stocks only.</p>

<p>New Hope, 75% of those millions of trades were done by computerized flash trading firms who buy stocks for maybe 1-2 seconds and then resell them for pennies more seconds later X millions of trades=$$$$$$$ worth of profits daily.</p>

<p>Menloparkmom, I kind of like what you wrote about the concentration of stock in ownership</p>

<p>in a small segment of the population and they won’t have to sell stocks.</p>

<p>I guess that could happen. I don’t think so but it could happen that way.</p>

<p>I’m hearing that some people are selling their stocks now to live. They need the money and they can’t take out home equity loans anymore.</p>

<p>dstark, some people are selling their stocks now to pay tuition. :)</p>

<p>:)…</p>

<p>…so we have retirees and near retirees spooked by the recent market swings and political turmoil moving their funds out of stocks and into “safety” bonds, and we have parents of the current and future college kids cashing out their 529 plans. Not good for the “P” part.</p>

<p>We’re going to need better information in order to draw a firm conclusion. What equities are owned by which boomers? What are their plans to sell? What circumstances would alter their plans to sell?</p>

<p>Here’s what we know demographically. Markets are international. There are 5,000 million persons world wide. There are 72 million baby boomers, with retirement dates spread out over approximately twenty years.</p>

<p>[Prb.org</a> is currently undergoing maintenance](<a href=“http://www.prb.org/Articles/2002/JustHowManyBabyBoomersAreThere.aspx]Prb.org”>http://www.prb.org/Articles/2002/JustHowManyBabyBoomersAreThere.aspx)</p>

<p>The San Francisco Fed’s Generation Gap
By Fisher Investments Editorial Staff, 08/25/2011 </p>

<p>Wednesday’s news included the release of a new San Francisco Fed study indicating retiring baby boomers may “strip away from equities a key source of support.” On its face, it doesn’t sound especially outrageous—after all, the baby boomers represent a large generation of investors. As they retire, so the theory goes, they’ll liquidate portfolios and ultimately decrease demand for stocks, hurting prices. Intuitive? Maybe not—this analysis is missing some key points.</p>

<p>First, consider the baby boomer generation itself. According to the US Census Bureau, baby boomers are those born between 1946 and 1964, meaning they’ll turn anywhere between 47 and 65 this year. A big range! So some boomers at the spectrum’s older end will likely begin retiring in the next couple years—maybe. Or maybe not—fact is, with life expectancies increasing, folks don’t always fully retire at 65 these days. Some may choose to continue working in some capacity for quite some time. Those at the baby boomer generation’s younger end are even further from retirement—18 years, give or take—and if life expectancies continue to improve as they historically have, they may also choose to work past 65. So the idea they’ll all wake up one day and uniformly decide to liquidate their equity portfolios strains credulity, since they’re not themselves a uniform group.</p>

<p>But even conceding that point momentarily, consider there are many other sources of demand to backfill lost baby boomer investors. For example, the millennial generation—also known as Generation Y or the Echo Boomers—will likely surpass the baby boomers, if it hasn’t already, as the largest age group. Meaning even as boomers retire, the Gen Yers will be entering the stage of life where they’ll likely look to invest—a large chunk likely going into equity markets given their very, very long investing time horizons.</p>

<p>Not only are younger generations a source of demand, but so are increasingly prosperous foreign citizens. America simply isn’t an isolated island, where no foreign money washes up on our shores. And as per-capita GDPs continue to improve in emerging markets and new markets open up, that’s another source of increasing demand long term.</p>

<p>Also, baby boomers currently have quite a bit of wealth tied up in less liquid instruments—like businesses and real estate. As they begin to retire, they may very well liquidate those less liquid assets in order to generate cash flow to live off—but they’ll still have cash proceeds to put somewhere. Presumably, a lot of that ends up in stocks and bonds.</p>

<p>Then too, given their time horizon—which, at 65, could even be a couple decades or more (and that’s for the very oldest boomers)—many of them will still need some degree of growth. For time horizons of 20 years or more (vastly more for most boomers), stocks have historically been a much better bet than other similarly liquid alternatives.</p>

<p>And of course, this is all predicated on the acceptance of demographic shifts as a driver of stock market returns in the first place. Any way you slice it, the baby boomers’ retirement is an ongoing process over the next 20-40 years, not the next 12-24 months. Historically, there have been plenty of demographically based investing theories, both bullish and bearish. But stocks just don’t price in what amount to glacial changes for good or ill—they price in events expected over the next year or two—particularly when those glacial changes likely don’t amount to a wholesale abandonment of equities, as many presume.</p>

<p>*The content contained in this article represents only the opinions and viewpoints of the Fisher Investments editorial staff.</p>

<p>Select Stories by Period August, 2011 July, 2011 June, 2011 May, 2011 April, 2011 March, 2011 February, 2011 January, 2011 December, 2010 November, 2010 October, 2010 September, 2010 August, 2010</p>

<p>Select Stories by Topic Alternative Investments Behavioral Finance Capitalism Commodities Corporate Earnings Currencies Deficits Developed Markets Emerging Markets Finance Theory Forecasting GDP Geopolitics Globalization Inflation Interest Rates Investor Sentiment Market Cycles Market Risks Media Hype/Myths Monetary Policy Others Personal Finance Politics Taxes Trade US Economy </p>

<p>Request Information
Get valuable information to help you manage your portfolio, with our compliments! To download, simply click on a link below and complete the short request form.</p>

<p>Stock Market Outlook
Eight Biggest Mistakes Investors Make…And How to Avoid Them
The 15-minute Retirement Plan</p>