evaluasi gw @saham 2013: GATOT sebagai PERAMAL, tapi LABA TETAP GW RAUP @WARTEG SAHAM gw
… sila baca posting soal IHSG NOVEMBER – DESEMBER 2013: ihsg AKAN TURUN atawa NAEK
… sila baca posting pertama soal PREDIKSI ga ada yang 100% akurat :tetaplah mencintaiku: PREDIKSI ga ada yang 100% akurat
… tetap aja ada yang COBA memprediksikan masa depan persahaman dan perinvestasian berisiko tinggi :
Nov. 6, 2013, 12:03 a.m. EST
Shiller’s hot P/Es powering a ‘Roaring Bull’ till 2017
Commentary: As in 2004, market can keep going higher
By Paul B. Farrell, MarketWatch
SAN LUIS OBISPO, Calif. (MarketWatch) — Pop culture is a leading indicator of market trends and we’re in a new “Katy Perry Bull Market.” “Roar” is her new hit: It’s “No. 1 with a bullet,” like stocks.
Yes, America is “Roaring” in the new “Katy Perry Market.” USA Today loves the “feel-good diva’s” new Prism album. Washington Post: It’s “spiritual.” The Verge: “Katy Perry has a lot of political capital to spend during her second term as popular music’s first lady.” Billboard: she’s “championing optimism.”
Yes, bet on a new bull run, the “Katy Perry Market.” She’s the new bell ringer, driving more than a “Roaring Twenties” sequel. She’s the harbinger leading us into a booming new stock market. Likely three more years, till 2017 and the next president.
But first, a huge wall of worry: The media has turned Nobel economist Robert Shiller’s P/E ratios into a massive panic attack for Wall Street and Main Street. P/E ratios also panicked investors in 2004 during the great bull run of 2002-2008. Still, the Dow nearly doubled from a bottom of 7,286 in late 2002 to 14,164 in October 2008. Déjà vu?
Massive bubble near popping? Or a roaring new stock bull?
Why this massive new panic over P/E ratios? Why is the media flooding investors with fear-mongering “bubble” stories: Forbes sees a “massive bubble.” Bloomberg: “Highly priced.” USA Today blames the Fed. While CBS News dumps jet fuel on the panic: “5 signs the stock market is in a bubble.”
… kata Forbes, Bloomberg, USA Today, Marketwatch, dan CBS News: HATI-HATI SAHAM BAKAL TERKOREKSI TURUN YANG DAHSYAT
And here on MarketWatch headlines warn: “Wall Street is way too bullish.” “Stocks have rarely had it so good — that’s the bad news.” “How bad will new investors get hit?” We’re even “setting up for the biggest stock market bubble of all time.”
… bila saham amrik AMBRUK, maka imbas terbesarnya pada saham CHINA dan ASIA TENGGARA, termasuk INDONESIA
What’s really going on? Why is the panic so powerful that some the most highly respected professionals are predicting the greatest stock-market bubble ever? Why? Because it’s happened before. Will again. Panics are a regular behavioral finance cycle phenomenon.
… baca juga posting gw soal KECEMASAN calon investor yang superkaya: BUANG SAHAM cari PALING AMAN, yaitu TUNAI dan TABUNGAN
So relax. Take a deep breath. Fear and panic does this to the “predictably irrational” human brain, even to stock-market professionals who pride themselves on making logical buy/sell decisions based on normally rational trading systems.
But lately it seems professionals and amateurs alike are experiencing what behavioral-finance experts like Daniel Kahneman, Richard Thaler, Dan Aierly and Terry Odean would call a cognitive bias that’s taken over, controlling and misleading our brains. All investors have cognitive biases that can override and manipulate our rational thought processes.
… teori SIMPANG SIUR KOGNITIF sedang MENGHINGGAPI PARA INVESTOR sehingga MEMPENGARUHI PROSES PIKIR YANG RASIONAL investor
Pessimism is now the market’s worst enemy, a virus in our brain
Back in July my headline read: “Why optimism is your worst investing enemy.” But today it’s just the opposite: Pessimism is now the investor’s worst enemy, distorting the thinking of professional traders, the media and Main Street investors.
Ominous headlines predicting the biggest bubble of all time suggest that fear and panic have indeed taken over the shadow brain of today’s investors (again), blocking our capacity to see the “Katy Perry Market” that’s climbing the wall of worry, “Roaring” ahead with the “eye of the tiger, a fighter dancing through the fire.” Like the fabulous 2002-2008 bull.
Biases are deceptive: Sometimes we’re overconfident, overly optimistic. Sometimes pessimistic, seeing only crashes and bears. Biases are like viruses hiding in a computer. You don’t even know they’re working against you, scrambling your rational mind. Worse, you not only don’t know you’re irrational, you’re convinced more than ever that you are rational. In fact, the brain gets so certain, our biased beliefs become “universal truths.”
… SIMPANG SIUR KEYAKINAN juga MERUSAK EKSPEKTASI PASAR, baik karna TERLALU OPTIMIS mau pun TERLALU PESIMIS
Are Nobel economist Shiller’s high P/E ratios spooking investors?
Today, everybody is panicking over the same thing: Yale’s Robert Shiller’s recent remarks about rising P/E ratios. Why? Go back to 2000 when Shiller became a modern day Nostradamus. Flash forward: today Shiller is not only the brilliant author of “Irrational Exuberance” who predicted the 2000 dot-com crash, he was just won a Nobel Prize, so now his words carry the weight of a papal encyclical.
… EJEKAN PENULIS ARTIKEL ini: pendapat Shiller, sang penerima NOBEL EKONOMI karna pikiran2 ekonomi pasar modalnya, memang AMAT NEGATIF terhadap kondisi bursa saham amrik, dan pendapat ini SEAKAN-AKAN SUDAH MIRIP DENGAN ENSIKLIK PAUS Katolik Roma
But Shiller ‘s recent remarks are also being misinterpreted as predicting the “biggest stock bubble of all time” and a new crash. For example: the Augusta Chronicle recently headlined an Associated Press report: “Nobel Prize winner Robert Shiller gives advice on calculating price-earning ratio: Are stocks too expensive now that the S&P 500 index is trading near a record high?” Now we hang on his every word.
The message: “Stocks are too expensive … near a record high.” The Chronicle says Shiller is “known for pointing out that stock prices were rising much faster than corporate earnings in his book ‘Irrational Exuberance,’ which came out in March 2000.” Then this dark reminder: “The dot-com bubble popped that month,” then the market crashed.
The subliminal psychological message is clear: If the 2000 crash happened just one month after Shiller’s famous prediction, run for cover, lightning will strike twice, another crash is imminent, if not before year-end 2013, certainly in 2014.
The Chronicle ended on an ominous note warning investors: “According to Shiller, the S&P 500 began October with a [P/E] ratio of 24. That’s well above its historic average, yet still well below a peak of 44 in December 1999 and a peak of 33 reached before the crash of 1929.” But still, “stocks are too expensive … near a record high.”
… menurut Shiller: P/E ratio 24 saat ini UDA BUBBLE, sementara tertinggi di bursa amrik : 1999 @44, DAN 1929 @33.
Déjà vu 2004: High P/E ratios spooked us, still stocks nearly doubled
But so what? Is today’s 24 P/E ratio really setting up the “biggest stock market bubble of all time?” Look closely. Back in 2004 investors were also panicking over P/E ratios.
One of our 2004 headlines reported similar fears: “Red-hot P/E ratios signal correction. Irrational exuberance feels like 1999 mania again … Are P/E ratios running too hot … powered by an economic recovery gaining steam … have we too quickly forgotten the lessons of the bear … shouldn’t we be worried the bull’s too bullish?”
Morningstar provided us the P/E ratios for all nine mutual fund sectors. Conclusion: “A correction may be coming as P/E ratios appear to be signaling a renewed overdose of what Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan and Robert Shiller called irrational exuberance.” And by year-end 2003 “P/E ratios were way above the historical average of the past several decades, approaching the stratospheric high-water mark of the late 1990s go-go era.”
Get it? Today’s panic is a repeat of the 2004 panic. Still, while P/E ratios were over 26 in early 2004,
the bubble didn’t pop
. In fact, with tongue-in-cheek, billionaire Ken Fisher dismissed the bears in his Forbes column: “The market is a great humiliator.” A long-time bull, Fisher was openly “taunting big-name bears like Shiller, Gross and Prechter.”
… pada 2003 sudah ada pernyataan yang menganggap 2004 sebagai akhir periode bullish karena P/E Ratio 2003 @26 … ternyata 2004: BULLISH TETAP TERJADI …
Fisher’s own research proved that “P/E’s are a useless myth … there is no linkage of market P/Es to subsequent returns in the market, no matter how you measure the ratio and no matter over how long.” Fisher tracked the data back 125 years.
… P/E Ratio itu MITOS berdasarkan penelitian selama 125 taon
So let’s all drop this bizarre new obsession with Shiller’s P/E ratios: It emerges from deep in some classic cognitive behavioral bias trapped in our rational brains. And it periodically sabotages us, triggering “predictably irrational” stock market panics.
Remember, instead of a popping bubble and a crash,
2004’s high P/E ratios acted like jet fuel
powering a “Roaring” stock market for nearly four more years as the Dow almost doubled from a bottom of 7,286 in late 2002 to a peak of 14,164 on October 2008, marching right past a very similar P/E wall-of-worry panic back in 2004.
… indeks DOW JONES 2002-2008 (melalui 2004) melesat dari bottom 7286 ke puncak tertinggi @14164
Bet on bulls, ‘Roar’ with the ‘Katy Perry Market,’ forget P/E panic
Stocks are on track to do it again
. Remember: The crash predicted by panicked professionals like Shiller and Gross: Did not happen in 2004. Not till 2008. The Dow roared and soared, “dancing through the fire,” gaining another 40%, rising from the 10,250 range in early 2004 to a 14,164 peak in October 2008, driving that long “Roaring” bull market for six years from 2002 to 2008. Don’t miss the new one.
Ask yourself: Is there a panicky little cognitive bias trapped in your brain, warning you that Shiller’s P/E ratios are “setting up for the biggest stock market bubble of all time?”
Don’t listen. Instead, turn up the stereo. Listen to the beat. Tap your feet. Get in sync with the “Roar” of the new Katy Perry stock market! You’ll love it!
MARKETWATCH, anak usaha wall street journal amrik, menurunkan tulisan yang MENGKRITIK PREDIKSI YANG TIDAK AKURAT dari ANALIS PROFESIONAL TERNAMA, termasuk DEUTSCHE BANK amrik:
2. Forecasting doesn’t work
Robert Seawright recently put together a great list of Wall Street’s “best” forecasts for 2013… which all missed the mark by between 16% and 30%.
The “smart money” analysts also have poor track records with individual stocks, too. Case in point: In May, an analyst at Maxim Group who upped his price target on J.C. Penney JCP +4.52% from $16.50 to $27 — right before Penney gave up 50% and currently trades under $9 a share. Deutsche Bank’s forecast was almost as bad, with analysts there increasing their price target to $18 in May.
But hey, at least they only considered JCP a “hold” at the time.
Sure, some forecasters get it right. But nobody gets it right frequently enough to be depended upon — so stop using investment bank research as your primary source for buy or sell calls. It will only end in disappointment.
Feb. 15, 2013, 6:30 a.m. EST
The end of an investing era
Commentary: Individual stocks are so 1990s; funds and ETFs rule now
By Howard Gold
NEW YORK (MarketWatch) — Someone must have sounded an all-clear signal on New Year’s Day because in January, after five years of fasting and penitence in the bond market, investors poured money into U.S. stocks.
But much of that money probably went into stock funds and exchange traded funds, not individual stocks. Though few statistics are available, there are many indications individuals have abandoned individual stocks as their preferred form of equity investing. Remember how people worshipped Cisco Systems (NASDAQ:CSCO) , Qualcomm (NASDAQ:QCOM) , and JDS Uniphase (NASDAQ:JDSU) back in the 1990s?
Now they’re buying target funds, index funds, and their close cousins, ETFs, instead of individual stocks. With one big, bright red exception, which we’ll get to later, individual stock investors may be a dying breed.
Nothing brought that out more starkly than an article last week in The Wall Street Journal, which dealt with the demise of investing clubs, that former pop-culture icon. (Remember the Beardstown ladies?) Read WSJ story (subscription required).
Investment clubs flourished in the era of do-it-yourself investing, when every man and woman was their own stock picker. Who needed professional managers when all the data was right at your fingertips? Especially when friends and neighbors could help each other find winning stock ideas.
Started by Hilary and Galen Weston, owners of upscale retailers Brown Thomas, Holt Renfrew and Selfridges, the private resort community of Windsor in Vero Beach is the anti-PalmBeach.
Well, it didn’t quite work out that way. As The Journal reported, BetterInvesting (formerly the National Association of Investors Corp.) has seen membership at investor clubs plummet from 400,000 at its peak in 1998 to only 39,000. That’s a plunge of 90% and reflects the ravages of a decade that saw two major bear markets. The problem, The Journal wrote: “Stocks aren’t fun anymore; they are scary.”
Especially individual stocks. Yes, anyone who stuck with equity funds through the Lost Decade lived in a world of hurt. But owning the wrong stocks — like, say, Citigroup (NYSE:C) or Akamai Technologies (NASDAQ:AKAM) — was pure torture. And investment clubs that tried to go against the tide were doomed to fail, as many of them did.
Read Gold’s take on why many individual investors are hopeless cases on MoneyShow.com.
The American Association of Individual Investors, another organization that focuses on investor education (of which I am a member), saw a more modest decline in its membership, between 10% to 15% from before the financial crisis. It now has around 150,000 members, president John Bajkowski wrote in an email.
But AAII members have changed their behavior, too.
Surveys of members’ asset allocation show a big drop in how much they put into individual stocks. In March 2000, AAII members had 41% of their portfolios in individual stocks. That hit a decade low of 16.7% in February 2003 and last month rested at 29%.
Stock fund holdings also fell from 41% of members’ portfolios in January 2000 to 32.5% last month. So, they’ve come back a bit more from their lows than individual stock holdings have — and in an organization that emphasizes disciplined stock picking.
Therein lies the problem. Anyone can buy a set-it-and-forget it target-date fund and get decent exposure to equities or put together a reasonably diversified mix of index funds or ETFs and participate nicely in bull markets.
But picking winning individual stocks takes work, time, and skill, a skill which only a small number of even professional managers have — and the vast majority of individuals don’t.
The research on individual stock ownership is voluminous and overwhelmingly damning. Just one example: Brad Barber and Terrance Odean of the University of California showed in a 2011 study that individual stock pickers made every mistake in the book: underperforming index funds; selling winners and keeping losers; not learning from past errors, and holding undiversified stock portfolios. And through it all, they evinced a delusional overconfidence in their own abilities. Read research about the behavior of individual investors.
If individual stock pickers keep letting their emotions get the best of them, there’s a reason for it: People get attached to individual stocks in a way they don’t to, say, the Vanguard Total Market ETF (NAR:VTI) .
Exhibit A, B, C, and D: Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL) , of course.
Last October, USA Today reported nearly 17% of all individual investors owned Apple stock, more than four times the number that owned the Dow Jones Industrial Average. And that one stock comprised 17% — yes, you read that right — of the portfolios of individual Apple shareholders. That’s just nuts. Read USA Today story on whether people own too much Apple stock.
“’I don’t want to diversify that much when I have one stock doing just fine,’” said one Apple shareholder, whom I mercifully won’t name and had 38% of his portfolio in Apple shares.
That’s the problem with falling in love with individual stocks — they don’t love you back when you really need them to.
As I wrote a couple of weeks ago, Apple shares fell more than 37% from their peak, wrecking the portfolios of true believers (who attack anybody who writes a critical word about Apple but conveniently don’t disclose their own stake in the stock).
Read Gold’s analysis of why Apple stock won’t hit $700 again on MoneyShow.com.
Only a very small number of individual investors can invest successfully in individual stocks–and if you have any doubt about it, you’re not one of them. Even then, they should limit individual stock holdings to no more than 10% of their total portfolio.
As for me, I do believe in actively investing with 10% to 20% of my holdings, but I do it mostly with ETFs. I gave up on individual stocks a long time ago. Give me the boredom of an index fund over the drama of an Apple or whatever the latest high flyer is. I’d prefer to get my entertainment elsewhere.