Cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings ratio

It's literally one trade, and it's at valuation levels we haven't seen since the dot-com boom.

Many metrics, the Buffett indicator, the pillar, the Shiller PE indicator, and our own proprietary NASDAQ valuation.

So stock market, you're guaranteed to make 0% over the next 10 years if you put your money in the stock market.

That's what the math tells us.

What's the question I'm asking? Is that a really low number? And relative to at least US market history, 5% to 6% risk premiums are at the higher end of the spectrum, not the lower end.

So for better or worse, when people use the word bubbles with U.S. stocks, and that's why I don't buy into the Shiller-Cape and all those other short-term metrics that people can use, hey, stocks are overvalued because the Cape is 25.

Cape might be 25, but I'm looking at the equity risk, which reflects a risk-free rate in your choices, and it looks

like it's not 1999 to me.

Yeah.

You look at the Buffett indicator, the CAPE ratio, whatever you want to look at, PE ratios in general.

Everybody will say that, although how long can they keep kicking the can down the road is anybody's guess, but nobody would argue that the stock market's not overvalued, right? Ultimately, investing, as is everything in life, comes down to life's most important question that I always talk about on my show is compared to what? Income property doesn't have to be as good as it was It just has to be better than everything else.

And I think it's got that mantle.

I was looking at the study the other day.

Anytime the Shiller Cape ratio is above, I hate to say the wrong data point, I wanna say it's above twenty, twenty-one, twenty-two, the four percent success rate drops to about seventy-five percent.

And our current Cape PE multiple is sitting at about forty, which is the equivalent of the dot-com bubble, meaning the four percent rule currently has a zero percent success rate at current valuation multiples of the market.

So yes, you're right.