Pareto's law says that roughly the top 20% of the market constituents should roughly represent 80% roughly of the overall market cap, and vice versa: the bottom 80% of constituents will represent 20% of the overall market cap.
When price seems irrational, and higher cap stocks start to represent more of the market than previous decades, and thus are given a higher weight in the major indices, it can be very useful to look at a large portion of the bottom 80% to get a more rational prospect of market value.
Russell 2000 represents many small and mid cap stocks, which are mostly given low weights in large portfolios and indices, compared to larger cap stocks such as TSLA or the FAANG stocks.
We get an interesting peek at the overall market value if we look at these companies in the median of the market, in addition to accounting for money supply expansion.
We can see that if we account for inflation, the relativity of the money supply in relation to the Russell 2000 has always topped out at about where it is now, in the past 20 years.
The price seems to be disconnected from value at the moment, off by a factor of 2 or 3. For the larger caps that are not included in this index, this overpriced factor is probably larger, maybe 5 or 10, given the current conditions of an irrationally large-cap dominated market.
Let me know what you think.
Do you think the dip of 1200 in 2020 was a valid retest?
Or was it just forced participation, coercion by the FED?
Do you think that, given such coercion, we're in for a further lower retest when said coercion becomes less effective?
Cheers
When price seems irrational, and higher cap stocks start to represent more of the market than previous decades, and thus are given a higher weight in the major indices, it can be very useful to look at a large portion of the bottom 80% to get a more rational prospect of market value.
Russell 2000 represents many small and mid cap stocks, which are mostly given low weights in large portfolios and indices, compared to larger cap stocks such as TSLA or the FAANG stocks.
We get an interesting peek at the overall market value if we look at these companies in the median of the market, in addition to accounting for money supply expansion.
We can see that if we account for inflation, the relativity of the money supply in relation to the Russell 2000 has always topped out at about where it is now, in the past 20 years.
The price seems to be disconnected from value at the moment, off by a factor of 2 or 3. For the larger caps that are not included in this index, this overpriced factor is probably larger, maybe 5 or 10, given the current conditions of an irrationally large-cap dominated market.
Let me know what you think.
Do you think the dip of 1200 in 2020 was a valid retest?
Or was it just forced participation, coercion by the FED?
Do you think that, given such coercion, we're in for a further lower retest when said coercion becomes less effective?
Cheers
Comment:
Note that we divide by the money supply because, in an inflationary scenario, the inflation reaches assets first, then goods, then wages. So we divide by the money supply as if it was already priced in (because it is, we're apes).