Goldman Sachs says this tech stock rally is grounded in reality
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/goldman-sachs-says-this-tech-stock-rally-is-grounded-in-reality-9ee03ea6
David Kostin, in a note to clients, says companies that have an enterprise value-to-sales ratio of at least 10 account for 24% of the total U.S. stock market cap, versus 28% in 2021 and 35% in the late 90s tech bubble.
...
Kostin notes the number of stocks with those elevated valuation ratios has declined very sharply. “Unlike the broad-based ‘growth at any cost’ in 2021, investors are mostly paying high valuations for the largest growth stocks in the index. This dynamic more closely resembles the Tech Bubble than 2021. However, in contrast with the late ’90s, we believe the valuation of the Magnificent 7 is currently supported by their fundamentals

(he also says the cost of capital is lower now, which is good for stocks)
... that said, my reading is that they're essentially saying "this time is different" -- which often are the 4 most dangerous words in investing & finance. And this being a prognostication by Goldman, my continuing reaction is to 'fade' such advice if I want to preserve capital and/or make money for ME.
My own sense? There's a bullish euphoria starting to build in the markets/financialp0rn punditry -- FOMO is keeping stocks elevated these days and my sense* is that this run doesn't go on too much longer before consolidation. IMO, the only thing that will goose stocks significantly higher is if/when rates come down and the purported trillions in cash and cash-like assets move back into equities. But Valuation? WCoC? Not going to do it by itself.
* somewhat more accurate than a 'Magic Eight Ball'

@WABAC: we both hold XMHQ. I was surprised to find SMCI as its top holding. Surprised because the same stock is the top holding of two of my go-go growth funds. Haircuts ensued last Friday.

I read that SMCI is moving to the 500. I guess we'll stumble along somehow.

I hold jqua plus Fido 5% mm funds

Nice fund:
https://morningstar.com/etfs/arcx/jqua/quote

Barron’s BEST FUND FAMILIES. They were evaluated in 5 categories to produce overall weighted scores – US equity, world equity, mixed assets, taxable bonds, muni bonds. Only active funds were considered, but that meant factor- and active- ETFs. Excluded were Janus Henderson, Dodge & Cox, etc, as they didn’t have enough funds within the 5 categories. Some funds from last year were merged into others, so skipped (but Putnam/Franklin Templeton was too recent). Listed here are Annual and 5-yr rankings; see the online/paper issue for 10-yr and category-wise rankings.
ANNUAL Ranking: #1-Putnam, #2-Fidelity, #3-PGIM, #4-Virtus, #5-Touchstone, #6-Nuveen/TIAA, #7-Rowe Price,…, #10-BlackRock,…, #12-Pimco, #13-State Street, #14-Vanguard,…,#17-DFA,…, #26-Morgan Stanley,…, #30-BNY Mellon,…, #32-Franklin Templeton,…, #34-Capital Group/AF,…, #38-Invesco,…, #45-J P Morgan.
5-YEAR: #1-Putnam, #2-Fidelity, #3-Sit, #4-Amundi, #5-Virtus, #6-State Street, #7-DFA, #8-Nuveen/TIAA,…, #10-Pimco,…, #13-PGIM, #14-J P Morgan,…, #17-Vanguard,…, #25-Morgan Stanley, #26-BlackRock, #27-Rowe price,…, #29-BNY Mellon, #30-Capital Group/AF,…, #39-Invesco,…, #43-Franklin Templeton.
LINK1 LINK2

Here is the data from MarketWatch which is more current than Fido. No changes to YTD data. And the data per MW ties to M* - both are as of 03/01/24.
YTD_1_3_5_10
FXAIX_7.97_32.11_11.32_14.78_12.77
GSIHX_11.85_33.70_9.24_13.00_N/A
NEAGX_15.64_43.34_12.25_24.13_14.37
GQGPX_9.27_38.07_1.06_10.18_N/A
So in effect, using more current MW and/or M* data, the relative performance of GQGPX is not any better!
Bottom Line_1: 2023 and 2024 may very well be the go-go years for EMs, or at least for GQGPX!
Bottom Line_2: Which of those funds would you have rather owned for those periods? Was venturing into a DEM worth your additional risk? Here's the biggie - Would you have stuck with GQGPX during its DOWN years?
Bottom Line_3: Was diversifying to a top-performing FLG or SCG fund a better option than diversifying to a top-performing DEM?
Bottom Line_4: It's SO HARD to consistently beat or at least track with the S&P but some funds do it. DEMs generally do not but GQGPX is worth a shot if so inclined to try.

@stillers ..."GQGPX is actually UP 9.36% over 5 years."
According to M*, GQGPX has returned an annualized 10.18% over the last 5 years.

GQGPX is actually UP 9.36% over 5 years.
EDIT_See corrected, more current data below thanks to @PRESSmUp. Thank you!
It lags the S&P in all regularly shown interim periods and was very poor for the past 3 years.
It is currently being fueled by its large stakes in India and Brazil, but also by its ~5% stake in (say what?) Domestic NVDA! Strip NVDA's parabolic TRs out of there and I trust you will have different TRs.
YTD_1_3_5_10
FXAIX_7.97_30.45_11.90_14.75_12.69
GSIHX_11.85_20.58_7.82_11.95_N/A
NEAGX_15.64_28.34_10.39_22.37_13.16
GQGPX_9.27_26.41_0.31_9.36_N/A
EDIT_See corrected, more current data below thanks to @PRESSmUp. Thank you!
If it doesn't consistently beat or at least track with the S&P, and carries and ER of over 1% (1.2%), we are generally NOT interested. FLG GSIHX's ER at 1.14% and SCG NEAGX's at 1.85% are our two exceptions. But we believe their two HIGH ERs are reasonable given their results. (NEAGX is noted here as IMO SCs are a much more attractive play in 2024 than EMs and NEAGX's performance supports that notion.)
Of course Domestic LC and even MC/SC can and do have indirect EM exposure. That's a given. But their respective performances are generally NOT driven by that exposure and are usually nominal to negligible. An investor really doesn't get much EM exposure unless they are holding DEM, Global and/or Foreign funds.
And while many investors may not be aware of their EM exposure, having invested directly in EM stock and bond funds for a coupla years, we keenly are. (FNMIX was a favorite when John Carlson was the PM.) We have some direct EM exposure via GSIHX (mainly India and Brazil) but negligible, if any, in all other funds.
Several years ago on the M* forum, stock and bond EMs were dissected ad nauseum. What I remember most about all that activity was a large group of retired investors, ourselves included, determined that there really is no need for direct EM stock or bond exposure in a retiree portfolio. The reasons: Why bother having to track and attempt to understand EM exposures? Why add that extra level of risk, when the TRs were not worthy of it?
For adventurous and perhaps younger investors (and also for expert market timers-raise your hands), EMs can be a viable playground when the EM cycle is in the UP mode. But the risks are clearly elevated and the DROPS can and usually do shake out weak hands at just the wrong time. The Callan Table that I previously posted is a clear visual of the feast or famine inherent to this category.
YMMV.

I own GQGPX and it's and don't mind it's 10+% Avg return over 5 yrs. Not bad when you consider both the Pandemic and the largest country allocation in EM index is struggling economically! Kept to a 2.5% allocation and part of my Int'l sleeve, it's a good option for those looking for a 'piece' of the action.
FWIW - Int'l MF DODFX typically holds 15-20% in EM
FWIW #2 - Most of the domestic giants in US make a lot of their $$$ from EM economies so you have exposure and may not realize it.

I hold jqua plus Fido 5% mm funds

@larryb - A little late to the party, but I use a combo of SCHD and TDVG, which is the ETF version of PRDGX referenced by Roy above. Large cap breakdown is 13/43/25, so it 's more blend than value. SCHD LC breakdown is 38/31/5. That's worked well for me, although yield for the TRP fund is only 1.19%.

6.4% YTD. Was 50% equity for most of January; currently about 70% equity. Trying to strike while the iron is hot. 76, retired, expenses covered, investing for heirs.

38% stocks, 50% bonds, 12% MM, YTD up 3.83%.

YTD. +7% 70% stocks, 20% bonds and 10% cash. I am 65 and retired.

@PRESSmUP, what is up 2.59 today? Your portfolio?

Well! You done GOOD! Just don't hold your breath, eh? MLP ET was my best performer. But it's just 5% of portfolio, by design. Don't wanna make too-big bets with single stocks. ET +2.32% just today, Friday.

BHB continues to hamper results, but I'd bet it's not their fault. Lots of knock-on effects from elsewhere, and the FED's recalcitrance to reduce interest rates. I see no indication that the bank has been imprudent or foolish or careless or has stopped making money. Low P/E. Nice dividend. Is this not a "widows and orphans" stock?
I continue to CRAWL upward in tiny, labored baby-steps. Since Jan 1: +0.7%. Pathetic. 52 stocks 39 bonds 7 cash.

+2.59% today...what could possibly go wrong?

Stable-Value (SV) Rates, 3/1/24
TIAA Traditional Annuity (Accumulation) Rates
Big drops! TIAA Declaration Year 3/1 - 2/28
Restricted RC 5.50%, RA 5.25%
Flexible RCP 4.75%, SRA 4.50%, Newer IRAs 4.75%
TSP G Fund hasn't updated yet (previous 4.125%).
Edit/Add. March rate is 4.375%
Options outside of workplace retirement plans include m-mkt funds, bank m-mkt accounts (FDIC insured), T-Bills, short-term brokered CDs.
#StableValue #401k #403b #TIAA #TSP
https://ybbpersonalfinance.proboards.com/post/1372/thread

StockCharts
https://stockcharts.com/h-sc/ui?s=$SPX&p=D&yr=1&mn=0&dy=0&id=p57969746568

Hi guys!
Hope all is well with you and yours.
So, what a run since 23, no?
Finally, healthcare rises this year. Fido numbers say FSMEX 6.39%, FSPHX 5.49%. These funds I wanted to sell but they were so bad. So now they rise in a bad time....the election.....but this time, I hope it's different....lol. Bigger things to worry about.
All I hear about is AI. So tired of it, really. Have we nothing else but the 7? Really, I guess not since we're back to the 2020 election. Have we no one else??? Anyway, back to topic...have any of you kept your holdings in healthcare??? I know some sold. I understand that. I stand at 11% in the space, so I hope for a turn. It's something that I thought was core to hold to the end with the aging boomers and all. Saying that, does anyone know any retirement home REITs?
The Brown One on our walks is very pro health, saying, "You people will spend what it takes to stay alive." Yes, I said, it would stand to reason. No one wants someone to die. At that point, money is not important.
What the Dukester said next stunned me. "Would you spend money on me to save me to live longer, Pudd?" Being out in the cold and having 2 cups of coffee, I said, "Yes" right away. With a smile looking back at me, he said, "Now, tell me why healthcare is not core forever?"
I hate long cold walks in the morning with Brown. It tends to not end well. Drats! Drats! and double Drats!!!!
God bless
the Pudd