Skip to main content

Where Have All the U.S. Stocks Gone?

A recent Wall Street Journal article, citing a study by the Center for Research in Security Prices, tells us something remarkable about the times we are investing in: the number of stocks on the U.S. market has quietly diminished by more than half over the last 20 years. In November 1997, investors could choose from 7,355 U.S. stocks. Today, there are fewer than 3,600.  

Most of the decline has come from vanishing companies ranging from small to microcap — the sort of names you probably haven’t heard of. Small stocks have diminished from more than 2,500 in 1997 to fewer than 1,200 today. Microcap companies that are even smaller numbered nearly 4,000 in 1997, compared to 1,900 today. Some went out of business, while others were gobbled up by larger companies or private equity firms. Meanwhile, instead of new companies going public to replace those that have retired from the market, venture capital firms are allowing younger ventures to stay private for longer.  

The article talks about several possible consequences. Since the surviving companies tend to be larger and better known, it becomes harder for professional asset managers to get an information edge or find small undiscovered gems that are undervalued. The declining roster of stocks may also mean that a long era of higher returns from small cap stocks compared to larger firms could be coming to an end or somewhat diminished. But the truth is that nobody knows what the investment consequences will be from the quiet shrinkage of investment options, or for that matter, if this trend will reverse itself.  

To Your Prosperity, 

Kevin Kroskey, CFP®, MBA

Adapted with permission from BobVeres.com
Source: https://www.wsj.com/articles/stock-picking-is-dying-because-there-are-no-more-stocks-to-pick-1498240513

Popular posts from this blog

Are We All Socialists Now: Government Intervention and Stock Market Returns

As a recent Newsweek cover asked, "Are We All Socialists Now?" And if so, should U.S. equity investors be alarmed by the prospect of greater government intervention in the economy? Historical data looking at this very question may be surprising to you. Click the link below to watch a short 6 minute video, which provides some objective comparisons of stock market returns from the more free-market system in the U.S. compared to the returns from more interventionist governments from around the world. The evidence suggests that government intervention is just one factor among many affecting stock returns, and that an above-average degree of intervention is not necessarily associated with below-average returns. https://admin.acrobat.com/_a772887163/governmentinterventionandstockreturns/ To Your Prosperity ~ Kevin Kroskey

Last Week Was Not One To Miss

Last week the Dow rose 7.3% last week amid earnings reports from many companies, as reported in the Wall Street Journal ( http://online.wsj.com/article/SB124782681174757379.html ). For most companies, it's not like the reports were necessarily good. It was that the news was not as bad as expected . This rapid rise in the market occurred despite poor economic news, including rising unemployment now predicted to go north of 10%. To many investors, this seems counter-intuitive: poor economic news and declining earnings reports compared to the same time last year yet the market goes up markedly. How come? It's quite simple actually. The market looks forward and reacts to new and unknowable information . So even though the news was bad, much of it was not as bad as expected . Thus the new information positively changed market expectations and prices adjusted upward. Unless you can predict the future, as investors we must stay invested through good times and bad to ensure we experien...

The Cruel Psychology of the 1,000-Point Drop

If you don't already read Jason Zweig's regular column in the Wall Street Journal, you should. He is one of the few financial journalists worth reading. His recent article on the psychology of the recent market drop is rational and instructive. ==== Click here to read the article in it's entirety: http://blogs.wsj.com/moneybeat/2015/08/24/the-cruel-psychology-of-the-1000-point-drop/ See below for a snippet: Experiments have shown , for instance, that people believe cancer is riskier when they are told that it kills “1,286 out of 10,000 people” than when they hear that it kills “24.14 out of 100 people.” Hearing “1,286” immediately brings a large number of victims to mind, while “24.14” is simply a much smaller number. To notice that the first number is less than 13%, while the second is more than 24%, you have to focus on the denominators of the fractions and do some quick division. But your emotions will likely hijack your brain long before you get to that poi...