So that second chart tells me that people are having trouble servicing housing and car debts at a time when both items are inflating? I don't know why more people don't talk about the third chart.
I think sometimes these surveys highlight an emotion rather than a real behaviour. Rising prices at the moment are probably more worrying than having a huge real impact on spending.
The data related to that 3rd chart is being discussed at a more institutional level. Unfortunately it's simply something average investors don't have access to. To be fair, this narrow market leadership has existed for some time now.
I appreciate that comment about sentiment and behaviour. If the narrow leadership has existed for a while, what do you see as its significance? Absent that knowledge, one might conclude that the market is lagging overall but this is being masked by a few companies, some of which (e.g., TSLA) are widely regarded as overvalued and/or a target for retail speculators.
The fact that a handful of companies continuously lead the market points to the growing concentration of economic power and wealth in America (and the world, for that matter). It's a threat to innovation, middle class prosperity and social stability.
It also presents unique risks with respect to portfolio construction. Does one match the index by putting 25%+ into just a few of the largest stocks? Or does one diversify out of the market leaders, but risk falling behind if market leadership remains highly concentrated.
This also has real career implications for investment managers who are evaluated on their relative performance.
So that second chart tells me that people are having trouble servicing housing and car debts at a time when both items are inflating? I don't know why more people don't talk about the third chart.
I think sometimes these surveys highlight an emotion rather than a real behaviour. Rising prices at the moment are probably more worrying than having a huge real impact on spending.
The data related to that 3rd chart is being discussed at a more institutional level. Unfortunately it's simply something average investors don't have access to. To be fair, this narrow market leadership has existed for some time now.
I appreciate that comment about sentiment and behaviour. If the narrow leadership has existed for a while, what do you see as its significance? Absent that knowledge, one might conclude that the market is lagging overall but this is being masked by a few companies, some of which (e.g., TSLA) are widely regarded as overvalued and/or a target for retail speculators.
The fact that a handful of companies continuously lead the market points to the growing concentration of economic power and wealth in America (and the world, for that matter). It's a threat to innovation, middle class prosperity and social stability.
It also presents unique risks with respect to portfolio construction. Does one match the index by putting 25%+ into just a few of the largest stocks? Or does one diversify out of the market leaders, but risk falling behind if market leadership remains highly concentrated.
This also has real career implications for investment managers who are evaluated on their relative performance.