re: CAPE Ratios: How much weight should we assign to them in choosing markets?

quote:

---

Will probably use new purchases to rebalance a bit toward non-emerging foreign markets.

---

Okay, but just keep in mind that CAPE ratios are supposed to be lower here, since non-emerging foreign markets are notoriously sluggish with respect to long-term growth, market demographics, public indebtedness, etc.

Anyway, I just came across this article from RealClearMarkets.com earlier this morning on Grantham's methodology: " This fund tracks 36 bubbles—and 33 have completely popped."

quote:

---

When writing an article on the slowing pace of global growth last week—for which Grantham’s ideas provide significant fodder—my colleagues and I were spellbound by one statistic: of the 36 major bubbles GMO says it tracks, 33 have completely popped, or returned to their prior trends.

GMO won’t say what most of these are, and according to the firm’s quarterly letters, it also tracks a lot more less-major bubbles: 330 by its February 2013 count. For GMO, a “bubble” is simply when the price of an asset in relation to its real value (usually just the “price-to-earnings ratio” in investor-speak) has exceeded its average by a certain amount, and a “major bubble,” a bigger amount (two standard deviations, for statistics aficionados.)

---

quote:

---

GMO declined to provide more details about its methodology or current bubbles it’s tracking because those data are proprietary.

---