Recent from talks
Nothing was collected or created yet.
Everything bubble
View on Wikipedia
High up on his [President Biden's] list, will be dealing with the consequences of the biggest financial bubble in U.S. history. Why the biggest? Because it encompasses not just stocks but pretty much every other financial asset too. And for that, you may thank the Federal Reserve.
The "everything bubble" refers to the impact on the values of asset prices, including equities, real estate, bonds, many commodities, and cryptocurrencies, due to quantitative easing by the Federal Reserve, European Central Bank, and the Bank of Japan.[3][4] The policy itself and the techniques of direct and indirect methods of quantitative easing used to execute it are sometimes referred to as the Fed put.[5] Modern monetary theory advocates the use of such tools, even in non-crisis periods, to create economic growth through asset price inflation.[a][4] The term "everything bubble" first came in use during the chair of Janet Yellen, but it is most associated with the quantitative easing during the COVID-19 pandemic by Jerome Powell.[3][6]
The everything bubble notably occurred despite the COVID-19 recession, the China–United States trade war, and political turmoil – leading to a realization that the bubble was a central bank creation,[3][7][8] with concerns on the independence and integrity of market pricing,[9][8][10] and on the Fed's impact on wealth inequality.[11][12][13]
In 2022, financial historian Edward Chancellor said "central banks' unsustainable policies have created an 'everything bubble', leaving the global economy with an inflation 'hangover'".[14] Rising inflation did ultimately force the Fed to tighten financial conditions during 2022 (i.e. raising interest rates and employing quantitative tightening), and in June 2022, The Wall Street Journal wrote that the Fed had "pricked the Everything Bubble".[15] In the same month, financial journalist Rana Foroohar told The New York Times, "Welcome to the End of the 'Everything Bubble'".[16] An article in The Guardian in October 2022 said that "In recent months, it has become clear that the “everything bubble” is over, pricked by the tightening of policy by central banks in response to higher inflation".[17] An article in The Economist in July 2023 noted that the everything bubble popped in 2022 but that asset prices were once again resilient.[18]
History
[edit]Origin
[edit]The term first appeared in 2014, during the chair of Janet Yellen, and reflected her strategy of applying prolonged monetary looseness (e.g. the Yellen put of continual low-interest rates and direct quantitative easing), as a method of boosting near-term economic growth via asset price inflation (a part of modern monetary theory (MMT)[a]).[20][21][22][23]
The term came to greater prominence during the subsequent chair of Jerome Powell, initially during Powell's first monetary easing in Q4 2019 (the Powell put),[24][25] but more substantially during the 2020–2021 coronavirus pandemic, when Powell embraced asset bubbles to combat the financial impact of the pandemic.[26][6] By early 2021, Powell had created the loosest financial conditions ever recorded,[27] and most US assets were simultaneously at levels of valuation that matched their highest individual levels in economic history.[28][3][29] Powell rejected the claim that US assets were definitively in a bubble, invoking the Fed model,[b] to assert that ultra-low yields justified higher asset prices.[31][32] Powell also rejected criticism that the scale of the asset bubbles had widened US wealth inequality to levels not seen since the 1920s,[33][34] on the basis that the asset bubbles would themselves promote job growth, thus reducing the inequality.[13][35][36] The contrast between the distress experienced by "Main Street" during the pandemic, and the economic boom experienced by "Wall Street", who had one of their most profitable years in history, was controversial,[37][38] and earned Powell the title of Wall Street's Dr. Feelgood.[39]
Powell was supported by Congress, with speaker Nancy Pelosi saying in October 2020, "Well, let me just say that the number, I think, that is staggering is that we have more people unemployed and on unemployment benefits than any time in our country's history. We know that the Fed is shoring up the markets so that the stock market can do well. I don't complain about that, I want the market to do well."[40][7][41]
Peak in 2021
[edit]
In early 2021, some market participants warned that Powell's everything bubble had reached dangerous levels. Investor Jeremy Grantham said, "All three of Powell's predecessors claimed that the asset prices they helped inflate in turn aided the economy through the wealth effect", before eventually collapsing.[43][44] Investor Seth Klarman said that the Fed had "broken the market", and that "the market's usual role in price discovery had been suspended".[10] Economist Mohamed El-Erian said "you have such an enormous disconnect between fundamentals and valuations", and that the record highs in assets were due to the actions of the Fed and the ECB, clarifying "That is the reason why we've seen prices going from one record high to another despite completely changing narratives. Forget about the 'great reopening', the 'Trump trade' and all this other stuff".[8] The Financial Times warned that the inequality from Powell's K-shaped recovery could lead to political and social instability, saying: "The majority of people are suffering, amid a Great Gatsby-style boom at the top".[11]
Several commentators called the 2020–2021 market created by Powell as being the most speculative market ever seen, including CNBC host Jim Cramer who said: "You can't lose in that market", and "it's like a slot machine" that always pays out. "I've not seen this in my career".[45] Bloomberg said: "Animal spirits are famously running wild across Wall Street, but crunch the numbers and this bull market is even crazier than it seems"[46] ("Animal spirits" is a term popularized in the 1930s by economist John Maynard Keynes to describe the influence of human emotions on finance and investing). The extreme level of speculation led to the GameStop short squeeze in January 2021, the five-fold rise in the Goldman Sachs Non-Profitable Technology Index,[47] and the record rise in the Russell Microcap Index.[48] At the end of January 2021, The Wall Street Journal wrote that: "For once, everyone seems to agree: Much of the market looks like it's in a bubble",[49] while Goldman Sachs said that the S&P 500 was at or near its most expensive levels in history on most measures, with the forward EV/EBITDA breaking 17× for the first time.[50]
In February 2021, the Fed Governor James B. Bullard said that they did not see an asset bubble and would continue to apply a high level of monetary stimulus.[42] Bloomberg News wrote that Powell, in the final year of his first term, was afraid to tighten in case of a repeat of tightening mistakes in the fourth quarter of 2018.[51] The Financial Times warned US regulators to regard the experience of the 2015–2016 Chinese stock market turbulence, when monetary easing by the Chinese state in 2014 led to a bubble, but then a crash over 2015–2016, in Chinese markets.[52] In February 2021, the former head of the BOJ financial markets division warned that the BOJ should adjust the level of direct purchases it makes of Nikkei ETFs due to bubble concerns.[53][c]
Popping of bubble in 2022
[edit]By early 2022, rising inflation forced Powell, and latterly other central banks, to significantly tighten financial conditions including raising interest rates and quantitative tightening (the opposite of quantitative easing), which led to a synchronized fall across most asset prices (i.e. the opposite effect to the 'everything bubble').[55] In May 2022, financial historian Edward Chancellor told Fortune that "central banks' unsustainable policies have created an 'everything bubble', leaving the global economy with an inflation 'hangover'".[14] Chancellor separately noted to Reuters, "If ultralow interest rates were responsible for inflating an 'everything bubble', it follows that everything – well, almost everything – is at risk from rising rates".[56] In June 2022, James Mackintosh of The Wall Street Journal wrote that the Fed had "pricked the Everything Bubble",[15] while in the same month the financial journalist Rana Foroohar told the New York Times, "Welcome to the End of the 'Everything Bubble'".[16]
Asset valuations at record levels
[edit]The post-2020 period of the everything bubble produced several simultaneous US records/near-records for extreme levels in a diverse range of asset valuation and financial speculation metrics:
General
[edit]- In December 2020, the Goldman Sachs GFCI Global Financial Conditions Index (a measure of US monetary looseness), dropped below 98 for the first time in its history (since 1987).[27]
- In January 2021, the Citibank Panic/Euphoria Index hit broke 2.0 for the first time since its inception in 1988, surpassing the previous dot-com peak of 1.5.[57]
- In February 2021, the ratio of margin debt-to-cash in Wall Street trading accounts hit 172%, just below the historical peak of 179% set in March 2000.[58]
- In February 2021, the Congressional Budget Office estimated that US Federal Public Debt held by the public would hit 102% of US GDP, just below the historic all-time high of 105% in 1946.[59]
Bonds
[edit]- In January 2021, the Sherman Ratio (the yield per unit of bond duration), known as the "Bond Market's Scariest Gauge", hit an all-time low of 0.1968 for the US Corporate Bond Index.[60]
- In February 2021, the yield on the US junk bond index dropped below 4% for the first time in history (the historical default rate going back to the 1980s is 4–5% per annum).[61]
Equities
[edit]- In January 2021, Goldman Sachs recorded that the forward EV/EBITDA of the S&P 500 had passed 17× on an aggregate basis, and 15.5× for the median stock, for the first time in history (note that the price-earnings ratio was less comparable due to the 2018 reduction in the US corporate tax from 39% to 21%).[50]
- By January 2021, the short-interest on the S&P 500 dropped to 1.6%, matching the record low of 2000;[62] the "most-shorted US stocks" outperformed by the largest margin in history in 2020.[63]
- In January 2021, the ratio of US corporate insider share sales-to-purchases ratio hit an all-time high of 7.8× (i.e. 7.8 times more corporate executives sold their company's stock than purchased it).[64]
- In February 2021, the Buffett indicator, being the ratio of the total value of the US stock market (as defined by the Wilshire 5000) to US GDP, set an all-time high above 200%, surpassing the previous dot.com peak of 159.2% (and the 2009 low of 66.7%).[65][66][58] In 2001, Warren Buffett said: "If the ratio approaches 200%—as it did in 1999 and a part of 2000—you are playing with fire".[65]
- In February 2021, the Price–sales ratio of US stocks hit an all-time high of 2.95×, surpassing its dot.com peak of 2.45× (and the 2009 low of 0.8×).[65]
- In February 2021, the P/B ratio of US stocks hit an all-time high of 14×, surpassing its peak during the dot-com bubble of 9× (and the 2009 low of 3×).[65]
- In February 2021, the US equity put/call ratio, hit 0.40×, almost matching the March 2000 low of 0.39× (a low ratio means market sentiment is optimistic).[58]
- In February 2021, the combined capitalization of the top five stocks in the S&P 500 (being Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Tesla and Meta Platforms) was 21% of the index, surpassing the prior March 2000 peak of 18% (being Microsoft, Cisco, General Electric, Intel and ExxonMobil).[58]
- In February 2021, a record 14 members of the Russell Microcap Index, and a record 302 members of the Russell 2000 Index were larger than the smallest member of the S&P 500 Index.[48]
Housing
[edit]
- In November 2020, the Robert J. Shiller cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings ratio for US housing, hit 43.9×, just 3.8% below its all-time record of 45.6× set in 2006.[67]
Cryptocurrencies
[edit]- In January 2021, the total value of cryptocurrencies passed US$1 trillion for the first time in history, with most currencies setting new highs in value.[68]
- In February 2021, bitcoin surpassed US$50,000 per unit for the first time in history.[69]
SPACs
[edit]- In 2020, a record 248 special-purpose acquisition company (SPACs) raised US$83 billion in new capital ininitial public offerings; and by Q1 2021, a further record US$30 billion was raised in a single quarter.[70] SPACs are notoriously poor-performing assets, whose returns 3-years after merging are almost uniformly heavily negative; their proliferation is a signal of an economic bubble.[70][71]
Commodities
[edit]- In July 2020, gold futures rose above US$2,000 per ounce level for the first time in history.[72]
- In August 2020, lumber prices, as defined by the CME one-month futures contract, broke the old historic record high of US$651 per thousand board feet, to reach US$1711 in May 2021.[73]
Alleged examples
[edit]As well as the above asset-level records, several assets with extreme valuations and extraordinary price increases were identified as being emblematic of the everything bubble:[74]
- Ark Innovation ETF, American exchange-traded fund, and major investor in Tesla and other technology firms.[15][75][76][74]
- Goldman Sachs Non-Profitable US Technology Index, a proprietary index of US technology firms that were loss-making.[47][75]
- Russell Microcap Index stocks, the smallest listed US stocks where a record number grew in a short period past the size of the smallest S&P 500 stock.[48]
- S&P Clean Energy Index, proprietary index of (mostly) US clean energy firms whose P/E ratio tripled, in February 2021.[15][77]
- The stock price of Tesla Inc. in 2020 and 2021[75][78][79][74]
See also
[edit]Notes
[edit]- ^ a b MMT asserts that excessive asset price inflation will lead to an increase in real price inflation, which will lead to an increase in yields, and correspondingly reduce the asset price inflation (i.e. a self-stabilizing system).[4] Critics say that most historical periods of excessive asset price inflation did not produce such self-stabilization, but instead produced financial collapse and real price deflation (e.g. post-1920s America, post-1990 Japan, and post-2008 Europe); in other cases, the inflation was not controllable, also leading to a financial collapse (e.g. the 1970s in the United States).[4][19]
- ^ The Fed model is a disputed form of equity valuation which has been challenged by academics, and particularly at very low yields.[30] A notable example is post-1990s Japan when ultra-low yields did not stop Japanese equity valuations from dropping substantially for decades, only stopping when the Bank of Japan started directly buying equities to support their price.[19]
- ^ The Bank of Japan is the largest owner of Japanese shares through direct daily purchases of Nikkei ETFs, leading to questions over the integrity of the pricing of Japanese securities, and their long-term viability.[54]
References
[edit]- ^ Cox, Jeff (25 September 2019). "The Fed will be growing its balance sheet again, but don't call it "QE4"". CNBC. Retrieved 16 February 2021.
- ^ Cookson, Richard (4 February 2021). "Rising Inflation Will Force the Fed's Hand". Bloomberg News.
- ^ a b c d Curran, Enda; Anstey, Chris (24 January 2021). "Pandemic-Era Central Banking Is Creating Bubbles Everywhere". Bloomberg. Retrieved 24 January 2021.
- ^ a b c d Summers, Graham (October 2017). The Everything Bubble: The Endgame For Central Bank Policy. CreateSpace. ISBN 978-1974634064.
- ^ Metrick, Andrew (6 January 2021). "Interview with Sir Paul Tucker". Yale Insights. Retrieved 21 January 2021.
It's no longer a Greenspan Put or a Bernanke Put, or a Yellen Put. It's now the Fed Put, and it's everything
- ^ a b Lachman, Desmond (19 May 2020). "The Federal Reserve's everything bubble". The Hill. Retrieved 9 November 2020.
- ^ a b Greifeld, Katherine; Wang, Lu; Hajric, Vildana (6 November 2020). "Stocks Show Jerome Powell Is Still Wall Street's Head of State". Bloomberg News.
- ^ a b c Gisiger, Christoph (7 January 2021). "Mohamed El-Erian: 'This Is Starting to Get to Dangerous Levels'". Neue Zürcher Zeitung. Retrieved 10 January 2021.
That is the reason why we've seen prices going from one record high to another despite completely changing narratives. Forget about the 'great reopening', the 'Trump trade' and all this other stuff
- ^ Derby, Michael S. (20 May 2020). "Fed's Mester Isn't Worried Central Bank Has Broken Market Pricing Ability". The Wall Street Journal.
- ^ a b "Baupost's Seth Klarman compares investors to 'frogs in boiling water'". Financial Times. 21 January 2021. Retrieved 12 February 2021.
Value investing guru says the Federal Reserve has broken the stock market
- ^ a b Luce, Edward (3 January 2021). "America's dangerous reliance on the Fed". Financial Times.
- ^ Saravia, Catarania (29 January 2021). "Low U.S. Rates Exacerbate Racial Wealth Gap, Paper Shows". Bloomberg News.
- ^ a b Joyner, April; Ahmed, Saqib Iqbal; Davies, Megan (28 August 2020). "Levitating stocks unlikely to help Fed's economic equality efforts". Reuters. Retrieved 17 February 2021.
- ^ a b Daniel, Will (29 May 2022). "One of the greatest financial historians alive says central bankers have been incompetent for decades and inflation is our 'big hangover'". Fortune.
- ^ a b c d Mackintosh, James (14 June 2022). "The Fed Pricked the Everything Bubble". The Wall Street Journal.
- ^ a b Klein, Ezra (22 June 2022). "Welcome to the end of the 'Everything Bubble'". New York Times. Retrieved 5 August 2022.
- ^ Elliott, Larry (October 30, 2022). "Twitter deal may signal point when the 'everything bubble' bursts". The Guardian.
- ^ "Can anything pop the everything bubble?". The Economist. July 4, 2023.
- ^ a b Richard Koo (October 2014). The Escape from Balance Sheet Recession and the QE Trap: A Hazardous Road for the World Economy Kindle Edition. Wiley. ISBN 978-1119028123.
- ^ Smith, Noah (5 July 2015). "There Is No Tech Bubble. Still, Be Worried". Bloomberg. Retrieved 7 January 2021.
The danger isn't that we're in a unicorn bubble. The danger isn't even that we're in a tech bubble. The danger is that we're in an Everything Bubble – that valuations across the board are simply too high
- ^ Irwin, Neil (15 July 2014). "Janet Yellen on the Everything Bubble". The New York Times.
- ^ DeFotis, Dimitra (13 July 2017). "Chair Yellen: Is Emerging Markets Rally Part of An 'Everything Bubble'?". Barron's.
- ^ Murphy, Jason (13 January 2018). "What happens if the 'everything bubble' bursts?". The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved 22 February 2021.
- ^ Howell, Mark (16 January 2020). "The Federal Reserve is the cause of the bubble in everything". Financial Times. Retrieved 9 November 2020.
- ^ Long, Heather (20 January 2020). "The global economy is likely to rebound in 2020, but the IMF warns of eerie parallels to the 1920s". Washington Post. Retrieved 11 November 2020.
- ^ Authers, John (11 June 2020). "Powell's Ready to Play the Fresh Prince of Bubbles". Bloomberg. Retrieved 9 November 2020.
- ^ a b Miller, Rich (14 December 2020). "U.S. Financial Conditions Easiest on Record, Goldman Sachs Says". Bloomberg. Retrieved 25 December 2020.
- ^ Lachman, Desmond (7 January 2021). "Georgia and the everything market bubble". The Hill. Retrieved 7 January 2021.
- ^ Powell, Jamie (2 February 2021). "Snap AV: US valuations eclipse dotcom madness". Financial Times. Retrieved 12 February 2021.
- ^ Humpe, Andreas; McMillan, David (2018). "Equity/bond yield correlation and the FED model: evidence of switching behaviour from the G7 markets". Journal of Asset Management. 19 (6): 413–428. doi:10.1057/s41260-018-0091-x. hdl:1893/27892. S2CID 158210939.
We demonstrate that at low levels of the real bond yield, the correlation between the equity and bond yields turns negative. This arises as the lower bond yield implies heightened macroeconomic risk (e.g. deflation and economic stagnation) and causes equity and bond prices to move in opposite directions.
- ^ Ponczek, Sarah; Wang, Lu (17 December 2020). "Soaring Stock Valuations No Big Deal to Powell Next to Bonds". Bloomberg. Retrieved 18 December 2020.
- ^ Lahart, Justin (23 December 2020). "Has the Fed Rewritten the Laws of Investing?". The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 25 December 2020.
- ^ Rabouin, Dion (13 October 2020). "Jerome Powell's ironic legacy on economic inequality". Axios. Retrieved 11 November 2020.
- ^ Gold, Howard (17 August 2020). "Opinion: The Federal Reserve's policies have drastically increased inequality". MarketWatch. Retrieved 19 November 2020.
- ^ Chapatta, Brian (9 June 2020). "Fed Needs Better Answers on Runaway Markets and Inequality". Bloomberg. Retrieved 11 November 2020.
- ^ Randall, David (11 September 2020). "Fed defends 'pedal to the metal' policy and is not fearful of asset bubbles ahead". Reuters. Archived from the original on September 23, 2020. Retrieved 11 November 2020.
- ^ Regan, Michael P. (21 December 2020). "2020 Has Been a Great Year for Stocks and a Bear Market for Humans". Bloomberg News.
- ^ Phillips, Matt (26 December 2020). "Market Edges Toward Euphoria, Despite Pandemic's Toll". The New York Times.
- ^ Grant, Jim (28 June 2020). "Powell Has Become the Fed's Dr. Feelgood". The Wall Street Journal.
- ^ "Strong GDP Report Shows We Need More Stimulus, Pelosi Says". Bloomberg News. October 29, 2020.
- ^ Msika, Michael (22 January 2021). "BofA Warns U.S. Policy Is Fueling a Bubble in Wall Street Prices". Bloomberg News.
- ^ a b Cox, Jeff (15 February 2021). "Fed's Bullard doesn't see asset bubble and doubts policy will tighten soon". CNBC.
- ^ "Waiting for the Last Dance". GMO Asset Management. 5 January 2021. Retrieved 5 January 2021.
- ^ Graffeo, Emily (5 January 2021). "Jeremy Grantham reiterates his warning that the stock market is in an epic bubble". Business Insider. Retrieved 5 January 2021.
- ^ Belvedere, Matthew J. (24 November 2020). "Cramer calls this stock market environment 'the most speculative' he's ever seen". CNBC. Retrieved 13 February 2021.
- ^ "A Speculative Frenzy Is Sweeping Wall Street and World Markets". Bloomberg. 19 December 2020. Retrieved 15 February 2020.
- ^ a b Powell, Jamie (20 January 2021). "This is nuts, where are the profits?". Financial Times.
- ^ a b c Mackintosh, James (18 February 2012). "Tiny-Company Boom Makes Markets Look Silly". Wall Street Journal. Retrieved 20 February 2021.
- ^ Wursthorn, Michael; Otani, Akane (31 January 2021). "Markets Look Like They're in a Bubble. What Do Investors Do Now?". The Wall Street Journal.
- ^ a b Santoli, Michael (23 January 2021). "Goldman Sachs: The stock market is at or near the most expensive levels ever by most measures. When will it matter?". CNBC.
- ^ Miller, Rich (26 January 2021). "Powell, With Year to Run at Fed, Aims to Avoid Past QE Mistake". Bloomberg News.
- ^ Noble, Josh (4 February 2021). "China's struggle to control stock bubble offers lessons in investor mania". Financial Times. Retrieved 17 February 2021.
- ^ Fujioka, Toru; Ito, Sumio (16 February 2021). "BOJ Should Avoid ETF Buys Fueling Stock Bubble, Ex-Official Says". Bloomberg News.
- ^ Lee, Min Jeong; Hasegawa, Toshiro (20 December 2020). "BOJ Becomes Biggest Japan Stock Owner With $434 Billion Hoard". NDTV. Bloomberg News.
- ^ Swint, Brian (6 May 2022). "The Famous Fed Put Is Now a Fed Call, and the Bad News Is Piling Up". Barron's.
- ^ Chancellor, Edward (19 May 2022). "Inflation revives spectre of the long bear market". Reuters.
- ^ Authers, John (25 January 2021). "The Stocks Bubble-O-Meter Is Flashing Bright Red". Bloomberg News.
- ^ a b c d Ponciano, Jonathan (12 February 2021). "Is The Stock Market About To Crash?". Forbes.
- ^ "The Pandemic Spending Hangover". The Wall Street Journal. 12 February 2021.
- ^ Chippata, Brian (14 January 2021). "Bond Market's Scariest Gauge Is Worse Than Ever". Bloomberg News.
- ^ Gonzalez, Carolina (8 February 2021). "U.S. Junk-Bond Yields Drop Below 4% for the First Time Ever". Bloomberg News.
- ^ Chung, Juliet (22 January 2021). "Short Bets Pummel Hot Hedge Fund Melvin Capital". The Wall Street Journal.
- ^ Authers, John (12 February 2021). "Bonfire of the Shorts Is a Precedent-Busting Black Swan". Bloomberg News.
- ^ Wang, Lu (20 January 2021). "Buybacks Snap Back Amid Feverish Selling by Corporate Insiders". Bloomberg News.
- ^ a b c d Regan, Michael P.; Hajric, Vildana; Ballentine, Claire (12 February 2021). "Warren Buffett's Favorite Valuation Metric Is Ringing an Alarm". Bloomberg News.
- ^ Minski, Jill (4 February 2021). "Market Cap to GDP: An Updated Look at the Buffett Valuation Indicator". AdvisorPerspectives. Retrieved 17 February 2021.
- ^ Brown, Aaron (13 November 2020). "Home Prices Are In a Bubble. Full Stop". Bloomberg News.
- ^ Wigglesworth, Robin (12 February 2021). "'Digital tulip' or new asset class? Bitcoin's bid to go mainstream". Financial Times. Retrieved 14 February 2021.
- ^ Ossinger, Joanna (15 February 2021). "Bitcoin Extends Its Rally to an All-Time High Close to $50,000". NDTV.
- ^ a b Naumovska, Ivana (18 February 2021). "The SPAC Bubble Is About to Burst". Harvard Business Review.
- ^ Li, Yun (February 10, 2021). "Unusual first-day rallies in SPACs raise bubble concern: 'Every single one of them has gone up'". CNBC.
- ^ Mazneva, Elena; Vasquez, Justina (27 July 2020). "Gold Steadies After Futures Jump to $2,000 for the First Time". Bloomberg News.
- ^ Franck, Thomas (19 May 2021). "Lumber futures swing 10% in wild session as speculative frenzy ends". CNBC.
- ^ a b c Helman, Christopher (14 June 2022). "Star Stockpicker Finds New Crusade Raging Against The 'Everything Bubble'". Forbes.
- ^ a b c Cannivet, Michael (24 January 2021). "Best Bubble Stock For 2021: Zoom Or Tesla?". Forbes.
- ^ McKenzie, Michael (11 February 2021). "Ark's Cathie Wood dismisses bubble talk and Tesla doubters". Financial Times.
- ^ Newman, Billy (19 February 2021). "'Green bubble' warnings grow as money pours into renewable stocks". Financial Times. Retrieved 21 February 2021.
- ^ Mackintosh, James (18 August 2020). "The 'Everything Bubble' Isn't Everything, and Maybe Not Even a Bubble". The Wall Street Journal.
- ^ Mansharamani, Vikram (3 September 2020). "Tesla: The Everything Bubble Embodied". Newsweek. Retrieved 15 February 2021.
Further reading
[edit]- Summers, Graham (October 2017). The Everything Bubble: The Endgame For Central Bank Policy. CreateSpace. ISBN 978-1974634064.
- Naim, Dr. Alasdair GM (October 2021). The End of the Everything Bubble: Why $75 trillion of investor wealth is in mortal jeopardy. Harriman House. ISBN 978-0857199645.
External links
[edit]- The Everything Bubble, (Graydon Carter, Vanity Fair, October 2015)
- Here's the potential upside when the 'Everything Bubble' finally pops (MarketWatch, August 2019)
- Implications of the Everything Bubble, Bloomberg TV: Interview with Scott Minerd (Guggenheim Partners, February 2020)
- Tesla: The 'Everything Bubble' Embodied Vikram Mansharamani (Harvard University, September 2020)
- The 'everything bubble' is back in business (Australian Financial Review, December 2020)
- Georgia and the everything market bubble (Desmond Lachman, The Hill, January 2021)
- "Age of Easy Money". FRONTLINE. Season 41. Episode 6. March 14, 2023. PBS. WGBH. Retrieved July 12, 2023.
Everything bubble
View on GrokipediaDefinition and Characteristics
Core Definition
The everything bubble refers to the simultaneous and historically unprecedented inflation of prices across nearly all major asset classes, including equities, bonds, real estate, commodities, cryptocurrencies, and even collectibles, where valuations detach from underlying fundamentals such as earnings growth, rental yields, or productive capacity.[6][11] This phenomenon manifests as compressed risk premiums, speculative capital flows into yield-chasing investments, and a broad suppression of volatility, creating correlated upside across disparate markets that would typically exhibit inverse or uncorrelated behavior under normal conditions.[11][6] The term gained currency around 2014 amid discussions of post-2008 monetary experiments, but intensified scrutiny during the 2020-2021 period when central banks, led by the Federal Reserve, expanded balance sheets dramatically—growing from under $1 trillion in 2008 to approximately $4.5 trillion by 2019 and peaking near $9 trillion in 2022—to counter economic disruptions, thereby flooding markets with liquidity that prioritized asset price support over consumer price stability.[12][13] Unlike sector-specific bubbles, such as the 1990s dot-com mania or the 2000s housing surge, the everything bubble encompasses fixed-income assets (with negative real yields persisting into 2021), growth stocks trading at price-to-earnings ratios exceeding 40 for indices like the Nasdaq 100 in late 2021, and alternative assets like non-fungible tokens reaching $69 billion in trading volume that year, all sustained by artificially low borrowing costs rather than organic demand or innovation-driven productivity.[6][11] Critics, including economists at firms like GMO, argue this represents a policy-induced distortion where fiat currency debasement incentivizes holding any non-cash asset to preserve purchasing power, leading to overleveraged positions and potential systemic fragility upon policy normalization, as evidenced by the 2022 drawdowns where the S&P 500 fell 25% and bonds declined 13% amid rising rates.[11] Proponents of sustained highs counter that technological advances, such as in artificial intelligence, justify elevated multiples, though empirical data shows median S&P 500 earnings yields dipping below 4% in 2021—levels historically associated with mean reversion—without commensurate global GDP acceleration.[6][9]Key Indicators of Overvaluation
The Shiller cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings (CAPE) ratio for the S&P 500 reached 38.6 as of September 2025, the highest level since November 2021 and exceeding the long-term median of around 16, signaling elevated equity valuations relative to inflation-adjusted earnings over the prior decade.[14] The Buffett Indicator, measuring total U.S. stock market capitalization against GDP, stood at 217% as of June 2025, far above the historical norm of 100% and indicative of broad overpricing across equities.[15] These metrics, which incorporate forward-looking adjustments, have correlated with subdued long-term returns following similar peaks, as seen in the dot-com era when CAPE exceeded 40.[16] Margin debt, a proxy for speculative leverage in stocks, hit a record $1.13 trillion in September 2025, surpassing the prior peak of $937 billion from November 2021 and reflecting heightened investor borrowing amid rising asset prices.[17] This surge, up 6.3% from August, often precedes corrections as forced liquidations amplify downturns, with historical data showing margin levels exceeding 3% of market capitalization (as in October 2021) aligning with bubble-like euphoria.[18] In housing, the U.S. median home price reached five times median household income in 2024, approaching the 2006 bubble peak of over seven times and underscoring affordability strains driven by low supply and financing costs.[19] National price-to-income ratios averaged 4.7 in 2024, with metro areas like San Francisco exceeding 10, far above the long-term equilibrium of 3-4 that supports sustainable demand.[20] Corporate debt burdens further highlighted overextension, with nonfinancial business debt-to-GDP climbing above 50% by early 2022 from 42% in 2012, peaking at 60.5% in Q2 2020 amid low borrowing costs that masked servicing risks.[21][22] Negative real bond yields from 2020-2022, where inflation outpaced nominal Treasury returns, compressed risk premiums across fixed income and fueled carry trades into riskier assets, contributing to synchronized valuations detached from fundamentals.[23]- Key Metrics Summary:
Indicator Peak/Recent Value Historical Context Source Shiller CAPE Ratio 38.6 (Sep 2025) Median ~16; dot-com high ~44 [14] Buffett Indicator 217% (Jun 2025) Norm 100% [15] Margin Debt $1.13T (Sep 2025) Prior peak $937B (2021) [17] Home Price/Income 5x (2024) Equilibrium 3-4x [19] Corporate Debt/GDP 60.5% (Q2 2020) Pre-2012 ~42% [22]
Underlying Causes
Expansionary Monetary Policy
The Federal Reserve implemented expansionary monetary policy following the 2008 financial crisis by slashing the federal funds rate to a target range of 0 to 0.25 percent on December 16, 2008, where it remained for seven years until gradual increases began in December 2015.[24] [25] This near-zero rate environment compressed yields across the yield curve, incentivizing investors to seek higher returns in riskier assets, thereby elevating valuations in equities, real estate, and other classes beyond fundamentals.[26] Complementing rate cuts, the Fed launched quantitative easing (QE) programs to inject liquidity and suppress long-term interest rates. QE1, initiated in November 2008, involved purchases of $175 billion in agency debt and $1.25 trillion in agency mortgage-backed securities through March 2010. QE2 followed in November 2010 with $600 billion in Treasury securities, while QE3 began in September 2012 as an open-ended purchase of $40 billion monthly in MBS, expanding to $45 billion in Treasuries until tapering commenced in late 2013; by October 2014, the Fed's balance sheet had ballooned from under $1 trillion pre-crisis to approximately $4.5 trillion.[27] [28] These interventions lowered borrowing costs and supported asset prices by signaling sustained accommodation, though critics argue they distorted capital allocation toward speculative investments rather than productive uses.[29] The policy's persistence into the late 2010s, with rates hiked modestly to 2.25-2.50 percent by December 2018 before reverting to zero amid trade tensions and slowing growth, sustained elevated asset multiples.[25] During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Fed recommenced aggressive expansion in March 2020, recommitting to zero rates and unlimited QE, expanding its balance sheet by over $4 trillion to nearly $9 trillion by mid-2022, which amplified prior distortions and fueled broad asset inflation across previously underperforming sectors like technology stocks and cryptocurrencies.[30] [31]| QE Program | Start Date | Key Purchases | Approximate Scale |
|---|---|---|---|
| QE1 | November 2008 | Agency debt and MBS | $1.425 trillion total |
| QE2 | November 2010 | Treasuries | $600 billion |
| QE3 | September 2012 | MBS and Treasuries | Monthly $85 billion until taper |
Fiscal Interventions and Stimulus
Fiscal interventions in the United States intensified following the 2008 global financial crisis, with the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 authorizing $831 billion in spending and tax cuts to counteract economic contraction, though fiscal deficits had already widened to $458 billion in fiscal year 2008 and surged to $1.41 trillion in 2009.[34][35] These measures, while stabilizing short-term output, contributed to a structural increase in federal borrowing, with deficits averaging over 5% of GDP annually from 2009 to 2019, elevating public debt from 68% of GDP in 2008 to 106% by 2019.[36] The COVID-19 pandemic prompted unprecedented fiscal expansion, beginning with the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act signed on March 27, 2020, which disbursed $2.2 trillion including $1,200 direct payments per adult, enhanced unemployment benefits, and Paycheck Protection Program loans totaling $800 billion.[37][38] This was followed by the $900 billion Consolidated Appropriations Act in December 2020 and the $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan Act in March 2021, featuring additional $1,400 checks and extended child tax credits, pushing the fiscal year 2020 deficit to $3.13 trillion or 14.9% of GDP—the largest since World War II.[39][35][36] Aggregate stimulus exceeded $5 trillion from 2020 to 2021, financed through deficit spending that raised federal debt held by the public to $28.4 trillion by September 2021.[40] Much of the liquidity from direct payments and forgivable loans flowed into financial assets rather than consumption; surveys showed approximately 40% of first-round stimulus checks were spent on stocks, mutual funds, or retirement accounts, correlating with S&P 500 gains of over 70% from March 2020 lows to year-end 2021.[41]| Fiscal Year | Deficit ($ trillions) | Deficit (% of GDP) |
|---|---|---|
| 2009 | 1.41 | 9.8 |
| 2019 | 0.98 | 4.6 |
| 2020 | 3.13 | 14.9 |
| 2021 | 2.77 | 12.3 |
| 2022 | 1.38 | 5.5 |
| 2023 | 1.70 | 6.3 |
Structural Factors in Financial Markets
The dominance of passive investment strategies, particularly through index funds and exchange-traded funds (ETFs), has structurally supported elevated asset valuations by introducing persistent, price-insensitive capital inflows. As of 2018, passive funds accounted for 47% of total U.S. equity fund assets, up from 14% two decades earlier, with inflows continuing to accelerate into the 2020s.[45] These vehicles allocate capital proportionally to existing market capitalizations, amplifying gains in already large companies and reducing the corrective force of fundamental analysis, as buying decisions ignore individual security valuations.[46] [47] This mechanism fosters momentum-driven pricing, where high-valuation stocks attract disproportionate flows, contributing to compressed risk premiums across equities.[48] Corporate share repurchases represent another structural dynamic inflating multiples, as firms deploy excess cash and low-cost debt to reduce outstanding shares, mechanically boosting earnings per share (EPS) without corresponding improvements in underlying profitability. U.S. companies executed buybacks exceeding $1 trillion in 2025 alone, the fastest pace on record, often targeting periods of elevated valuations.[49] [50] This practice lowers the denominator in price-to-earnings ratios, sustaining high P/E levels even as organic growth stagnates, and concentrates ownership among insiders and institutions.[51] Critics, including analyses of tech sector repurchases, argue this signals potential overextension, as buybacks divert funds from productive investments amid frothy markets.[52] Market concentration in a narrow set of mega-cap firms exacerbates these effects, with passive flows reinforcing dominance by the so-called Magnificent Seven stocks, which drove over 100% of S&P 500 returns in certain periods post-2020.[47] By 2025, these firms represented structural imbalances where index-tracking demand props up valuations detached from diversified economic output, diminishing price discovery and increasing systemic fragility.[53] Such dynamics, combined with reduced active management scrutiny, have embedded higher equilibrium valuations, though they heighten vulnerability to sentiment shifts.[54]Historical Development
Buildup from 2008 to 2019
Following the 2008 global financial crisis, the Federal Reserve initiated aggressive monetary easing, including three rounds of quantitative easing (QE) from late 2008 through 2014, expanding its balance sheet from approximately $900 billion pre-crisis to $4.5 trillion by 2017.[27] [55] This involved large-scale purchases of Treasury securities and mortgage-backed securities to lower long-term interest rates and support credit markets amid banking sector distress and economic contraction.[27] The federal funds rate was held near zero from December 2008 until the first hike in December 2015, fostering an environment of abundant liquidity that encouraged borrowing and investment in higher-yielding assets.[27] These policies spurred a broad recovery in asset prices, with equities leading the rebound. The S&P 500 index, which plummeted 57% from its October 2007 peak to a March 9, 2009 low of 676.53, climbed steadily thereafter, delivering a total return of approximately 400% by December 31, 2019, when it closed at 3,230.78 including dividends.[56] Annual total returns averaged over 13% from 2009 to 2019, driven by corporate earnings growth, share buybacks, and compressed risk premiums amid low discount rates.[56] Nonfinancial corporate debt in the U.S. expanded markedly, rising from about $6.8 trillion in 2008 to over $10 trillion by 2019, often financing stock repurchases and mergers that boosted per-share metrics without proportional economic output gains.[57] This leverage amplified returns in a low-rate regime but heightened vulnerability to rate normalization.[58] Fixed income markets reflected yield suppression, with 10-year Treasury yields averaging below 3% for much of the period and falling to 1.5-2% by 2019, prompting a "search for yield" that shifted capital toward corporate bonds, high-yield debt, and equities.[59] This dynamic inflated valuations across classes, as investors accepted higher risk for incremental returns in an era of suppressed volatility.[60] Housing prices, tracked by the S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index, bottomed at 134.0 in February 2012 after a 27% decline from the 2006 peak, then rose over 60% by December 2019 to around 214, surpassing pre-crisis levels by 2016 amid low mortgage rates and constrained supply.[61] By late 2019, these trends had elevated asset multiples, with the Shiller cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings (CAPE) ratio for equities exceeding 30—well above historical norms—and corporate debt-to-GDP ratios approaching 50%, signaling overextension fueled by policy accommodation rather than fundamental productivity surges.[62] Investors like Jeremy Grantham highlighted the protracted bull market since 2009 as maturing into speculative excess, attributing it to central bank interventions that distorted price discovery.[62] While growth stabilized post-crisis, underlying fragilities from debt accumulation and yield-chasing persisted, setting the stage for further distortions.[63]Acceleration During COVID-19 (2020-2021)
The COVID-19 pandemic triggered an unprecedented surge in asset prices across multiple classes, despite severe economic disruptions including global lockdowns and a U.S. unemployment rate peaking at 14.8% in April 2020. Central banks, led by the Federal Reserve, responded with aggressive monetary easing, expanding the Fed's balance sheet from $4.2 trillion in February 2020 to $8.9 trillion by April 2022 through large-scale asset purchases and liquidity facilities that suppressed interest rates to near zero.[64] This influx of liquidity, coupled with fiscal measures, decoupled financial markets from contracting real economic output, channeling funds into speculative investments and accelerating overvaluations built up since the 2008 financial crisis. U.S. fiscal interventions amplified this effect, totaling approximately $5.6 trillion in tax cuts, direct payments, and spending programs between 2020 and 2021, including the $2.2 trillion CARES Act signed on March 27, 2020, which provided $1,200 per adult stimulus checks and enhanced unemployment benefits.[65] Subsequent legislation, such as the $900 billion package in December 2020, added $600 per adult payments, injecting over $800 billion in household relief alone.[66] These transfers boosted household savings rates to 33.8% in April 2020, much of which flowed into equities, real estate, and alternative assets amid limited consumption opportunities from restrictions. Low borrowing costs further incentivized leverage, with retail investor participation surging via platforms like Robinhood, contributing to a feedback loop of price appreciation and FOMO-driven buying. Equity markets recovered rapidly from the March 2020 crash, with the S&P 500 falling 34% to a low of 2,237 on March 23 before climbing 68% to 3,756 by December 2020 and reaching 4,766 by year-end 2021—a more than doubling from pandemic lows despite corporate earnings volatility. Valuations expanded to extreme levels, with the index's forward price-to-earnings ratio exceeding 22 by late 2021, reflecting compressed risk premiums rather than productivity gains. Housing markets paralleled this trend, as Federal Housing Finance Agency data showed U.S. house prices rising 17.5% from Q4 2020 to Q4 2021, with median sales prices increasing 16.9% to $346,900 amid mortgage rates below 3% and shifts toward suburban demand from remote work.[67] [68] Cryptocurrencies epitomized the speculative frenzy, with total market capitalization surging from about $250 billion in March 2020 to over $2.9 trillion by November 2021, driven by Bitcoin's rise from under $10,000 to a peak of $69,000 and retail hype around decentralized finance and NFTs.[69] This growth occurred against a backdrop of regulatory ambiguity and minimal intrinsic cash flows, underscoring liquidity-driven distortions. Commodities and alternatives like SPACs also ballooned, with over 600 SPAC IPOs in 2021 raising $160 billion, often at premiums untethered to fundamentals. Overall, these dynamics entrenched the everything bubble by prioritizing asset inflation over sustainable growth, setting the stage for subsequent volatility as inflationary pressures mounted.Peak Valuations in 2021
In late 2021, asset valuations across multiple classes reached historic highs, marking the culmination of the expansionary policies initiated during the COVID-19 pandemic. The S&P 500's cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings (CAPE) ratio, also known as the Shiller PE, climbed above 40 for the first time since the dot-com era, reflecting earnings multiples detached from fundamentals amid low interest rates and abundant liquidity.[70] This elevation, which peaked around 40.5 in October 2021, signaled overvaluation comparable to prior bubbles, as historical averages hover near 17.[16] Fixed-income markets exhibited inverse extremes, with the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield averaging 1.45% for the year—among the lowest in decades—and dipping as low as 0.52% in January, implying bond prices at premium levels unsupported by economic growth prospects.[71] Real estate prices surged concurrently, with the median U.S. home sales price reaching $346,900 by year-end, a 16.9% increase from 2020 and the fastest annual rise on record since tracking began in 1999.[68] This boom was driven by low mortgage rates below 3% and stimulus-fueled demand, pushing price-to-income ratios in many metros to unsustainable levels exceeding historical norms by 50% or more.[72] Cryptocurrencies epitomized speculative fervor, with total market capitalization exceeding $3 trillion in November 2021, led by Bitcoin's all-time high of approximately $69,000.[73] Ethereum and other altcoins followed suit, fueled by retail speculation and institutional inflows, though volatility underscored the disconnect from intrinsic value. Alternative assets like SPACs proliferated, raising over $160 billion in 2021 alone—more than double the prior year's total—often at inflated valuations that later unraveled.[74] These synchronized peaks across uncorrelated assets highlighted systemic overextension, where low yields compressed risk premiums and propelled capital into riskier domains without regard for underlying cash flows or productivity gains.[6]Asset Classes Affected
Equities and Stock Market Multiples
The Shiller cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings (CAPE) ratio for the S&P 500, which averages inflation-adjusted earnings over the prior 10 years to smooth business cycles, surged to approximately 38 by November 2021, approaching levels last seen during the dot-com peak of 44 in 1999-2000 and signaling elevated valuations unsupported by fundamentals.[70][14] This metric, developed by economist Robert Shiller, historically correlates with subdued long-term returns; periods above 30 have preceded annualized real returns below 0% over the subsequent decade.[75] Trailing twelve-month P/E ratios for the S&P 500 averaged 35.96 in 2021, far exceeding the long-term median of around 15-16 and reflecting multiple expansion driven by low interest rates and fiscal stimulus rather than proportional earnings growth.[76] Forward P/E multiples also hit extremes, with the S&P 500's forward 12-month P/E reaching highs not sustained since prior bubbles, as investors priced in optimistic growth projections amid abundant liquidity.[77] Valuation dispersion was pronounced, with technology and growth stocks—such as those in the Nasdaq 100—trading at price-to-sales ratios exceeding 10x in aggregate, compared to historical averages under 2x, fueled by speculative fervor in sectors like software and electric vehicles.[78] This overvaluation extended beyond large-cap indices; small-cap and value stocks lagged, with the Russell 2000 P/E compressing relative to the S&P 500, highlighting a narrow market rally concentrated in a handful of high-flyers.[79] By mid-2022, as the Federal Reserve initiated rate hikes, equity multiples contracted sharply, with the S&P 500's CAPE falling to around 30, though still above historical norms, underscoring the bubble's partial deflation amid rising discount rates that eroded the present value of distant earnings.[80] Critics like John Hussman have argued that such expansions represent speculative credit rather than productive investment, with price/revenue ratios reverting over time and implying inevitable mean reversion.[78] Empirical data from 1926 onward shows that CAPE ratios above 35 have uniformly led to negative real returns over 10-12 years, contrasting with mainstream narratives that dismissed warnings as overly bearish given low yields and tech innovation.[81]| Metric | 2021 Peak/Average | Historical Median | Source |
|---|---|---|---|
| S&P 500 Shiller CAPE | ~38 (Nov 2021) | 15-16 | web:33 web:8 |
| S&P 500 Trailing P/E | 35.96 (annual avg.) | ~15 | web:13 web:10 |
| Forward P/E (S&P 500) | >22 (intraday highs) | ~17-19 | web:16 |
Fixed Income and Bond Yields
The fixed income sector during the everything bubble was characterized by yields at historic lows, which elevated bond prices to unsustainable levels relative to economic fundamentals and risk. Central bank policies, including prolonged quantitative easing and maintenance of near-zero policy rates, suppressed yields across maturities by increasing demand for government debt and anchoring long-term inflation expectations. The U.S. 10-year Treasury yield, a primary benchmark, averaged 2.14% for 2019, plummeted to an annual average of 0.89% in 2020 amid the COVID-19 crisis, and remained subdued at 1.45% in 2021 despite massive fiscal stimulus.[82] [83] These levels reflected not only flight-to-safety dynamics but also artificial yield curve control through Federal Reserve asset purchases exceeding $3 trillion in 2020 alone. The nadir occurred on March 9, 2020, when the 10-year yield briefly touched 0.318%, the lowest since daily records began in 1962, driven by panic buying of Treasuries and emergency Fed rate cuts to zero.[82] Real yields, adjusted for inflation, turned deeply negative, with the 10-year TIPS yield averaging -1.1% in 2020, eroding returns for fixed income investors and prompting capital flows into riskier assets. This suppression extended to corporate bonds, where investment-grade spreads over Treasuries compressed to 85 basis points by late 2020—the tightest since 2007—while high-yield spreads narrowed to around 3% by mid-2021, signaling over-optimism about default risks amid low borrowing costs.[84] Critics, including independent analysts, contend that such yield compression masked underlying fragilities, such as rising government debt loads (U.S. federal debt surpassing 130% of GDP by 2021) and dependency on central bank backstops, fostering a bond market vulnerable to policy normalization.[85] Yield curve dynamics further underscored bubble-like conditions: the curve flattened markedly, with 2-year/10-year spreads turning negative in August 2019 and inverting again in 2021, historically a precursor to recessions yet ignored amid asset euphoria. Internationally, similar patterns emerged, as European Central Bank and Bank of Japan policies kept German bund and Japanese government bond yields near or below zero, contributing to global fixed income overvaluation.Real Estate and Housing Prices
U.S. residential real estate prices experienced significant inflation from 2020 to 2022, aligning with the broader "everything bubble" driven by accommodative monetary policy and fiscal stimulus. The S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller U.S. National Home Price Index, a benchmark for single-family home values, rose from approximately 220 in early 2020 to over 310 by mid-2022, representing a roughly 40% increase in nominal terms.[61] This surge outpaced wage growth and contributed to elevated valuations relative to fundamentals, with price-to-income ratios reaching historic highs in many metros.[86] Low mortgage rates, stemming from Federal Reserve actions including near-zero federal funds rates and quantitative easing, were a primary driver, making financing cheaper and boosting demand. Federal Reserve policies kept 30-year fixed mortgage rates below 3% for much of 2020-2021, enabling buyers to afford higher prices while monthly payments remained manageable.[87] Fiscal interventions, such as direct payments and enhanced unemployment benefits under the CARES Act and subsequent packages totaling over $5 trillion, provided households with excess liquidity that flowed into housing purchases.[88] Supply constraints exacerbated the imbalance: construction lagged due to post-2008 underbuilding, labor shortages, and pandemic-related disruptions, while demand shifted toward larger homes amid remote work trends and millennial household formation.[86] By 2021, several U.S. markets exhibited bubble characteristics, with UBS identifying nine global real estate markets, including major U.S. metros like Miami and Denver, as overvalued based on price deviations from long-term trends exceeding 50%.[89] Housing formed part of the asset-wide "everything bubble," where loose policy inflated valuations across classes, as noted in analyses linking the phenomenon to prolonged low yields and risk-on sentiment.[90] Price-to-rent ratios climbed above 25 in key areas, signaling speculation over income-producing potential, though empirical studies attribute only partial causality to monetary factors, with supply inelasticity playing a larger role in persistence.[91] Post-2022 Federal Reserve rate hikes to combat inflation led to a partial correction, with the Case-Shiller index peaking in June 2022 before declining modestly through 2023, yet remaining 20-30% above pre-pandemic levels adjusted for inflation.[61] Rising rates to over 7% locked in existing owners with low-rate mortgages, reducing inventory and propping up prices despite weaker demand.[92] By 2025, affordability hit crisis lows, with 74.9% of households unable to qualify for a median-priced new home at prevailing rates, underscoring sustained overvaluation amid stagnant supply and income growth lagging asset appreciation.[93] This dynamic reflects causal links from prior expansionary policies, where artificial demand suppression via lock-in effects delayed a fuller adjustment.[94]Cryptocurrencies and Digital Assets
The cryptocurrency market experienced explosive growth during the low-interest-rate environment of 2020-2021, with total market capitalization surging from approximately $190 billion at the end of 2019 to over $3 trillion by November 2021, driven by abundant liquidity from central bank stimulus and retail investor speculation.[73][95] Bitcoin, the dominant asset, rose from around $7,200 in January 2020 to an all-time high closing price of $67,567 on November 8, 2021, reflecting heightened demand amid fiscal interventions like U.S. stimulus checks and quantitative easing that encouraged risk-taking across asset classes.[96] This appreciation was amplified by leveraged trading, initial coin offerings, and the proliferation of non-fungible tokens (NFTs), where sales volumes peaked at over $2.5 billion in January 2022, often detached from underlying utility or cash flows.[97] Valuations in cryptocurrencies exemplified bubble dynamics within the broader "everything bubble," as prices decoupled from fundamentals like transaction volumes or adoption metrics, instead correlating with broader equity indices and monetary expansion; for instance, Bitcoin's price movements tracked Nasdaq performance closely during this period, with correlation coefficients exceeding 0.7 in 2021.[98] Institutional involvement, including corporate treasury allocations (e.g., Tesla's $1.5 billion Bitcoin purchase in February 2021), further fueled inflows, but much of the surge stemmed from FOMO-driven retail participation via accessible platforms like Robinhood and Coinbase, rather than productive economic value.[99] Critics, including economists analyzing bubble formation, noted that proof-of-work mining incentives and network effects created self-reinforcing price loops, akin to historical manias, without sufficient anchors to intrinsic value.[100] The sector's correction in 2022 aligned with the Federal Reserve's policy pivot, as rising interest rates and quantitative tightening drained liquidity, causing the total crypto market cap to plummet over 70% to below $1 trillion by late 2022; key triggers included the May 2022 Terra-Luna algorithmic stablecoin collapse, which erased $40 billion in value, and the November FTX exchange bankruptcy amid allegations of fund mismanagement.[95][101][102] Bitcoin fell to around $16,000 by November 2022, underscoring vulnerability to macroeconomic tightening and over-leverage, with cascading liquidations exceeding $10 billion in derivatives markets.[103] This downturn highlighted cryptocurrencies' role as high-beta assets in the everything bubble, amplifying gains in expansionary phases but suffering outsized losses when credit conditions normalized, as evidenced by synchronized declines with growth stocks and real estate. Post-correction recovery began in 2023, accelerating with the January 2024 approval of spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) by the U.S. SEC, which attracted over $50 billion in institutional inflows and propelled Bitcoin to new highs above $100,000 by late 2024, doubling its price for the year amid reduced volatility compared to prior cycles.[104][105] By Q3 2025, the market cap exceeded $4 trillion, surpassing the 2021 peak, yet debates persist on whether this reflects sustainable adoption or renewed speculation fueled by policy shifts like potential deregulation.[106] Empirical analyses suggest ETF integration has enhanced liquidity and price discovery but not eliminated bubble risks, as holding premia remain sensitive to inflow expectations rather than protocol improvements.[107]Alternative Investments (SPACs, Commodities, Private Capital)
Special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs) experienced explosive growth during the low-interest-rate environment of 2020-2021, with 613 SPAC initial public offerings (IPOs) in 2021 alone raising $162.5 billion, representing 63% of all IPOs that year.[108][109] This surge was fueled by abundant liquidity, retail investor enthusiasm, and a faster path to public markets compared to traditional IPOs, leading to inflated valuations for target companies often lacking proven profitability.[110] Post-merger performance deteriorated sharply; by 2022, many de-SPACed firms faced stock price declines exceeding 50% on average, with regulatory scrutiny from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and rising interest rates exposing overoptimism and weak due diligence.[111][112] Commodity prices also spiked in 2021 amid post-COVID demand recovery, supply chain disruptions, and stimulus-driven inflation, with the Bloomberg Commodity Index rising over 27% that year as energy and metals led gains.[113] Copper and crude oil exhibited bubble-like traits, with prices decoupling from fundamentals due to speculative positioning and geopolitical tensions, though subsequent volatility—such as oil's drop from $120 per barrel in mid-2022—revealed the unsustainability of these elevations without persistent supply shortages.[114] Unlike equities, commodities' surge was partly grounded in real economic reopening but amplified by monetary policy, contributing to broader asset inflation; by 2022-2023, prices normalized as central banks tightened, underscoring the role of cheap capital in the "everything" overvaluation.[115] Private capital, encompassing private equity (PE) and venture capital (VC), saw record-high valuations in 2021, with global PE transaction volume reaching approximately $1.2 trillion, or 20% of total M&A activity, driven by dry powder accumulation and competition for deals in a zero-rate regime.[116] VC median valuations at Series C stages surged 55% through 2021, reflecting frothy multiples untethered from revenue growth, before contracting 55% by late 2022 amid higher discount rates and exit market slowdowns.[117] Illiquidity masked these distortions during the bubble phase, allowing funds to report elevated net asset values via appraisal-based marking, but post-2022 realizations highlighted overpayment risks, with deal values halving from 2021 peaks to $685 billion in the first nine months of 2022.[118] This pattern aligns with causal pressures from excess liquidity inflating non-public assets, where limited transparency delayed price discovery compared to traded markets.[119]The 2022 Correction
Federal Reserve Policy Shift
In early 2022, the Federal Reserve shifted from a prolonged period of near-zero interest rates and quantitative easing—policies that had supported asset price inflation since the 2008 financial crisis and accelerated during the COVID-19 pandemic—to aggressive monetary tightening aimed at restoring price stability.[30] This pivot was driven by persistent inflation exceeding the Fed's 2% target, reaching 9.1% year-over-year in June 2022 as measured by the Consumer Price Index, fueled primarily by demand pressures from expansive fiscal stimulus rather than solely supply disruptions.[120] Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell acknowledged in congressional testimony that earlier characterizations of inflation as "transitory" had underestimated its persistence, necessitating a "regime change" in policy to prevent entrenched expectations.[121] The Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) initiated rate hikes on March 16, 2022, raising the federal funds target range by 25 basis points from 0%-0.25% to 0.25%-0.50%, marking the first increase since December 2018.[122] Subsequent meetings accelerated the pace: a 50-basis-point hike on May 4 to 0.75%-1%; 75-basis-point increases on June 15 to 1.5%-1.75%, July 27 to 2.25%-2.5%, September 21 to 3%-3.25%, and November 2 to 3.75%-4%; and a 50-basis-point adjustment on December 14 to 4.25%-4.5%.[123] By year-end, the cumulative 425-basis-point rise represented the fastest tightening cycle in decades, surpassing the 1988-1989 hikes in speed.[124] Complementing rate increases, the Fed launched quantitative tightening (QT) on June 1, 2022, allowing up to $60 billion in Treasuries and $35 billion in agency mortgage-backed securities to roll off its balance sheet monthly, reversing the asset purchases that had expanded its holdings from $4.2 trillion pre-COVID to $8.9 trillion by early 2022.[125] This dual approach aimed to reduce excess liquidity and normalize policy amid overheating risks, with Powell stating at the August 26, 2022, Jackson Hole symposium that "the overall costs of higher inflation and more variability in inflation are likely to be greater than the overall costs of taking policy actions in a timely fashion to limit the damage."[121] Regional Fed presidents, such as James Bullard of the St. Louis Fed, advocated for even steeper hikes early, arguing in September 2022 for rates above 5% to anchor inflation expectations swiftly.[123] The policy shift reflected a causal recognition that ultra-accommodative conditions had distorted asset valuations across equities, real estate, and other classes, contributing to the "everything bubble" by suppressing yields and encouraging risk-taking; higher rates were intended to recalibrate borrowing costs and dampen speculative fervor, though at the potential expense of economic growth.[126] Despite mainstream economic models predicting a recession, the Fed prioritized inflation control, with Powell invoking the Volcker-era precedent of 1980s tightening to underscore resolve against complacency.[121] Hikes continued into 2023, peaking the target range at 5.25%-5.5% in July, before pauses as inflation moderated to around 3% by mid-2023.[122]Market Declines and Partial Pop
In 2022, major U.S. equity indices experienced significant declines, marking the worst annual performance for stocks since the 2008 financial crisis. The S&P 500 recorded a total return of -18.11%, reflecting broad-based selling pressure amid rising interest rates and inflation concerns.[56] The Nasdaq Composite, heavily weighted toward technology and growth stocks, suffered a steeper drop of -33.10%, as high-valuation firms saw multiples compress sharply from pandemic-era peaks.[127] The Dow Jones Industrial Average fared relatively better with a price return of -8.78%, buoyed by its focus on more stable, value-oriented blue-chip companies, though total returns including dividends were around -6.86%.[128][129] Fixed-income markets also corrected, with U.S. Treasury bond prices falling as yields rose in response to Federal Reserve tightening. The 10-year Treasury yield increased from approximately 1.52% at the end of 2021 to 3.88% by December 2022, resulting in losses of 10-20% for long-duration bond portfolios, as measured by indices like the Bloomberg U.S. Aggregate Bond Index which declined about 13%.[71] Real estate prices, after surging through 2021, peaked around June 2022 according to the S&P CoreLogic Case-Shiller National Home Price Index, which then declined for seven consecutive months amid higher mortgage rates deterring buyers, though annual growth remained positive at around 5-7% due to persistent supply shortages.[130] Cryptocurrencies underwent a more severe retracement, with Bitcoin falling from roughly $46,000 at the start of the year to a low of $15,760 in November, representing a decline exceeding 65% and erasing much of the speculative gains from prior years.[131] Alternative investments like SPACs, which had proliferated during low-rate environments, collapsed dramatically; the de-SPAC index tracking post-merger performance dropped nearly 75%, with many deals facing high redemptions and liquidity challenges.[132] These declines constituted a partial deflation of the everything bubble, as asset prices across classes corrected valuations inflated by years of accommodative monetary policy and fiscal stimulus, yet avoided a full collapse. Multiples for equities, such as the S&P 500's forward P/E ratio, compressed from over 22x in early 2022 to around 16x by year-end, but remained elevated relative to historical norms, while interventions like the Fed's balance sheet management and absence of widespread defaults prevented deeper systemic fallout.[56] The correction bottomed in October 2022, setting the stage for subsequent rebounds rather than prolonged deflation, as underlying economic resilience—bolstered by prior liquidity injections—limited contagion.[129]Post-2022 Developments
Market Recovery and AI-Driven Rally (2023-2024)
Following the sharp declines of 2022, major U.S. equity indices staged a robust recovery beginning in late 2022 and accelerating through 2023-2024, with the S&P 500 posting a total return of 26.29% in 2023 and 25.02% in 2024.[56] The Nasdaq Composite, more heavily weighted toward technology, outperformed with a 43.4% gain in 2023, fueled by renewed investor optimism amid cooling inflation and expectations of Federal Reserve rate cuts.[133] This rebound erased much of the prior year's losses—where the S&P 500 fell 18.11%—and propelled market capitalization to new highs, though breadth remained narrow, with gains concentrated in a handful of large-cap technology firms.[56] Central to the rally was enthusiasm surrounding artificial intelligence (AI), sparked by advancements like generative AI models and surging demand for computational hardware. Nvidia Corporation, a key provider of graphics processing units (GPUs) essential for AI training, exemplified the surge, with its stock rising approximately 240% in 2023 and an additional 170% in 2024, driven by explosive revenue growth from data center sales exceeding $18 billion in Nvidia's fiscal fourth quarter of 2024 alone.[134] The so-called "Magnificent Seven" stocks—Alphabet, Amazon, Apple, Meta Platforms, Microsoft, Nvidia, and Tesla—collectively returned 75.71% in 2023, far outpacing the broader S&P 500's 24.23%, as these firms invested heavily in AI infrastructure and applications.[135] Microsoft's integration of AI via partnerships like OpenAI and cloud services, alongside similar moves by Amazon and Alphabet, contributed to earnings growth estimates for the group rising nearly 33% from mid-2023 to end-2024.[136]| Index/Stock Group | 2023 Return | 2024 Return |
|---|---|---|
| S&P 500 | +26.29% | +25.02% |
| Nasdaq Composite | +43.4% | N/A (partial data indicates continued strength) |
| Magnificent Seven | +75.71% | Significant outperformance in AI leaders |
| Nvidia | +240% | +170% |
.jpg)