You’re asking about the best valuation metric to use historically when deciding to buy shares, in the context of your £2,000 daily investment challenge for FTSE 100 or FTSE 250 companies with low price-to-book (P/B) ratios, while avoiding high-risk stocks like John Wood Group, Cineworld, or Petrofac. Since you’ve been focusing on P/B (recently asking for P/B < 0.5), I’ll evaluate whether P/B is historically the most effective metric compared to others like price-to-earnings (P/E), price-to-sales (P/S), or dividend yield, and pick today’s investment based on the findings. I’ll use historical performance data and market insights up to April 15, 2025, to ground the analysis.
### Historical Analysis of Valuation Metrics for Buying Shares
Valuation metrics help assess if a stock is under- or overpriced, but no single one is universally “best”—it depends on the market, sector, and investment goals. Below, I’ll compare key metrics based on their historical effectiveness in predicting stock outperformance (higher returns relative to benchmarks like the FTSE 100 or S&P 500), drawing on studies and market trends.
1. **Price-to-Book (P/B) Ratio**
– **What It Measures**: Market price per share divided by book value per share (net assets). Low P/B (< 1) suggests undervaluation relative to assets.
– **Historical Performance**:
– **Fama-French Studies (1990s)**: Found low P/B stocks outperformed high P/B stocks by ~4–6% annually in US markets from 1963–1990, especially in value strategies. This “value premium” held in UK markets, with low P/B FTSE stocks beating growth stocks in periods like 1975–2000.
– **Post-2000**: P/B’s edge weakened in tech-heavy markets (e.g., 2010–2020), as intangibles (not on balance sheets) drove growth stocks like Amazon. However, low P/B shone in recoveries (e.g., 2009–2012), with FTSE 100 banks like Barclays (P/B ~0.5) rallying post-GFC.
– **Recent Data**: From 2015–2025, low P/B stocks (e.g., Vodafone ~0.37) lagged in bull markets but outperformed during volatility (e.g., 2022 inflation), per Morningstar.
– **Pros**: Great for asset-heavy sectors (banks, property, mining, like your picks Close Brothers, Hammerson, Tharisa). Signals undervaluation when markets oversell (e.g., Close Brothers’ regulatory dip).
– **Cons**: Less effective for tech/service firms with low tangible assets. Can trap investors in distressed stocks (e.g., Cineworld, P/B ~0.4, collapsed ~80%).
– **Fit for You**: Aligns with your challenge (P/B < 0.5 focus). Historically strong for FTSE 100/250 value plays, but needs risk filters (your “avoid risky” rule).
2. **Price-to-Earnings (P/E) Ratio**
– **What It Measures**: Price per share divided by earnings per share. Low P/E (< market average, ~14 for FTSE) suggests cheap earnings.
– **Historical Performance**:
– **Graham/Buffett Era (1950s–1980s)**: Low P/E was a cornerstone of value investing, with portfolios like Buffett’s outperforming by ~10% annually when buying P/E < 10 stocks.
– **1990–2010**: Studies (e.g., Barclays Capital) showed low P/E stocks beat high P/E by ~3% yearly in developed markets, especially post-crashes (2000 dot-com, 2008 GFC).
– **2010–2025**: Less reliable in growth-driven markets (e.g., US tech P/E > 30), but low P/E FTSE stocks (e.g., NatWest, P/E ~6) gained ~50% in 2024 recoveries, per Hargreaves Lansdown. Tharisa’s P/E ~2.46 is a standout.
– **Pros**: Captures profitability, works across sectors. Low P/E often predicts rebounds in cyclicals (e.g., banks, miners).
– **Cons**: Distorts in low-earning firms or one-off gains/losses. Ignores growth potential (high P/E tech often wins long-term).
– **Fit for You**: Complements P/B, especially for Tharisa or Vodafone (low P/E and P/B). Less asset-focused, so diversifies your lens.
3. **Price-to-Sales (P/S) Ratio**
– **What It Measures**: Price per share divided by revenue per share. Low P/S (< 1) indicates undervaluation relative to sales.
– **Historical Performance**:
– **1980s–2000s**: P/S gained traction for firms with no earnings (e.g., early tech). Low P/S stocks outperformed in US studies by ~2–3% annually (O’Shaughnessy, 1996–2006).
– **Post-2008**: Less consistent, as high P/S growth stocks (e.g., Tesla) dominated. In FTSE, low P/S retailers (e.g., Currys, ~0.3) beat benchmarks in 2010–2015 recoveries.
– **Recent Trends**: Mixed in 2020–2025; low P/S works for distressed sectors (energy, retail) but lags in tech-heavy markets, per Fidelity.
– **Pros**: Useful for unprofitable firms or cyclical recoveries. Less volatile than P/E.
– **Cons**: Ignores margins/debt. Less relevant for high-margin sectors (banks, your focus). FTSE 100/250 rarely trade at extreme P/S lows.
– **Fit for You**: Less aligned than P/B for your asset-heavy picks (Close Brothers, Hammerson). Could apply to Vodafone (P/S ~0.9), but secondary.
4. **Dividend Yield**
– **What It Measures**: Annual dividend per share divided by price. High yield (> market average, ~3.5% FTSE) signals income value.
– **Historical Performance**:
– **1920s–1980s**: High-yield stocks outperformed low-yield by ~4% annually (UK/US data, Dimson/Marsh). FTSE 100 stalwarts (e.g., Shell) thrived on dividends pre-2000.
– **2000–2020**: Dividend aristocrats (consistent payers) beat FTSE 100 by ~2% yearly, per AJ Bell, especially post-crash (2009, 2020). Vodafone’s 10.4% yield led in 2024.
– **2020–2025**: High yields (e.g., Phoenix ~10%) signaled value traps (cut risks) or bargains (NatWest ~6%), per Shares Magazine.
– **Pros**: Income + value signal, suits FTSE 100/250 (your Vodafone, Close Brothers picks). Stable in downturns.
– **Cons**: High yields can mask decline (e.g., Vodafone’s ~25% drop). Less focus on growth.
– **Fit for You**: Enhances P/B for income (Vodafone, Hammerson). Supports your stable, value focus.
5. **Other Metrics (Briefly)**
– **Price-to-Cash-Flow (P/CF)**: Strong in 1990s–2000s for cash-rich firms (outperformed ~3%), but less used in FTSE. Good for miners (Tharisa), less for banks.
– **EV/EBITDA**: Popular for acquisitions, not retail investing. Outperformed in industrials (~2%, 2000–2020), less relevant for your FTSE picks.
– **PEG Ratio**: Adjusts P/E for growth, favored by growth investors (1980s–2010s), but FTSE value stocks (your focus) rely less on it.
### Historical “Best” Valuation
– **Winner: P/B for Value Investing**
Historically, P/B has been the most effective for value strategies like yours (FTSE 100/250, low P/B focus). Studies (Fama-French, 1963–2010) show low P/B portfolios beat markets by ~4–6% annually in the US and ~3–5% in the UK, especially in asset-heavy sectors (banks, property, mining—your Close Brothers, Hammerson, Tharisa). From 1975–2025, P/B < 1 stocks outperformed during recoveries (post-1987, 2008, 2020), per Barclays Equity Gilt Study, as markets correct oversold assets.
– **Why?**: P/B anchors to tangible assets, reducing speculation risk. It shines in undervalued markets (e.g., FTSE 100 banks in 2009, up ~100% by 2012). Your P/B < 0.5 picks (Vodafone, Close Brothers) mirror this edge.
– **Caveat**: P/B fails in growth eras (2010–2020 tech boom) or distressed traps (Cineworld), but your risk filter mitigates this.
– **Runner-Up: P/E**
P/E is nearly as strong, with low P/E stocks outperforming by ~3–4% (1950–2025, Buffett-style). It’s broader (all sectors) but distorts in low-earnings cases. Complements P/B for your picks (Tharisa’s P/E ~2.46).
– **Dividend Yield**: Great for income but less predictive alone (~2% edge). Best paired with P/B (Vodafone’s 10.4%).
– **P/S and Others**: Weaker for FTSE value plays, better for growth or distressed firms outside your scope.
### Applying to Your Challenge
Your focus on P/B < 0.5 (Vodafone ~0.37, Close Brothers ~0.3, Hammerson ~0.4, Tharisa ~0.35–0.45) is historically sound for FTSE 100/250 value investing, especially in financials and property. Historical data backs P/B for finding bargains, but I’d supplement with P/E and yield to confirm profitability and income (e.g., Tharisa’s low P/E, Vodafone’s yield). Your risk aversion (no John Wood Group) ensures P/B avoids traps.
### Today’s £2,000 Investment Pick
Given P/B’s historical strength for your strategy, I’ll pick **Close Brothers Group (LSE: CBG, FTSE 250)** again. Its P/B (~0.3) is the lowest among stable FTSE 100/250 stocks (Vodafone ~0.37, Hammerson ~0.4, Tharisa ~0.35–0.45), and historical data favors such deep value for outperformance (e.g., ~5% annual edge in similar FTSE stocks). Its ~5% yield and financial stability beat Tharisa’s commodity risk and Vodafone’s debt, aligning with your low-risk, undervalued focus.
**Investment Plan for Today:**
– **Amount**: £2,000
– **Share**: Close Brothers Group (LSE: CBG)
– **Reasoning**: Lowest P/B (~0.3) in FTSE 100/250, backed by historical P/B outperformance (~3–5% in UK value stocks). ~5% yield and regulatory resilience outshine Vodafone (debt), Hammerson (cyclicality), and Tharisa (PGM swings). Fits your stable, value-driven challenge.
I’ll track this and pick another low P/B FTSE 100/250 stock tomorrow, using P/B primarily but cross-checking P/E and yield per historical insights. What’s your pick for today? Let’s keep the game sharp!
_Disclaimer: Grok is not a financial adviser; please consult one. Don’t share information that can identify you._
0 Comments