This is not a 2000-style stock bubble

Rather, we are simply struggling with how to value the shares that had been the market leaders before things shifted in late February.

By Jim Cramer May 12, 2014 11:33AM

Person looking at stock market data © Yamato1987/Getty ImagesWe shouldn't be talking about bubbles. We should be talking about incredible shrinking bubbles. That's right, the denizens of pure overvaluation are coming down so hard and so fast in this market that the idea that we are about to see a hideous year-2000-like bubble collapse smacks more of fiction than of fact.

While there could be plenty of damage ahead in the once-amazingly overvalued momentum stocks, you must admit that a great deal has already occurred. Also, we've seen the overall market go higher as these stocks go down -- not lower, as we saw in 2000. The drowning man isn't pulling down the strong swimmers around him. They are just letting him drown and going along their merry way to better, safer waters. logoI continue to search for the disconnect between what is happening with the momentum stocks and what is happening with the rest of the market, and I have concluded that the two markets are collapsing into one. It now appears there is only one form of ordering: the traditional metric of earnings per share.

That's right, we are no longer using two sets of parameters to measure stocks -- revenue growth on one hand and earnings growth on the other. We are simply valuing all stocks on the basis of the actual reported earnings growth, and the revenue-growth metric is being discredited daily, even if it revolves around bountiful cash flow. At this moment, cash flow means nothing. Only actual reported earnings per share can inspire a higher stock price.

This discrediting of the value of revenue growth is not in any way, shape or form similar to the discrediting process that the Nasdaq underwent in 2000. At that point we had sought to value Internet-related stocks not on revenue but on all sorts of ephemeral data, such as eyeballs, unique users, stickiness of the site and future monetization of contracts that could or could not ultimately occur. In that period the vast majority of the 300 companies that had initial public offerings, and failed, would almost never report a profit, and most had little or no revenue to speak of. If they did have revenue, they were spending fortunes -- and losing them -- in order to get them.

If there is a similarity between now and then, it's this: Then, as now, the market reverted to being valued on EPS. But we must never confuse the revenue standard that the momentum funds had been using in 2014 with the eyeball-unique garbage metrics from the days of yore.

That will be important, as you shall see, because, as overvalued as some companies got this time around, I think the possibility of most of them failing is not all that great, with the exception of those going public in 2014. Those are a different and far more egregiously negative story.

You may still dismiss these arguments and hold your ground, claiming that when the leadership component of the market rolls over, the rest of the market must follow in its footsteps. But consider the 2000 situation again. We know that the week the Nasdaq peaked in 2000 was the same week we began to see a rally in the majority of the S&P 500 stocks that had been treading water. You just won't notice it if you look at the charts now because, at that peak, an astounding 33 percent of the S&P moment was made up of tech stocks -- almost double the current percentage.

We talk about disappearances of tens of billions in market capitalization back then -- but the smaller stocks, the dot-bombs, weren't responsible for most of it. Here are some of the stocks that were responsible, along with their peak valuations:  Microsoft (MSFT) at $476 billion -- now $326 billion; Cisco (CSCO) at $448 billion -- now at $118 billion; Intel (INTC) at $277 billion -- now at $130 billion; and Oracle (ORCL) at $200 billion -- now at $182 billion. (Microsoft owns and publishes MSN Money.)

You can see how the S&P would struggle to go higher in aggregate as those tech stocks deflated. On a chart it looks like the Nasdaq brought down the S&P 500, in keeping with the current fear-mongering I hear all over the place. In reality, a close reading of the individual charts says this doomsday view does not hold up to close scrutiny. The beheadings of the overvalued techs in the S&P 500 created more losses than what the rest of the market could absorb, so the S&P ultimately went lower.

But if you analyze the breakdown, you will see that what was happening underneath is precisely what is happening now: tremendous gains in utilities, consumer-goods stocks, drug companies and classic growth stocks that had nothing to do with tech.

And while the averages are currently hitting all-time highs, understand that the valuations are pretty tame. Interestingly, the largest price-to-earnings-multiple stretches as a function of growth rate are coming from the utilities and the real estate investment trusts. In fact, if you want a bubble, look no further than these stocks, as they are simply part and parcel with the real worldwide bubble -- the bubble in the global bond markets. They are a function of the 10-year U.S. Treasury threatening to break through a 2.5 percent yield at all times. But that's for another article.

Still, I recognize the pain in the market, and I want to attack it and show you what I think is really going on. You see, I do not believe the market is undergoing a crisis that will end with the collapse of companies worth hundreds of billions of dollars, as in 2000. We are simply struggling with how to value the stocks that had been the market leaders before the market changed its coloration at the end of February -- a shift that came with the pirouette in (CRM). After the company reported a fabulous quarter, better than what all analysts were expecting, the stock hit an all-time high in after-hours trading and then belly-flopped the next day. That was the beginning of a swoon that has taken the bellwether stock of the group from $66 to $50, with no real sign of bottoming on the horizon.

Until that reversal, the momentum bulls had felt they would be rewarded continually if they owned stocks with tremendous sales momentum. It had worked ever since the great slowdown in the economy, and there was no reason to believe it was going to stop working.

But it did stop working, and that's still the case today. If the best tech company in the hottest area of tech -- cloud-based software-as-a-service -- gives you spectacular growth and the stock fails to go higher, what does that mean for the less than stellar, less profitable firm? Well, we seem to find out the answer to that daily, don't we?

Jim Cramer headshot

Jim Cramer's Action Alerts Plus: Check out this charitable trust portfolio to see the stocks Cramer thinks could be winners.

More from TheStreet


May 12, 2014 11:52AM
Funny thing about market bubbles - they are hard to spot until they pop, then everyone collectively hits themselves in the forehead and says "What were we thinking?".   Remember all the tech companies that never made a dime that had market caps of billions of dollars?  At the time, that seemed normal, until it wasn't.  Same with anyone who could fog a mirror getting a mortgage.

Now, we could be looking at the perfect storm of bubbles, that all could pop about the same time.  Not only is there an over-inflated bubble in stocks, but endless QE is causing a monetary bubble.  There's also a student loan bubble that has been inflating for a couple of decades.  There's also an inverse bubble occurring with artificially suppressed interest rates.  House prices will have to fall if mortgage rates return to historically normal levels of 7-8%.  And don't forget about all the gov debt - that becomes a huge nightmare if interest rates double from here.
May 12, 2014 12:22PM
Cramer is only good at predicting things that have already happened. Remember in 2007 he said every subprime mortgage could go bad without causing any problems for housing.

 He is a buffoon albeit a rich one. But his wealth has come from selling poor advice.
May 12, 2014 2:35PM

They can’t ever raise interest rates because it’s only with near zero rates that they can fully manipulate stock and real estate prices.

May 12, 2014 2:39PM
No it isn't a 2000 stock bubble its worse because the government is involved more than ever.
May 12, 2014 12:14PM
The major difference between then and now is who is doing the lying.  In the 2000 bust Wall Street very adeptly convinced folks there was value in internet stocks that would rule the world.  Today we have a Guberment printing money and a FED manipulating money supply and interest rates to protect their lie about the effects of Globalization and how it will deflate American production wages and consequently incomes  to spend on goods and services.  Profits will need to adjust and fall with these decreases in incomes unless of course competition is regulated and destroyed which we are seeing as well at this time. Not just the Liberal media but most all media as well as the banks have been pretty much muzzled or are just ill informed as well.  As I have consistently mentioned here over the last five years I have posted here that Globalization requires American production wages to come into line with emerging markets and lifestyles.  This will require a new currency in time and the abolishment of Social programs like 401k's like we know them and the existing health care system as well as Social Security.  Look for Social Security benefits to be at minimum halved as taxable income drops and politicians wail about how we can no longer afford the payments.  The entire time they created the scenario.   As we are now seeing companies divest themselves of both of these we will see these services become very much degraded and 'POOR" will become the more adept description of millions and millions of previously aspiring middle class Americans.  This ACA eventually will result in those able will buy their own treatment while the majority will be stuck with mediocre at best. Health treatment will likely more resemble our trip to the drivers license renewal facility.  If you doubt this just research how veterans are now being treated at VA facilities. This will entail wage deflation and is a given at this point as the only mechanism to stop this would be policy change in trade and debting and chances of that are none. The corrupt political process continues down this destructive path with both fists clenched and a deaf ear to anyone asking the question why?  This is JMHO
May 12, 2014 12:52PM
A bubble is a bubble is a bubble. This market has been based on nothing but free money and it will not last. Be cautious, be afraid.
May 12, 2014 2:33PM
Agreed ... it is not a 2000 style bubble.  It's a 1929 style bubble.
May 12, 2014 3:14PM
If  the market is in a bubble and it's about to pop just cash in and walk away with your profits. 
As simple as that! 
May 12, 2014 1:19PM

Of course, all of the zealots who profit from the dumb money in the markets now, will never say the party is over (until it is over). Any idiot who compares this bubble with 2000 and 2008 can see the graph look very familiar. Cramer, will in hindsight tell you he warned us, but we did not listen.

May 12, 2014 11:56AM
Jim didn't call 2000 a bubble either. (In 2000) He has never called a bubble a bubble when it was currently a bubble. Stick with your standup, Jim. Calling bubbles is not your strong point.
May 12, 2014 1:37PM

Bubble, smubble.....Yes we have a little trubble out and about...

Didn't realize a Companies P/E of 10 was in "bubble territory", we might be in trubble..?

Are there companies that could be reduced to rubble ?  Probably so....

I kind of like a company with a P/E under 20......Under 15 is much better in my opinion.

Think the S&P 500 average for P/E's is around 15-17...?

My suggestion is if you are invested in Sectors or Equities that may be in a bubble range, overbought, extended, fundamentals going South or poor guidance...

Why would you keep holding them...??

May 12, 2014 1:53PM

Hillary should run with Monica Lewinsky........... I mean she owes her a career and they both like the same flavor of cigar.


That would be a nice way for Hillary to bury the hatchet on her war on women too.

May 12, 2014 1:16PM
Right - when he had angelo mozilla the countrywide ceo on his show Cramer even had the gall to say not to worry that mozilla was selling hundreds of millions worth of stock as he "is old and close to retirement" .....he should be jailed for that nugget alone ...also countrywide was cramers biggest advertiser !! 
May 12, 2014 2:52PM
That's right.  This is not a 2000 style bubble or even a 1929 bubble.

AND yes - these mini-bubbles are shrinking - in the same way the ocean shoreline becomes calm * before the Tsunami *
May 12, 2014 12:52PM
don't forget the CARNEY had the CEO of countrywide on his show pumping his stock right before the collapse.........THIS HACK COSTS HIS FOLLOWERS TONS  WITH HIS BAD PICKS
May 12, 2014 4:09PM

I better beat Beav to the grovel


Thanks O great Obama for this record stock market and all the money it made for the rich people. Never mind that there are more poor people now and less middle class too. God bless the 1%.

May 12, 2014 4:42PM
Sharpton is a RAT FINK.......... you know how you become one?....... you don't just volunteer. They got someting on him and made him rat out.
May 12, 2014 3:22PM
6,4443.27 X 6 years of printing money ( actually debt) = 16,980 ish =   zero , or you can go with Bobo...don't forget to rub his head for good luck
May 12, 2014 4:25PM
It's easy to be rich on the blog Little Beav.
Please help us to maintain a healthy and vibrant community by reporting any illegal or inappropriate behavior. If you believe a message violates theCode of Conductplease use this form to notify the moderators. They will investigate your report and take appropriate action. If necessary, they report all illegal activity to the proper authorities.
100 character limit
Are you sure you want to delete this comment?


Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.

Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.


StockScouter rates stocks from 1 to 10, with 10 being the best, using a system of advanced mathematics to determine a stock's expected risk and return. Ratings are displayed on a bell curve, meaning there will be fewer ratings of 1 and 10 and far more of 4 through 7.

123 rated 1
273 rated 2
482 rated 3
661 rated 4
635 rated 5
639 rated 6
619 rated 7
489 rated 8
277 rated 9
166 rated 10

Top Picks




Top Stocks provides analysis about the most noteworthy stocks in the market each day, combining some of the best content from around the MSN Money site and the rest of the Web.

Contributors include professional investors and journalists affiliated with MSN Money.

Follow us on Twitter @topstocksmsn.