Back to Drew's Views
December 11, 2019
Previous
Next

Europe vs the US: Is it all about sector exposures?

Markets

In America’s Decade, we highlighted [1] the very similar returns provided by the MSCI Europe and S&P 500 from 1980 through 2009, and the very different returns since. Many commenters (accurately, mind you) wondered if the difference this past decade has had at least something to do with sector exposures in each region.  The next question, of course, is if the performance of the sectors in each region was also different.

Before proceeding, let’s get in the right frame of mind.  Below are the total returns of the S&P 500 (red) and the Eurostoxx 600 (blue) so far this decade.  From December 31, 2009 through October 31, 2019, the US index has generated total returns of ~234% while the European index has mustered only 70%.

EU v US 1.png

‍

This first table shows the average sector weights from January 2010 through this month.  These “average weights” can be misleading (more on that below) but the table will give you a general sense of the differences in sector exposures, geographically.   And yes, as many suspected, the US has been relatively overweight Tech and Comms, while Europe has been relatively overweight Financials, Materials, and Consumer Non-Cyclicals.

Even within these sectors, we can see that the constituents of each sector matter as well.  The next table shows the annualized returns of each of these sectors.

As an example, in the US, the communication sector has companies like Netflix, Amazon, Google, and Facebook. Europe doesn’t.  Europe has Netfonds, Amadeus, Goodwin and Facephi [2].

So even with the same weights, the annualized returns of the communications sector in the US trounced the same sector returns in Europe.  

Over nearly ten years, these annualized differences did their geometric thing, and compounded their face off.

Even in the sectors where Europe is overweight (like the Financials, Utilities and Consumer Non-Cyclicals noted below), the performance of similar US sectors has been markedly better.  They were getting upgrades, and the Europeans weren’t.

EU v US 4.png

This in turn begs the top-down question (has macroeconomic policy – e.g. aggressive QE – made a big difference here, perhaps influencing factor performance and investor appetite); or are US companies in these sectors just better?  

The folks at SAP and Oracle or Airbus and Boeing might have different answers, but this gets back to the question we initially asked:  Why did all these multinationals perform similarly for 30 years, and why has that decoupled since?

And getting back to the initial question about overall sector exposures, we’ve made the following observations [3]:

EU v US 5.PNG

So yes, the sector exposures did have an impact, but probably not as high as many believed. The sector constituents mattered more (much more) than the sector bet, which gets us back to the initial question.  Knowing that it wasn’t primarily sector differences is illuminating, but it doesn’t explain the “why” of the relative returns.  

FOOTNOTES

[1] https://www.albertbridgecapital.com/drew-views/2019/11/5/americas-decade

[2] No offense to any of these guys. Their names, unfortunately for them just happen to match up.

‍[3] And this is with a lot of fudging and plugging.  We only have EoM weights, so if companies come into an index (or leave) mid-month, we have slippage. There are a million other things that give us slippage, including projection of total returns based on average sector exposures.  This is not CRISP data.  To tie the end-result up with actual index returns, we’ve inserted a plug and applied it proportionally.  So, take none of these numbers as anything other than a general guide to the geographic differences in sector contributions.  We’re merely comfortable enough here saying that we’re in the ballpark.

Download PDF

Topics

Markets

DISCLAIMER

The views and opinions expressed in this post are those of the post’s author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Albert Bridge Capital, or its affiliates. This post has been provided solely for information purposes and does not constitute an offer or solicitation of an offer or any advice or recommendation to purchase any securities or other financial instruments and may not be construed as such. The author makes no representations as to the accuracy or completeness of any information in this post or found by following any link in this post.

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE

Text Link

Heading

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Suspendisse varius enim in eros elementum tristique. Duis cursus, mi quis viverra ornare, eros dolor interdum nulla, ut commodo diam libero vitae erat. Aenean faucibus nibh et justo cursus id rutrum lorem imperdiet. Nunc ut sem vitae risus tristique posuere.

Text Link
Text Link

Sell in May and Go Away?

Turns out there may actually be something to the old Sell in May and Go Away adage - at least over the last 80+ years.

Markets
Asset Pricing
Read More
Text Link

If Growth Stocks Sell Off Will They Bring Value Stocks Down with Them?

Growth stocks crushed just about everything from 2017 through 2021. Not that they necessarily will, but if they do give back some or all of their gains, given their weightings, times will be tough for broader indices. But what about the value names within them, will they sell off in sympathy as well? Of course no one knows, including ourselves, but we take a quick look at behavior of value names as the tech bubble sold off from 2000 through 2002. This example may be worth some consideration.

Markets
Factors
Read More
Text Link

Stock Market History, Illuminated

Some year-end charts and tables asking some big questions about what comes next.

Asset Pricing
Factors
Markets
Valuation
Read More
Text Link

Which One Are You?

So, if you are in the taxi, what is your first move (and you can’t say “do nothing”). Are you trimming or adding?

Markets
Stock Picking
Read More
Text Link

Just How Cheap is Europe vs. the US, and Should it Be?

As it turns out, it isn’t that the people are paying a bigger growth premium for US Growth over European Growth; but instead it is that people are paying a (much) bigger multiple for US Value than for European Value.

Markets
Stock Picking
Valuation
Read More
Text Link

Are American Companies Better than European Ones?

If we again go back and start the clock on January 1, 1980, and stop it thirty years later on December 31, 2009, we see that the S&P 500 generated annual total returns (with dividends) of 11.5%. During that exact same period, guess what the annual returns of the MSCI Europe were? Also 11.5%. This last decade, however, things have gotten out of whack.

Markets
Stock Picking
Read More
Navigations
HomeTeamDrew's viewsPressContact
Disclaimers
Legal & regulatoryPrivacy policyCookies policy
How to get in Touch
info@albertbridgecapital.com

Subscribe to Drew's Views

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Thank you! Your submission has been received!
Oops! Something went wrong while submitting the form.
© Albert Bridge Capital 2022
Website by SW10media.com
On the Relationship Between Gasoline Prices and Vehicle Demand
Sell in May and Go Away?
The Politics of Passive Investing
If Growth Stocks Sell Off Will They Bring Value Stocks Down with Them?
Stock Market History, Illuminated
Which One Are You?
Was Ben Graham a Quant?
Do Short Term Flows Permanently Affect Share Prices?
Just How Cheap is Europe vs. the US, and Should it Be?
Are American Companies Better than European Ones?
Rumpelstiltskin and Meme Stock Investing
Archegos, Disclosure, and Price Discovery
It's All About the Fundies
On Unlimited Upside
A Memo to Investors
Investors? Possibly you!
Avengers Assemble!
How Did This Even Happen?
Was “Value” Just a Hot Hand Thing?
The Hot-Hand Fallacy Fallacy Fallacy?
Cue the Camouflage
The Times that Try Stock-Pickers’ Souls
A Different Game?
Heads I Win
A New Ice Age?
Grandpa Stocks
Bubblicious?
On Negative Oil and Futures Prices
In Flew Enza
COVID-19 and Equity Markets
Regulators to the Rescue?
Perspective
We Don’t Make Pizzas
Ben Graham the Growth Investor?
Not a Bad Decade
On the Impact of the FAMANGs
Europe vs the US: Is it all about sector exposures?
Behavioural Finance is Finance
America’s Decade
Known Unknowns and Share Prices
Prediction, Publicity, and Paul the Octopus
Are Company Visits Good or Bad?
Everybody Was Kung Fu Fighting?
Voting Machines and Weighing Machines
The DCF is the Randy Watson of Valuation
The Sacrilegious Diaries: Measuring the Impact of Portfolio Turnover
Passively Irrational?
Imagine No Inflation
The Sacrilegious Diaries: The Benefits of Turnover
Stay in the Game
I’m Volatility?
Woody was Right
When You Can’t Wait For Tomorrow
James Harden and Alpha
Groundhog Day and Overnight Returns
Debiasing and Alpha
Peak “Peak Car” ?
The Right Way
The First Step to Regaining Credibility
The Futility of Market Timing
Visualizing the Arithmetic of Active Management
123 Years of the Dow
Sweet Emotion?
Share Buybacks, Bad Companies, and Bear Markets
Risk and Portfolio Theory
Keeping Calm and Carrying On
Reminiscences of a Stock Operator: The Volkswagen Chronicles, Ten Years Later
We’d Rather Not Sleep
Factor Timing, Should You Try?
The Mathematics of Maintaining Bet Size
The Grandfather of Behavioural Investing
On Sexual Chocolate and Semi-Annual Reporting
Island Economies and Risk
Build a Bear?
Data Science and Alpha
We’re all Value Investors
Hunting for Alpha
Career Risk, Alpha, and Contrarian Investing
Passive Flows and Wheelbarrows
God Bless the Shorts
Equilibrium Happens
Horses and Stocks
Peak Quality?
Bill Sharpe and Hank Aaron
Unwarrented
The Search for Excellence and the Loser’s Game
Fooled by Non-Randomness
Half Hearted Is Half Minded
Still Superman, but without the cape
122 year Dow Jones Histogram: Putting 2017 into context
Pegs, P/E'S and the Value Premium
Rick Barry and Lewis Carroll
Secular Winners and Value Investing
On Passive Flows, Smart Money, and Alpha
The Voting Machine
Prevous
Next
homeTeamdrew's viewspressCOntactDisclaimers