Home » Most Recent Stories

GOLDMAN SACHS 2010 INVESTMENT OUTLOOK – THE BULL WILL CONTINUE

23 December 2009 by Cullen Roche 8 Comments

The rally is going to continue into 2010 according to Wall Street’s most influential bank   (Please see here for Goldman’s top 10 trades of 2010). Analysts at Goldman Sachs Europe and America have released their full year 2010 estimates and they are very bullish about the upcoming year.

Goldman sees very low rates, stronger than expected earnings, strong commodity demand and investor reallocation driving prices higher.  Goldman sees no rate changes through 2011 – one of the most accommodative outlooks of any bank we have covered.  Stronger than expected revenue growth and continued margin expansion will result in 15%+ equity returns in the upcoming year.  Although they see a continuation in the rally some moderation is expected.  As we previously mentioned, their analysts expect many similarities to 2004.  David Kostin wrote:

“Continued profit margin resiliency from prior aggressive cost reductions should drive strong returns in early 2010 and push the S&P 500 towards 1,300.”

Their analysts in Europe are even more bullish.  They see the DJ STOXX 600 rising 20% to 300 by the end of 2010.

Goldman argues that we are transitioning into the growth phase of the recovery from the hope phase.  This period is generally characterized by stabilization in economic growth and lower equity returns than the hope phase.  Nonetheless, doubt remains and catalysts for higher stock prices remain.

Perhaps most important, Goldman sees a continued influx of cash to the equity markets.  Thus far, investors have been risk averse and either remain in cash or have moved into bonds.  Goldman sees a substantial move into equities as investors become less risk averse.

How to play it?  Thematically they focus on three key themes:

  • Dispersion – higher growth and higher sustainable returns companies.
  • BRICs exposure.
  • High and growing dividend growth companies.

* You can find Goldman’s 2010 commodity predictions here.

Source: GS

Disclosures - Unless otherwise noted, authors have no positions in any securities mentioned and readers should never consider this to be investment advice. Always consult your financial advisor before acting on any ideas. Comments Guideline - Readers who denigrate authors or other readers will be banned without warning. This site does not tolerate any sort of reader abuse. The goal of this site is to create an environment that is conducive to learning and better understanding of the monetary system and the investment world. We expect readers to behave maturely and responsibly. We welcome and encourage intense and intelligent discourse, but the site adheres to a strict 1 strike policy. While it is your right to speak freely, it is not your right to behave childishly. Above all else, please enjoy the site. It is intended to be used as an educational tool and we hope the intelligent and mature debate will further that purpose. We hope readers will make an effort to respect that goal. Comments with excessive linking or foul language will be moderated before posting.
Comments
  • AnacottSteel

    I f’ing hate these guys, but you’re an idiot to ignore them.

  • jt26

    “their analysts expect many similarities to 2004″ .. at least for US markets, I don’t see the similarities at all … 2004 saw rising credit, decreasing unemployment previous 6 mo … maybe they are looking at asian stats (I’d like to see the case for unmanipulated countries like Korea, Singapore, Malaysia, India). I haven’t seen the evidence in Europe either. The other thing they miss from their 2004 analogy is the Fed started to hike then, whereas GS says no hike til 2011.

    One thing I do agree with is the continuing weight of ZIRP on investors. Even as the Fed started to hike in 2004 there was an enormous subsequent demand for risk (ie people buying ABS for 15 bps premium over TBonds; CRE with 5% cap rates). I would **never** underestimate ZIRP … the Fed Funds low in 2003-4 was only 0.75-1% and look what happened in the subsequent 3-4 years. So far I don’t see that in the US, but some countries (Canada,Oz, HK, China, Korea) is seeing some of that low cap rate action in CRE. HY looks to be similar risk taking as 2003-4. Once again the same conundrum … do I trade the ZIRP bubble or is this time different; I’ve never been so conflicted in years. From an equity point of view, it’s a tossup … 2002 or 2004?

  • GTG

    They aint often referred to as “Government” Sachs for nothing!

    Reminds me of the $200 dollar oil call at/near the $147 peak last year. Could this be the ultimate contrarian indicator for the next leg down?

  • Ledbedder

    MY gosh, if Government Sachs says it will be a strong 2010, that, to me, means SELL!! They’ve bought and goosed this market up as much as they could since March. Looks like they are running out of fiat money to send it up higher. I wouldn’t trust these vampires to baby sit a clove of garlic.

    • joe

      I agree a leopard does not change his spots, to show thier commitment to their clients they need to limit their outrageous bonusses.

      Joe

  • arnoldsimage

    i believe at this point we can safely conclude that these criminals don’t have our best interests at heart. do you really want to believe what they have to say?

  • Denis

    Goldman analyst bullish? That’s not news. Being bullsh*tly bullish is a job requirement there.

  • TC

    “Nonetheless, doubt remains and catalysts for higher stock prices remain.”

    With only about 16% of investment newsletter writers polled by Investors Intelligence bearish it hardly seems much “doubt remains.”

    “Perhaps most important, Goldman sees a continued influx of cash to the equity markets.

    Curiously, about as much “sideline cash” existed in May 2008 as exists right now. That the lender of last resort was not then all in, unlike now, and that the global financial system presently is no less hopelessly insolvent now that the lender of last resort is backstopping a considerable portion of Wall Street’s trash, suggests that the several trillions of sideline cash is there for good reason (much as proved true in May 2008).