
Forecasts predict a dismal decade for stocks. Here's what to do.
What if those days are over?
In recent forecasts, Vanguard projects the stock market will rise by only 3.3% to 5.3% a year over the next decade. Morningstar sees U.S. stocks gaining 5.2% a year. Goldman Sachs forecasts the broad S&P 500 index will gain only 3% a year.
Those numbers aren't outliers. A roundup of market prognostications, charted by Morningstar, finds no one projecting annual returns higher than 6.7% for the domestic stock market in the next 10 years.
In June, USA TODAY noted that many analysts predict the stock market will end the year with only meager gains.
Some readers reacted with surprise, others with disbelief. Stock indexes have been posting record highs, despite lingering inflation, a softening job market and rising import tariffs.
As it turns out, those record highs are one reason forecasters don't expect much from the stock market over the rest of this year, nor in years to come.
Here, then, is a closer look at why economist have dim hopes for the stock market in the next decade, and what everyday investors can do about it.
Stocks are overpriced
The simple reason forecasters don't expect much from the U.S. stock market over the next decade: stock prices are already very high.
Stock indexes have been breaking records. To analysts, that means many stocks are overpriced. Bargains are fewer. The indexes have less room to grow.
Just how overpriced is the stock market? Economists have a yardstick to measure that. It's called the cyclically adjusted price-to-earnings ratio, or CAPE ratio. It measures a stock's price against corporate earnings. It tells you, in effect, whether the stock is overvalued or undervalued.
Right now, the CAPE ratio for the S&P 500 stands at 38.7. That means stock prices are very expensive, relative to earnings.
'Right now, the U.S. stock market is trading at more than double the post-World War II average price-to-earnings ratio,' said Randy Bruns, a certified financial planner in Naperville, Illinois.
There are two prior moments over the past century when the CAPE Ratio was really high. One was in 1929. The other was in 1999. In the decades that followed those peaks, the stock market sank like a stone: The Great Depression of the 1930s, and the dot-com bust and Great Recession of the 2000s.
'Our projection is that that ratio is going to somehow come down,' said Paul Arnold, global head of multi-asset research at Morningstar.
Investors forget to buy low
No one is forcing anyone to purchase expensive stocks. Why, then, do investors keep buying them?
It's easy to recite that old investing adage about buying low and selling high. It's harder to follow the rule, especially when you don't know how high is too high.
Purchasing stocks when the market is high sounds like a flagrant violation of the buy-low rule. And yet, investment advisers routinely encourage consumers to keep buying stocks when prices are high.
The reason: Stocks tend to rise over time. Even if you buy high, you can bet the market will eventually climb even higher.
All those headlines about stock-market records function like ads for stocks. And investors keep buying them, pushing prices up.
'When stocks are going up, investors have this tendency to think that now's the time to get in,' said Todd Schlanger, senior investment strategist at Vanguard. 'Stocks are one of the few things people don't like to buy on sale.'
The stock market is too 'concentrated'
Here's another reason many forecasters are down on U.S. stocks, and especially the monster stocks known as the Magnificent Seven: Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Amazon, Alphabet, Meta and Tesla.
Together, the Seven represent 34% of the overall value of the S&P 500, up from 12% in 2015, Motley Fool reports. That's called market concentration, and it can be a bad thing.
Investors are urged to diversify: Not to hold only stocks, and not to hold too much of any one stock.
The problem with the Magnificent Seven, Goldman Sachs reports, is that their massive growth is unsustainable: 'It is extremely difficult for any firm to maintain high levels of sales growth and profit margins over sustained periods of time.'
Those seven stocks are 'already priced to perfection,' Schlanger said. That's a gentle way of saying that they are expensive.
Vanguard forecasts that growth stocks, the category dominated by the Magnificent Seven, will grow by only 1.9% to 3.9% a year over the next decade.
That does not mean the Magnificent Seven stocks are going to crash.
'I find it hard to believe that something would happen that would throw one of those companies into a tailspin,' said Catherine Valega, a certified financial planner in Winchester, Massachusetts. 'The larger companies have resources to pivot, if they need to.'
Forecasters question, though, whether the Magnificent Seven will continue to grow at the same fevered pace of the past.
'If those companies are booming, that's great,' Bruns said. 'But when the writing on the wall hits for those seven companies, it'll be bad news for the S&P 500 as a whole.'
What to do about those gloomy stock forecasts?
If you want to avoid market concentration and overpriced stocks, forecasters say, here are some places to look:
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Business Wire
12 minutes ago
- Business Wire
Rosen Law Firm Urges Novo Nordisk A/S (NYSE: NVO) Investors with Losses in Excess of $100K to Contact the Firm for Information About Their Rights
NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces that an investor filed a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers and acquirers of Novo Nordisk A/S (NYSE: NVO) securities between May 7, 2025 and July 28, 2025, both dates inclusive (the 'Class Period'). Novo Nordisk is a pharmaceutical company. For more information, submit a form, email attorney Phillip Kim, or give us a call at 866-767-3653. The Allegations: Rosen Law Firm is Investigating the Allegations that Novo Nordisk A/S (NYSE: NVO) Misled Investors Regarding its Business Operations. According to the lawsuit, defendants provided overwhelmingly positive statements to investors while, at the same time, disseminating materially false and misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts concerning the true state of Novo Nordisk's growth potential. Notably, Novo Nordisk's asserted potential to capitalize on the compounded market greatly understated the potential impact of the personalization exception to the compounded GLP-1 exclusion and overstated the likelihood that such patients would switch to Novo Nordisk's branded alternatives. Further, defendants greatly overstated the potential GLP-1 market or otherwise, Novo's capability to penetrate said markets to achieve continued growth. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages. What Now: You may be eligible to participate in the class action against Novo Nordisk. Investors who want to serve as lead plaintiff for the class must file their motions with the court by September 30, 2025. A lead plaintiff is a representative party who acts on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation. You do not have to participate in the case to be eligible for a recovery. If you choose to take no action, you can remain an absent class member. For more information, click here. All representation is on a contingency fee basis. Shareholders pay no fees or expenses. About Rosen Law Firm: Some law firms issuing releases about this matter do not actually litigate securities class actions. Rosen Law Firm does. Rosen Law Firm is a recognized leader in shareholder rights litigation, dedicated to helping shareholders recover losses, improving corporate governance structures, and holding company executives accountable for their wrongdoing. Since its inception, Rosen Law Firm has obtained over $1 billion for shareholders. Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: on Twitter: or on Facebook: Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.


CNBC
13 minutes ago
- CNBC
A technical look at Wall Street's 'fear gauge' and how to hedge against potential volatility
As Fundstrat's Tom Lee says, this is the most hated bull market of all time, yet it continues to power higher. There are plenty of overhanging uncertainties that could derail this rally that I'll discuss below, but first let's talk about technical condition of this rally. This V-shape recovery-turned-rally from April lows has been unrelenting. Any minor pullbacks are bought up and those left on the sideline are still waiting for a sizable pullback to enter. It could continue to power higher leaving those on the sideline chasing momentum and entries at new highs, or, the numerous overhanging threats to this market could begin to manifest and pullback may be ahead of us. We can't know. No one knows the future. All we can do is control our process in the present and plan accordingly. To avoid the concern that we need to be able to predict the future to successfully invest in the markets, we recently deployed a VIX hedge to our Active Opps portfolio at Inside Edge Capital with a favorable risk-reward ratio. If the market does pullback the VIX hedge will provide some protection to our portfolio while we're able to hold onto the strong names we've been building here with you every Tuesday on CNBC Pro. The S & P broke out from the late 2024 highs at around 6,140 and have not yet re-tested that breakout zone as support. It's not required, but it would be nice to see this checkback to this significant technical level. Also located in this zone is the 50 period moving average (dotted purple). You'll also notice the rate of change indicator below that has been in a decisive downtrend. To use a baseball analogy as I'm running travel baseball tryouts tonight, if you throw a ball in the air the speed of ascent will decelerate until the rate of change is zero and gravity takes over and pulls the ball back to the ground. The same thing here. At some point buyers will exhaust themselves and sellers will come in. Looking at the Volatility Index (VIX) overlay with the S & P 500 you'll notice that there is a clear inverse relationship between the two. As the stock market falls, fear and the accompanying price of option insurance goes up. Home insurance on a house with a smoldering foundation is going to be a lot more expensive than a calm clear day. The VIX at 17 is still relatively cheap so insurance is still reasonable. Plus you'll notice that I've outlined a divergence between late 2024 and now. With the S & P 500 at new highs, the VIX should be sub-15, but as mentioned above there are so many overhanging threats to the market investors are buying up the insurance policy keeping the VIX somewhat elevated. Specifically, we went to the VIX September monthly call options and bought the 23 strike and then sold the 29 call. The difference between the two should be around $1.50 for that $6 spread so that means you're risking $150 to make $450 if the VIX is above 29 on Sept. 17. As mentioned, there are threats to the market that we all know about including a Fed that may not be ready to drop rates despite many calling for it, persistent inflation driven by strong demand tariff pressures, Geopolitical tensions, narrowing breadth in the market as mega-cap hyper scalers are starting to lead once again, and finally seasonality. September is historically the worst month for the S & P 500. Hopefully we won't need the hedge and will close it at a loss. But if we do need it and the market is going to pullback, we can maintain our strong portfolio and not dislodge the low cost basis of names we've been building this year. -Todd Gordon, Founder of Inside Edge Capital, LLC We offer active portfolio management and regular subscriber updates like the idea presented above. DISCLOSURES: (Gordon owns VIX call spreads personally and in his wealth management company Inside Edge Capital) All opinions expressed by the CNBC Pro contributors are solely their opinions and do not reflect the opinions of CNBC, NBC UNIVERSAL, their parent company or affiliates, and may have been previously disseminated by them on television, radio, internet or another medium. THE ABOVE CONTENT IS SUBJECT TO OUR TERMS AND CONDITIONS AND PRIVACY POLICY . THIS CONTENT IS PROVIDED FOR INFORMATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY AND DOES NOT CONSITUTE FINANCIAL, INVESTMENT, TAX OR LEGAL ADVICE OR A RECOMMENDATION TO BUY ANY SECURITY OR OTHER FINANCIAL ASSET. THE CONTENT IS GENERAL IN NATURE AND DOES NOT REFLECT ANY INDIVIDUAL'S UNIQUE PERSONAL CIRCUMSTANCES. THE ABOVE CONTENT MIGHT NOT BE SUITABLE FOR YOUR PARTICULAR CIRCUMSTANCES. BEFORE MAKING ANY FINANCIAL DECISIONS, YOU SHOULD STRONGLY CONSIDER SEEKING ADVICE FROM YOUR OWN FINANCIAL OR INVESTMENT ADVISOR. Click here for the full disclaimer.


CNBC
13 minutes ago
- CNBC
AI is already impacting the labor market, starting with young tech workers, Goldman economist says
Changes to the American labor market brought on by the arrival of generative AI are already showing up in employment data, according to a Goldman Sachs economist. Most companies have yet to deploy artificial intelligence in production cases, meaning that the overall job market hasn't yet been significantly impacted by AI, said Joseph Briggs, senior global economist of Goldman's research division, in a podcast episode shared first with CNBC. But there are already signs of a hiring pullback in the technology sector, hitting younger employees there the hardest, Briggs said. "If you look at the tech sector's employment trends, they've been basically growing as a share of overall employment in a remarkably linear manner for the last 20 years," Briggs said on the episode of "Goldman Sachs Exchanges" to be aired Tuesday. "Over the last three years, we've actually seen a pullback in tech hiring that has led it to undershoot its trend." Since its November 2022 release, OpenAI's ChatGPT has fueled the rise of the world's most valuable company, Nvidia, and forced entire industries to contend with its implications. Generative AI models are quickly becoming adept at handling many routine tasks, and some experts say they are already on par with human software engineers, for instance. That has sparked concerns that while automation will make companies more productive and enrich shareholders, swaths of the job market could be impacted in the coming years. Technology executives have recently become more candid about the impact of AI on employees. Companies including Alphabet and Microsoft have said AI is producing roughly 30% of the code on some projects, and Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff said in June that AI handles as much as 50% of the work at his company. Young tech workers, whose jobs are the easiest to automate, are the first concrete signs of displacement, according to Briggs. Unemployment rates among tech workers between 20 and 30 years old jumped by 3 percentage points since the start of this year, he said. Briggs recently co-authored a report titled "Quantifying the Risks of AI-Related Job Displacement" that cites labor market data from IPUMS and Goldman Sachs Global Investment Research. "This is a much larger increase than we've seen in the tech sector more broadly [and] a larger increase than we've seen for other young workers," he said. The approach from technology CEOs has been to hold off on hiring of junior employees as they begin to deploy AI, said George Lee, the former technology banker who co-heads the Goldman Sachs Global Institute. "How do I begin to streamline my enterprise so I can be more flexible and more adaptive... yet without harming our competitive edge?" Lee said in the podcast episode. "Young employees for this period of time are a little bit the casualty of that." Over time, roughly 6% to 7% of all workers could lose their jobs because of automation from AI in a baseline scenario, according to Briggs. The transition could be more painful, both to workers and the broader U.S. economy, if adoption among companies happens faster than the roughly decade-long period he assumes, Briggs said. That could either be because of advances in the technology or an economic slowdown that encourages companies to cut costs, he said. If AI researchers achieve AGI, or artificial general intelligence that equals a person's ability to learn and adapt across domains, instead of being narrowly deployed, the impact on workers would probably be deeper. "Our analysis doesn't factor in the potential for the emergence of AGI," Briggs said. "It's hard to even start thinking about the impact on the labor market, but I would guess there probably and undoubtedly is more room for labor substitution and a more disruptive impact in that world."