How can I understand why investors think a particular company should have a high PE ratio?
"Does the company see itself expanding into new product lines or new territories? What is the current predicted growth for the company's earnings for the next 5 years? These would generally be where I'd look for growth in companies. In the case of Costco, there may be a perception of the company as being a ""safe"" company as the market capitalization for the stock is over $50 billion which is rather large. Thus, there is something to be said for Costco providing a dividend and may well weather the current market for an idea compared to holding funds in money markets that are paying nothing in some cases. There is also something to be said for looking at the industry and sector values that Costco is in where on Yahoo! Finance, I find the P/E for the industry and sector to be 35.05 and 28.47, respectively. Thus, Costco isn't as inflated as the other stocks in the same ballpark for another idea here."
"I'm a senior majoring in accounting and management information systems. Here is a question I answered a while back about financial statements and employee retention. In the answer that I provided at the bottom it was to assess a company's ability to pay by use of ratios. Likewise, similar accounting methods need to be understood and implemented when assessing stocks(which is where I believe Mr. Buffet was going with this). As we can see the severity of the questions decreases, but if you can not answer question 3 then you should study accounting principles.   So how much is enough just to get started? You will never have enough knowledge to start, period. You will have to continuously be learning, so start sooner than later.  However you need neither economics or accounting knowledge if you were to learn technical analysis, many doubt the workings of this technique, but in my experience it is easier to learn and practise. A comment on @Veronica's post.  Understanding economics and accounting are fundamental. Analysis, seeing trends, and copying are instinctual human traits that helped us evolve (we are very good at pattern recognition). Taking an intro economic and accounting course at a local community college is an excellent place to start when breaking the mold of pattern-thinking. You have to be critical in understanding what elements move a company's A/R in the statement of cash flows. Read. Literally, don't stop reading. Latest edition of of Kesio's accounting principles? Read it. Cover to cover. Tax policies on Section 874, 222, 534? Read it.  Take a class, read a book, ask questions! Good Luck, ""Welcome to [the] Science [of Business], you're gonna like it here"" - Phil Plait" As someone who works with LBOs and a decent number of M&amp;A deals, I find the biggest issue is that managers don't understand the competitive advantages of their company. They try to pivot into higher margin processes and products because they see other companies who are doing well there. The companies who succeed target niches in the market and make acquisitions that complement their skills. The other issue is that the market is too hot right now and when a good company comes up, you have PE firms and strategics bidding against each other, typically leaving a winner who bid too high. "1 - in most cases, the difference between filing joint or married filing single is close to zero. When there is a difference you're better off filing joint.  2 - The way the W4 works is based on how many allowances you claim. Unfortunately, even in the day of computers, it does not allow for a simple ""well my deduction are $xxx, don't tax that money."" Each allowance is equal to one exemption, same as you get for being you, same as the wife gets, same as each kid. 3 people X $3800 = $11,400 you are telling the employer to take off the top before calculating your tax. She does this by using Circular E and is able to calculate your tax as you request. If one is in the 15% bracket, one more exemption changes the tax withheld by $570. So if you were going to owe $400 in April, one few exemption will have you overpay $170. i.e. in this 15% bracket, each exemption changes annual withholding by that $570.  For most people, running the W4 numbers will get them very close, and only if they are getting back or owing over $500, will they even think of adjusting.  3 - My recently published Last Minute Tax Moves offers a number of interesting ideas to address this. The concept of grouping deductions in odd years is worth noting.  4 - I'm not sure what this means, 2 accounts each worth $5000 should grow at the same rate if invested the same. The time it makes sense to load one person's account first is if they have better matching. You say you are not sure what percent your wife's company matches. You need to change this. For both of your retirement plans you need to know every detail, exact way to maximize matching, expense ratios for the investments you choose, any other fees, etc. Knowledge is power, and all that. In What is an appropriate level of 401k fees or expenses in a typical plan? I go on to preach about how fees can wipe out any tax benefit over time. For any new investor, my first warning is always to understand what you are getting into. If you can't explain it to a friend, you shouldn't be in it.  Edit - you first need to understand what choices are within the accounts. The 4% and 6% are in hindsight, right? These are not fixed returns. You should look at the choices and more heavily fund the account with the better selection. Deposit to her account at least to grab the match.  As far as the longer term goals, see how the house purchase goes. Life has a way of sending you two kids and forcing you to tighten the budget. You may have other ideas in three years. (I have no P2P lending experience, by the way.)  Last - many advise that separate finances are a bad path for a couple. It depends. Jane and I have separate check books, and every paycheck just keep enough to write small checks without worry, most of the money goes to the house account. Whatever works for you is what you should do. We've been happily married for most of the 17 years we've been married." In general, a warrant is a security issued by a company allowing the holder to purchase a certain number of a particular class of shares at a certain price for a particular period of time.  They differ from exchange traded options (i.e. calls and puts) in that they are issued by the company that issued the underlying shares that they allow you to purchase whereas calls and puts are generally written by other investors. The other big difference between options and warrants is that options are standardized.  Any call or put you buy on a particular exchange has basically the same set of rules governing use.  By contrast, a warrant may have all kinds of stipulations that must occur before you can execute, such as price events (e.g. only if the stock hits a certain price) or business events (e.g. only if the company elects to defer payment on a bond issued at the same time as the warrant). Warrants are generally a bad choice for small and inexperienced investors since each warrant issue is different and you often need a lawyer or other qualified professional to fully understand all to possible outcomes. Amazon is stuffed full of dumb money.  People who like the company and therefore assume it must be a good investment.  Nothing about an investment makes sense when the PE is 100.  If you buy something like that you must assume 8% moves will happen pretty frequently. "This is a really interesting question and something a lot of work is being done to understand.  I'm going to look at the closely related question ""Do non market-cap etf weighting methods consistently outperform once you take into account their investment biases?"" Let's use revenue weighting as a reason why investment biases are so important.  In revenue weighting, you would own almost no fast-growing tech companies as they generally have little revenue.   This sounds great if we are talking about say Pets.com in the late 90s but you also would miss most of the rise of Google. To believe in these ETFs consistently outperform (adjusted for risk) you would have to have a strong reason to believe that earnings, sales, or dividends are a better predictor of company value than market value.  Market analysts include the above three metrics and many more when pricing stocks so out-performance using only one of the above metrics seems unlikely. There is one caveat to this and that is value and small cap stocks have been shown to give slightly better risk-adjusted returns in the very long run (see Fama/French) and many of these alternative weighting methods will have a value or small cap bias.  First, it is unclear if this out-performance will continue now that it is more widely known.  Second, even if you believe this will continue you can more easily and cheaply get this bias though value/small-cap etfs than these weighting schemes. In the end, the only thing that is perfectly clear is that higher fee investments will generally under-perform." "As Dheer pointed out, the top ten mega-cap corporations account for a huge part (20%) of your ""S&P 500"" portfolio when weighted proportionally. This is one of the reasons why I have personally avoided the index-fund/etf craze -- I don't really need another mechanism to buy ExxonMobil, IBM and Wal-Mart on my behalf. I like the equal-weight concept -- if I'm investing in a broad sector (Large Cap companies), I want diversification across the entire sector and avoid concentration. The downside to this approach is that there will be more portfolio turnover (and expense), since you're holding more shares of the lower tranches of the index where companies are more apt to churn. (ie. #500 on the index gets replaced by an up and comer). So you're likely to have a higher expense ratio, which matters to many folks." There are those who would suggest that due to the Efficient Market Hypothesis, stocks are always fairly valued. Consider, if non-professional posters on SE (here) had a method that worked beyond random chance, everyone seeking such a method would soon know it. If everyone used that method, it would lose its advantage. In theory, this is how stocks' values remain rational.  That said, Williams %R is one such indicator. It can be seen in action on Yahoo finance -  In the end, I find such indicators far less useful than the news itself. BP oil spill - Did anyone believe that such a huge oil company wouldn't recover from that disaster? It recovered by nearly doubling from its bottom after that news. A chart of NFLX (Netflix) offers a similar news disaster, and recovery.  Both of these examples are not quantifiable, in my opinion, just gut reactions. A quick look at the company and answer to one question - Do I feel this company will recover? To be candid - in the 08/09 crash, I felt that way about Ford and GM. Ford returned 10X from the bottom, GM went through bankruptcy. That observation suggests another question, i.e. where is the line drawn between 'investing' and 'gambling'? My answer is that buying one stock hoping for its recovery is gambling. Being able to do this for 5-10 stocks, or one every few months, is investing.