Earlier last week, the LSEG put up their quarterly earnings preview, and included within was the “market cap weight vs sector weight” analysis of the 11 S&P 500 sectors.
Tajinder Dhillon, the LSEG executive who’s responsible for prepping and publishing the Russell 2000 and S&P 500 earnings reports each week, sent the earnings weights of the top 10 names in the S&P 500 last week, so those earnings weights could be compared to their respective market cap weights:
5 of the top 10 S&P 500 mega-cap names report this week.
- Apple (NASDAQ:AAPL): mkt cap weight 6.29% vs its earnings weight of 6.7%;
- Microsoft (NASDAQ:MSFT): mkt cap weight of 7.29% versus its earnings weight of 4.5%;
- Meta (NASDAQ:META): mkt cap weight of 2.11%, vs its earnings weight of 2.4%;
- Alphabet (NASDAQ:GOOGL): mkt cap weight of 2.14%, vs its earnings weight of 2.1%;
- Amazon (NASDAQ:AMZN): mkt cap weight of 3.48%, vs its earnings weight of 1.6%;
Apple, Meta, and Amazon report after the closing bell on February 1 ’24, while Microsoft and Alphabet (GOOG/GOOGL) report after the closing bell on Tuesday, January 30, ’24.
The whole point of this is to give readers the perspective of how the two “weights” relate.
Back in the late 1990s, the argument against the technology sector in the S&P 500, i.e. Intel (NASDAQ:INTC), Microsoft, Cisco (NASDAQ:CSCO), SunMicro, etc. was that with a 35% market cap weight of 35%, the earnings weight of the technology sector was just 13% – 14%.
A bullish or bearish argument isn’t being bad based solely on this ratio, but readers can tell the ratio is far more “reasonable” today. Of the 5 names listed above, Apple’s earnings weight is larger than its market cap weight, (which is truly surprising) while (also surprising), the same can be said for META. Only Amazon’s market cap is more than 2x greater than its earnings weight today. (The market cap weight is sourced from Morningstar and final market prices for the SPY portfolio as of 1/25/24.)
It’s normal for the financial sector to have an earnings weight greater than its market cap, and that’s true for Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRKa). JP Morgan is actually ranked 12th in the SPY by market cap, but 7th by earnings weight.
This blog will be out with an earnings preview on a number of the above names this weekend.
S&P 500 Data:
- The forward 4-quarter estimate (FFQE) fell $0.31 to $242.61 from last week’s $242.92 and Sept 30th’s $232.95;
- The PE ratio has increased to 20.2x, the first time since 12/15/23 that the S&P 500’s PE ratio is above 20x;
- If the S&P 500 closes today at 4,888, the S&P 500 earnings yield will have dropped below 5% to 4.96%, its lowest close since late December ’23;
- The 2023 full-year calendar EPS estimate for the S&P 500 increased last week to $219.53 vs the prior weeks $219.40;
- The S&P 500 EPS “upside surprise” jumped to +4.2% from last week’s +3.6%, while the revenue upside surprise remains around 1%;
- The 2024 EPS estimate declined this week, possibly due to cautious guidance for calendar ’24, from $243.17 to $242.61 and Sept ’30th’s estimate of $247.49;
Conclusion:
Earnings weight matters to the S&P 500, and this coming week. 18.3% of the S&P 500’s (only 5 stocks) earnings weight reports in just three days – Tuesday through Thursday. Again, earnings previews for some of the top 10 names will be out this weekend on this blog.
The increase in the S&P 500’s upside surprise this week, is a good tell, but guidance matters more. It is understandable that management's are being cautious – just look at how many of Wall Street’s best have called for a recession the last 24 months.
IBES data and Refinitiv, have undergone a corporate name change with the start of 2024, hence – although the data will be from the exact same source – the new name for Refinitiv, will be known as LSEG (London Stock Exchange Group) – and will be referred to as LSEG going forward.
***
None of this is advice or a recommendation. Past performance is no guarantee or suggestion of future results. All S&P 500 earnings data is sourced from LSEG unless otherwise noted. Capital markets can change quickly for both the good and the bad. Readers should gauge their comfort with their portfolio volatility accordingly, and adjust when necessary.