We’ve had more than a few clients ask lately:
“Aren’t markets overpriced right now?”
It’s a fair question. The headlines point to the S&P 500 trading at valuation levels well above historical averages, and that can sound like a warning. But like most things in investing, it’s more nuanced than it appears.
Before jumping to conclusions, we think it’s worth stepping back to ask a better question:
Are we comparing today’s market to the right kind of history?
The S&P 500 trades above 20 times earnings. Historically, the average has been closer to 15. That difference is often used as evidence that markets are overheated.
But that comparison skips the deeper question: what kind of economy was that 15x average built on?
The truth is, comparing today’s valuations to a long-term average without context creates more confusion than clarity.
The Old Economy Was Built Differently
That “15x” benchmark comes from a different world. In past decades, the S&P 500 was led by companies in sectors like industrials, energy, materials, and utilities. These were cyclical, capital-heavy businesses with lower margins and less predictable earnings.
Companies like Alcoa, GM, and Exxon didn’t scale easily. Their earnings moved with interest rates, inflation, and commodity prices. Their debt levels were higher. Their reinvestment needs were constant. A low multiple made sense.
In contrast, today’s index is driven by companies like Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, and Alphabet. These businesses are built on software, data, and networks. They scale quickly. They throw off cash. Their earnings are stickier. And their balance sheets are stronger than most sovereign nations.
The index has changed. So have the economics behind it.
What If Every Sector Was “Fairly Valued”?
To isolate this shift, we ran the math. We took the long-term average P/E of each sector and applied it to the actual sector weightings of the S&P 500 in 1980 and 2025.
Here’s the result:
Weighted Average P/E (based on sector composition):
- 1980: 15.88x
- 2025: 19.53x
https://fullratio.com/pe-ratio-by-industry
That’s a 23% increase purely due to the changing mix of industries.
This is key: even if nothing is overpriced, the structure of the index alone lifts the baseline multiple. If we don’t account for that, we’re not comparing apples to apples. We’re comparing Apple to Alcoa.
How the Index Has Shifted
| Sector | Long-Term Avg P/E | 1980 Weight | 2025 Weight |
| Technology | 25.0 | 6% | 30% |
| Health Care | 20.0 | 6% | 13% |
| Consumer Discretionary | 18.0 | 8% | 10% |
| Financials | 14.0 | 10% | 11% |
| Industrials | 16.0 | 20% | 8% |
| Consumer Staples | 18.0 | 8% | 6% |
| Energy | 12.0 | 20% | 4% |
| Materials | 14.0 | 10% | 2% |
| Utilities | 15.0 | 10% | 3% |
| Real Estate | 16.0 | 0% | 2% |
| Communication Services | 20.0 | 2% | 11% |
https://novelinvestor.com/sector-performance
Visually, the takeaway is obvious. In 1980, the market was loaded with low-P/E, high-volatility sectors. In 2025, it’s tilted toward tech, services, and healthcare. Businesses with stronger margins, better balance sheets, and more pricing power.
Higher Quality Often Means Higher Multiples
A higher P/E doesn’t automatically mean “overvalued.” Sometimes it just reflects better economics.
It makes sense that investors are willing to pay more for earnings from a company like Apple. It has more cash than the Federal Reserve. It generates predictable revenue from a global customer base. It operates with high margins and almost no debt.
That’s not just hype. That’s strength, and strength may command a premium.
So Is the Market Too Expensive?
Maybe in parts. Some themes have run hot. Some stocks look stretched.
But if your only argument is that “P/Es are above the historical average,” you’re missing the point. That average was built in a different era, around a different set of companies, in a different economy.
You’re not paying more for the same thing. You’re paying more for companies that are built better, run leaner, and scale faster.
That deserves a different conversation. And maybe a different baseline.
The Bottom Line
Valuation still matters, but context matters more.
The S&P 500 is not what it used to be, and that’s exactly why historical benchmarks don’t tell the whole story.
If someone is going to quote a multiple, they should at least make sure they’re applying it to the right kind of market.
Because 15x in 1980 and 20x in 2025 might actually be saying the same thing – just in a different language.
IMPORTANT DISCLOSURE INFORMATION: Past performance may not be indicative of future results. Different types of investments involve varying degrees of risk. Therefore, it should not be assumed that future performance of any specific investment or investment strategy (including the investments and/or investment strategies recommended and/or undertaken by BentOak Capital [“BentOak”]), or any non-investment related services, will be profitable, equal any historical performance level(s), be suitable for your portfolio or individual situation, or prove successful. BentOak is neither a law firm, nor a certified public accounting firm, and no portion of its services should be construed as legal or accounting advice. Moreover, you should not assume that any discussion or information contained in this document serves as the receipt of, or as a substitute for personalized investment advice from BentOak. Please remember that it remains your responsibility to advise BentOak, in writing, if there are any changes in your personal/financial situation or investment objectives for the purpose of reviewing/evaluating/revising our previous recommendations and/or services, or if you would like to impose, add, or to modify any reasonable restrictions to our investment advisory services. A copy of our current written disclosure Brochure discussing our advisory services and fees is available upon request at www.bentoakcapital.com/disclosure. The scope of the services to be provided depends upon the needs of the client and the terms of the engagement. Historical performance results for investment indices, benchmarks, and/or categories have been provided for general informational/comparison purposes only, and generally do not reflect the deduction of transaction and/or custodial charges, the deduction of an investment management fee, nor the impact of taxes, the incurrence of which would have the effect of decreasing historical performance results. It should not be assumed that your account holdings correspond directly to any comparative indices or categories. Please Also Note: (1) performance results do not reflect the impact of taxes; (2) comparative benchmarks/indices may be more or less volatile than your accounts; and, (3) a description of each comparative benchmark/index is available upon request. Please Note: Limitations: Neither rankings and/or recognitions by unaffiliated rating services, publications, media, or other organizations, nor the achievement of any designation, certification, or license should be construed by a client or prospective client as a guarantee that he/she will experience a certain level of results if BentOak is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services. Rankings published by magazines, and others, generally base their selections exclusively on information prepared and/or submitted by the recognized adviser. Rankings are generally limited to participating advisers (see link as to participation criteria/methodology, to the extent applicable). Unless expressly indicated to the contrary, BentOak did not pay a fee to be included on any such ranking. No ranking or recognition should be construed as a current or past endorsement of BentOak by any of its clients. ANY QUESTIONS: BentOak’s Chief Compliance Officer remains available to address any questions regarding rankings and/or recognitions, including the criteria used for any reflected ranking.