@article {Fesenmaier86, author = {Jeff Fesenmaier and Gary Smith}, title = {The Nifty-Fifty Re-Revisited}, volume = {11}, number = {3}, pages = {86--90}, year = {2002}, doi = {10.3905/joi.2002.319515}, publisher = {Institutional Investor Journals Umbrella}, abstract = {The traditional Nifty-Fifty story is that the prices of growth stocks rose in the early 1970s to unreasonable heights, as evidenced by their subsequent crash. An article in The Journal of Portfolio Management argues that this story is wrong-the long-run performance of these investor favorites validates their seemingly high prices. That article poses a plausible list, although another list is frequently cited as the Nifty-Fifty. The 24 stocks that appear on both lists-the unambiguously Terrific 24-have done substantially worse than the market. For the combined lists, there is a substantial and statistically persuasive inverse relationship between P/E ratio and subsequent long-term performance. The basic elements of the Nifty-Fifty story are sound. With the spectacular exception of Wal-Mart, the glamour stocks that were pushed to relatively high P/E ratios in the early 1970s did substantially worse than the overall market, in both the short and the long run.}, issn = {1068-0896}, URL = {https://joi.pm-research.com/content/11/3/86}, eprint = {https://joi.pm-research.com/content/11/3/86.full.pdf}, journal = {The Journal of Investing} }