Quoth the Raven
· QTR’s Fringe Finance
· June 28, 2026 at 13:16
· ⏱ 12 min read
| Read on Substack ↗
Summary
The article argues that the heated CNBC exchange between Jeremy Grantham and Joe Kernen reflects a genuine, unresolved debate about whether traditional valuation frameworks still work in a world of persistent central bank liquidity. Both sides have valid points—Grantham's long-term caution has missed some upside but avoided catastrophic drawdowns, while Kernen's challenge highlights that the rules may have permanently changed. The author calls for financial media to apply accountability equally to both bears and bulls, not just skeptics.
•Grantham called Bitcoin 'a useless speculative' asset that will 'dwindle away... not with a bang, but a whimper,' while Kernen countered that anyone who ignored Grantham missed one of the best-performing assets in history.
•Kernen expanded the criticism to Grantham's bearish market outlook since 2010, arguing investors following it would have dramatically underperformed the bull market.
•Grantham responded that he was not a permanent bear and had written about the possibility of a speculative 'melt-up' late in the cycle, distinguishing between overvaluation and imminent collapse.
•The author notes his own 26 Stocks to Watch for 2026 are up +26.1% year-to-date, beating the S&P 500 by roughly +18.7%, and his 2025 list beat the S&P by more than +50%—refuting claims he is a permabear.
•The core unresolved question is whether valuations still matter in an era dominated by quantitative easing, passive investing, options-driven flows, and central bank intervention—neither party has a definitive answer.
•The author criticizes Kernen for being 'dickish' and talking over Grantham, but supports the idea of more challenging interviews—provided they are applied equally to bulls, bears, CEOs, and strategists.