Is Europe becoming uninvestable?

[SharperDingaan]

NATO/Armouries.

 

The reality is that the troops/nations are primarily European, with the armouries split between Europe and North America. Ramped up North American weapons, fuel/food production compensating for European losses; should the conflict occur in Europe, and enemy rockets/drones/bombs degrade European production (as occurred in WWII).

 

The US as the primary armourer made sense, as long as the US could be trusted .... to NOT remotely disable the targeting/avionics/etc on allied weaponry, if it didn't get its way. While it made sense to threaten to disable weaponry to get GNP contributions up, the loss of trust meant European weapons suppliers offshoring production to Canada.

 

New military hardware/software just has to be able to talk to US systems, and comply with NATO specs (shells, bullets, drones, fuel grades, etc.) ... it does not have to be US. Griping aside, the reality is that Canada geographically falls within the protective US North American dome; both are NATO allies, Canada is between Alaska and the mainland USA, and the US needs deep detection sites across the entire arctic; the only question is who contributes how much and how.    

 

Not so hot for US weapons makers, and not a bad thing.

 

UK Economics.

 

Either accept that London is the economic centre or take your money elsewhere; it isn't going to change, you are. Not a lot different to France (Paris), the US (New York, Silicon Valley), Germany, etc. The centre sucks in capital, and trickles it out to the rest of the nation via orders for goods/services used. The more activity, the better everyone does.

 

The wealthy get richer, the money piles up in these cities as higher real estate prices within select postal codes. Those up, buying from those down; houses as luxury goods, no different to Tiffany's jewellery. There is a reason why we prefer to own in these postal codes   

 

Thing is ... the wealthy stay rich, only as long as the less wealthy let them. French royalty forgot that, and it cost them their heads. London's privileged forgot that, and it cost the UK Brexit. The US elite seem to have forgot that .... and it has cost them Trump - that MAGA base with much to lose, not much different to the under privileged UK population ... who actually had the numbers to vote Brexit in.

 

Europe Opportunities.

 

Soooo ... many trade agreements, side practices/arrangements, an enterprising lad is hard put to choose  But for the young, independent, unattached, and adventurous ... it's still better to temporarily leave, and seek a new life elsewhere. Reach, let life happen, then either stay away or come back later as circumstance dictates.

 

SD

 

Edited December 14, 2025 by SharperDingaan

[Marco Van Basten]

1 hour ago, NnnnotSoSmart said:

Listening to a Schwab 2026 Market Outlook (yes, I know time better spent staring at my navel)

 

During the Q&A, at 46:25 min,  a question was asked about investing in Europe:

 

Moderator: 
“Excessive regulation in Europe Does it slow down growth or not?”

 

Michelle Gibley (Director International Equity Research – Charles Schwab)
“Regulation has certainly pulled down Europe’s growth. Despite the Euro being a currency union, the capital markets are not a union.  So there’s a separate stock market for each country with different filing requirements and different regulations. Can you imagine if we had a separate stock market for every US state? This lack of a capital market union reduces the ability of startups to raise money. It also hinders R&D. Former ECB President Mario Draghi, also former prime minister of Italy, laid out a year ago 383 recommendations for Europe to improve its competitiveness. You might say that’s bad news, but the good news it shows there is a lot of opportunity to improve. Investor expectations are low…

 

 

As Buffett has said: “You pay a high price for a cheery consensus”

 

No disrespect for Mr. Buffett, or my European ancestors but I wouldn't touch European equities with someone else's ten foot pole.  My roots (DNA) are 99.9% European. Mother was born in France. I feel fortunate I was born in US.  Mom met dad (American) and moved to the US.  
 

 

I disagree, there is a price for everything.  Look at the performance of Safran in the past several years, Holcim and Heidelberg Materials this year, Hermes over the past two decades, BTI in the past 24 months, Aena in the past decade and the list goes on.  Richemont is another great example, so are LVMH/Dior, ASML.  Rheinmetall and Saab in the past two years.  Hell, I would even buy Russian or Chinese stocks, provided that they are priced like warrants - effectively a 10 bagger if there is no confiscation, just size them as you would warrants - very small. 

[Loss Horizon]

3 hours ago, cubsfan said:

I'll just assume he's highly intelligent, but has no understanding of the American political system.

 

Thank you, that is very kind!

 

3 hours ago, cubsfan said:

And if he watches enough BBC, MSNBC and CNN - he might actually believe MAGA is the next coming of the NAZI party.

 

Nazi is the most famous and atrocious organization, but I've seen more recent and immediate examples. I watched my country turning isolationist and ultra militaristic.

 

I never watched or read BBC, MSNBC and CNN. My main newspaper for the last 10 years has been WSJ. That is in my opinion the best newspaper in the world. This year I tried to change to FT, and I'm a bit disappointed so far.

 

 

Edited December 13, 2025 by Loss Horizon

[cubsfan]

1 hour ago, Marco Van Basten said:

I disagree, there is a price for everything.  Look at the performance of Safran in the past several years, Holcim and Heidelberg Materials this year, Hermes over the past two decades, BTI in the past 24 months, Aena in the past decade and the list goes on.  Richemont is another great example, so are LVMH/Dior, ASML.  Rheinmetall and Saab in the past two years.  Hell, I would even buy Russian or Chinese stocks, provided that they are priced like warrants - effectively a 10 bagger if there is no confiscation, just size them as you would warrants - very small. 

 

Yup, definitely.  BTI and Imperial Brands have been great winners for me. Gotta pick your spots.

[cubsfan]

1 hour ago, Loss Horizon said:

 

Thank you, that is very kind!

 

 

Nazi is the most famous and atrocious organization, but I've seen more recent and immediate examples. I watched my country turning isolationist and ultra militaristic.

 

I never watched or read BBC, MSNBC and CNN. My main newspaper for the last 10 years has been WSJ. That is in my opinion the best newspaper in the world. This year I tried to change to FT, and I'm a bit disappointed so far.

 

The only thing I will say is that the Wall Street Journal is called that for a reason. In no way, does it represent Main Street America - it's not the Main Street Journal.  

 

So you are missing the major part of American thinking: the common working man, which is aligned with MAGA.

[Spekulatius]

Karl Marx was wrong about many things but he was right on one thing “ Religion is opium for the masses”.

 

I don’t know who said it, but patriotism is one way to get people to vote against their own interest. Thats why politicians love patriotism.

 

Almost any time a politician plays the religion or patriotism card, you can almost bet on getting fooled.

[vinod1]

3 hours ago, Loss Horizon said:

 

Thank you, that is very kind!

 

 

Nazi is the most famous and atrocious organization, but I've seen more recent and immediate examples. I watched my country turning isolationist and ultra militaristic.

 

I never watched or read BBC, MSNBC and CNN. My main newspaper for the last 10 years has been WSJ. That is in my opinion the best newspaper in the world. This year I tried to change to FT, and I'm a bit disappointed so far.

 

 

 

You can predict with near 100% accuracy what the position of every single article on WSJ is going to be. Does it increase profits of corporations? If yes, then WSJ is for it. Everything else is just boilerplate around that idea.

 

I read WSJ too and I am as capitalist as they come, but you can spot bias in WSJ very easily.

 

 

 

[Spekulatius]

3 hours ago, Marco Van Basten said:

I disagree, there is a price for everything.  Look at the performance of Safran in the past several years, Holcim and Heidelberg Materials this year, Hermes over the past two decades, BTI in the past 24 months, Aena in the past decade and the list goes on.  Richemont is another great example, so are LVMH/Dior, ASML.  Rheinmetall and Saab in the past two years.  Hell, I would even buy Russian or Chinese stocks, provided that they are priced like warrants - effectively a 10 bagger if there is no confiscation, just size them as you would warrants - very small. 

Exactly.

 

I think many Europeans stocks are very cheap and they run business that operate world wide,  it just in Europe. They trade cheaply partly because  they are not part of the US stock market juggernaut, although governance and higher taxes play a role as well. 

I said it before, you need to go where the fish are, not where the fishermen are.

[NnnnotSoSmart]

45 minutes ago, Spekulatius said:

I said it before, you need to go where the fish are, not where the fishermen are.

Suppose it depends on who the fishermen are?  

Saying that, I followed Charlie into BABA a few years back and later regretted it.  

Sold out for a sizable loss. I won't be fishing in China again.

Edited December 13, 2025 by NnnnotSoSmart

[Loss Horizon]

2 hours ago, vinod1 said:

 

You can predict with near 100% accuracy what the position of every single article on WSJ is going to be. Does it increase profits of corporations? If yes, then WSJ is for it. Everything else is just boilerplate around that idea.

 

I read WSJ too and I am as capitalist as they come, but you can spot bias in WSJ very easily.

 

 

I like the language of the top newspapers like WSJ. I can see they put extra effort to make everything sound neutral and never use loaded and emotional phrasing. Even for controversial events, it's always "who did or said exactly what, when, according to what source". The lack of emotions and drama gives it less entertaining value comparing to others and it's sometimes hard to read. But I appreciate that approach a lot, almost nothing at that level of professionalism exists in Russian, sadly.

[UK]

I think this discussion about EU uninvestability sometimes really misses the point. First of all, even on the macro level, European countries are very different. E.g. Scandinavian/Nordic countries are very different (stable, low debts, quite socialistic, but very business friendly with a strong rule of law/shareholder protection traditions), or what is wrong with Switzerland? Then even in euro area, if you want some strong macro, just look at Ireland, this country (and it is kind of by design) just thrives within EU/Euro zone. But also from a micro perspective, as others already mentioned, there are al lots of great global companies in EU and their business exposures is not very different from similar companies is US (sure in this case usually valuation is not that different either, but why would they be uninvestable?). It is funny, and it is by accident/micro driven, but actually right now I think I have less then 20 per cent US exposure, if you look by jurisdiction, yet I think it would be no less than 60 per cent US exposure their real business wise. Sa am I invested in Europe or US this way?. And yes, there is price for everything, because like I already posted, European banks, which are perhaps the most macro related business one can think of, just produced one of the best 3 year return globally, including in Greece or Italy:). So perhaps US is still generally the best jurisdiction, but I think Europe in general and especially good/global companies is Europe is not really that different. As for Russia (or even China for that matter), this is perhaps different...or recently I was looking at a KZ bank with 20-30 ROE trading at 3-4 PE in London, now here I think this investability question is relevant:))

 

[Spekulatius]

12 hours ago, Loss Horizon said:

 

I like the language of the top newspapers like WSJ. I can see they put extra effort to make everything sound neutral and never use loaded and emotional phrasing. Even for controversial events, it's always "who did or said exactly what, when, according to what source". The lack of emotions and drama gives it less entertaining value comparing to others and it's sometimes hard to read. But I appreciate that approach a lot, almost nothing at that level of professionalism exists in Russian, sadly.

The WSJ by far is the best newspaper for business news. Just ignore the many opinion pieces there.

[SharperDingaan]

6 hours ago, UK said:

I think this discussion about EU uninvestability sometimes really misses the point. First of all, even on the macro level, European countries are very different. E.g. Scandinavian/Nordic countries are very different (stable, low debts, quite socialistic, but very business friendly with a strong rule of law/shareholder protection traditions), or what is wrong with Switzerland? Then even in euro area, if you want some strong macro, just look at Ireland, this country (and it is kind of by design) just thrives within EU/Euro zone. But also from a micro perspective, as others already mentioned, there are al lots of great global companies in EU and their business exposures is not very different from similar companies is US (sure in this case usually valuation is not that different either, but why would they be uninvestable?). It is funny, and it is by accident/micro driven, but actually right now I think I have less then 20 per cent US exposure, if you look by jurisdiction, yet I think it would be no less than 60 per cent US exposure their real business wise. Sa am I invested in Europe or US this way?. And yes, there is price for everything, because like I already posted, European banks, which are perhaps the most macro related business one can think of, just produced one of the best 3 year return globally, including in Greece or Italy:). So perhaps US is still generally the best jurisdiction, but I think Europe in general and especially good/global companies is Europe is not really that different. As for Russia (or even China for that matter), this is perhaps different...or recently I was looking at a KZ bank with 20-30 ROE trading at 3-4 PE in London, now here I think this investability question is relevant:))

 

 

The reality is that one can buy the same US exposure (at the revenue level) for a lot less, via a EU based company, vs a US one. And if you are EU based, you also have the advantage of FX change.

 

Not what those based in the US want to hear, as it wrecks the business proposition. Do business in the US ... but don't make your company US resident. The tax difference will still be zero, after your tax people are through with it.

 

Not what the MAGA folks want to hear 

 

SD

[cubsfan]

1 hour ago, SharperDingaan said:

Not what the MAGA folks want to hear 

 

SD

 

Sharper - buy all the European equities you like. 
As for me, I'm praying for a 100% European come-back - Canada too!

[Marco Van Basten]

1 hour ago, SharperDingaan said:

 

The reality is that one can buy the same US exposure (at the revenue level) for a lot less, via a EU based company, vs a US one. And if you are EU based, you also have the advantage of FX change.

 

Not what those based in the US want to hear, as it wrecks the business proposition. Do business in the US ... but don't make your company US resident. The tax difference will still be zero, after your tax people are through with it.

 

Not what the MAGA folks want to hear 

 

SD

What you forget is that very often, European corporate governance is abysmal.  Witness the fight TCI had to do to prevent Safran from destroying tens of billions of shareholder value a few years ago on an insanely stupid acquisition, trying to pay twice the fair market value and using shares that were trading at probably half of the true market value.  

[John Hjorth]

10 hours ago, UK said:

I think this discussion about EU uninvestability sometimes really misses the point. First of all, even on the macro level, European countries are very different. E.g. Scandinavian/Nordic countries are very different (stable, low debts, quite socialistic, but very business friendly with a strong rule of law/shareholder protection traditions), or what is wrong with Switzerland? Then even in euro area, if you want some strong macro, just look at Ireland, this country (and it is kind of by design) just thrives within EU/Euro zone. But also from a micro perspective, as others already mentioned, there are al lots of great global companies in EU and their business exposures is not very different from similar companies is US (sure in this case usually valuation is not that different either, but why would they be uninvestable?). It is funny, and it is by accident/micro driven, but actually right now I think I have less then 20 per cent US exposure, if you look by jurisdiction, yet I think it would be no less than 60 per cent US exposure their real business wise. Sa am I invested in Europe or US this way?. And yes, there is price for everything, because like I already posted, European banks, which are perhaps the most macro related business one can think of, just produced one of the best 3 year return globally, including in Greece or Italy:). So perhaps US is still generally the best jurisdiction, but I think Europe in general and especially good/global companies is Europe is not really that different. As for Russia (or even China for that matter), this is perhaps different...or recently I was looking at a KZ bank with 20-30 ROE trading at 3-4 PE in London, now here I think this investability question is relevant:))

 

Thank you, @UK !

 

That was a really great post to start the day with, by reading it to the morning coffee!  

Edited December 14, 2025 by John Hjorth

[SharperDingaan]

Lots of EU and US companies pay too high a price for an acquisition, with assets that are undervalued; sadly, there is no monopoly on stupid. However it was purely on the investor, as to whether or not to buy the shares of that EU or US company ... decisions made by the dumb, and dumber  

 

Imagine that you're a legal drug dealer, based in Denmark, via a holding of NVO shares 

• NVO does USD 250M (assume) of business in the US, but everyone hates NVO .. so NVO shares trade at only 10x earnings (assume). US business/company earnings of USD 25M [USD 250M/10] 
• A much smaller US based competitor (with friends in the right places) does USD 100M of business in the same space, and trades at 20x earnings. US business/company earnings of USD 50M [USD 100M/20]
• The reason you're in Denmark is 'cause you're getting that same US business exposure at a 50% discount ... 2x the US exposure for the same dollar of earnings; multiple times the competitors size, and a hard-ass running NVO, are bonus. 
• Today the vikings are bums, but tomorrow they will be hero's; after they bail out the friends of the failing competitor via a timely acquisition that comes with a package of tax/regulatory credits. That hard-ass is there for a reason, and is rubbish if he is no good!

 Not what the MAGA folks want to hear .... 

 

SD

[Sweet]

I don’t think Ireland’s a good example, only because Ireland deliberately have a business policy which is to lure EU investment and companies i.e it’s tax policy.  It’s doing so well because so many companies that want to operate under the EU umbrella place themselves in Ireland.  Still they’ve done a great job of have a strategy and a executing that.

 

Part of my work covers some EU policy, one day I had a look at the comparable US policies and they weren’t nearly as complicated. I don’t share Dalal’s pessimism since there are reasons to be optimistic, but there needs to be serious deregulation.  

[Gregmal]

The content of this hits the nail on the head 100x over.

 

https://nypost.com/2025/12/14/opinion/self-righteous-smug-europe-chokes-on-its-scorn-for-america/

[John Hjorth]

28 minutes ago, Gregmal said:

The content of this hits the nail on the head 100x over.

 

https://nypost.com/2025/12/14/opinion/self-righteous-smug-europe-chokes-on-its-scorn-for-america/

 

Greg [ @Gregmal ],

 

Please try to project the main bullet points of this article over the Atlantic Ocean onto United States of America.

 

What do you then get!?

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

Ohh, I just forgot : You don't really care, right?

[Gregmal]

16 minutes ago, John Hjorth said:

 

Greg [ @Gregmal ],

 

Please try to project the main bullet points of this article over the Atlantic Ocean onto United States of America.

 

What do you then get!?

 

- - - o 0 o - - -

 

Ohh, I just forgot : You don't really care, right?

I’m not sure what you mean by this. It has been an active subject in this thread and this author summed a lot of it up, pretty concisely, in an easily digestible, 3 minute read. 

[Sweet]

1 hour ago, Gregmal said:

The content of this hits the nail on the head 100x over.

 

https://nypost.com/2025/12/14/opinion/self-righteous-smug-europe-chokes-on-its-scorn-for-america/

Mostly correct I’m afraid to say.

[Dalal.Holdings]

 

Quote

- For the first time since antiquity, Europe is no longer a serious power factor – in a world where strength counts again, not convictions.

- While the great powers openly agree on spheres of influence, Europe continues to speak the language of morality – but it is no longer heard.

- The Ukraine war shows Europe's powerlessness: For decades, security delegated to the USA, armies shrunk to operetta format, dependencies solidified.

- Even after three years of war, Europe is not able to carry the military support of Ukraine independently – without the USA, nothing works.
 

Quote

- Instead of projecting power, Europe produces perseverance slogans, debt, and bureaucracy – a model that no one wants to emulate anymore.

- Germany, too, lives on illusions: about Russia, about the USA – and about politicians whose grand promises fizzle out without consequence.

- Europe has forgotten how to think in categories of power, interests, and strength – and now wonders why it plays no role in the reorganization of the world.

https://www.welt.de/politik/deutschland/harald-martenstein/plus693abacd255f61bcbd40d3eb/neben-der-spur-europa-steht-nur-noch-fuer-grosse-klappe-und-monstroese-buerokratie.html

Quote

Europe lives beyond its means and mainly on debt, just like the GDR once did. It once stood at the forefront of technological progress; in that situation, one could more easily afford debt. Today, Europe stands for a monstrous bureaucracy. The pithy sayings of its politicians are hardly taken seriously by anyone in the world anymore: all talk and no substance." Harald Martenstein

 

Some people think Americans want a weaker Europe--no, we want a stronger, more self confident Europe -- the one that was the birthplace of the enlightenment and many other legacies that America was founded upon.

 

Edited December 15, 2025 by Dalal.Holdings

[Dalal.Holdings]

9 hours ago, Marco Van Basten said:

What you forget is that very often, European corporate governance is abysmal.  Witness the fight TCI had to do to prevent Safran from destroying tens of billions of shareholder value a few years ago on an insanely stupid acquisition, trying to pay twice the fair market value and using shares that were trading at probably half of the true market value.  

I think this is often country specific -- France seems like an outlier. I think there are places in Europe where the corporate governance is better.

 

Even then, I think Europe resembles Japan in some ways where you can find very cheap stocks with poor corporate governance and still do okay because your downside is protected. Now, if Europe goes full socialist/leftist and destroys its heavy industries, then you will not do well (compare with Japan which is not afflicted by intense climate ideology of Europe and whose heavy industries continue to do okay).

[Loss Horizon]

My failed bet on https://finance.yahoo.com/quote/SHA0.F/ is suddenly paying out. Looks like China can't do completely everything in industrial engineering and manufacturing after all.