The stock market is presently very richly valued and above the range that preceded major tops in the past. At 1614 for S&P 500 it would take 10 years for revenues growing at 4% to catch up with stock prices with no change in prices. The average revenue growth is around 5% though. At 5% it would take 10 years for revenue to reach 1778 with no change in prices which is the bubble point. Bubble valuations begin above 1778 and this is about where valuations were in the 1998-2001 period. At the peak in 2000 it would take 14 years for revenue growing at 5% to catch up with prices with not change in prices which is a record. The price for the peak valuation in 2000 is 2271 for the S&P 500. So 1778 to 2271 is the range for equivalent valuations in the 1998-2001 period.
From a valuation perspective as a rule if it takes more than 10 years for revenue growing at 5% to catch up with stock prices with no change in prices, stocks are not even worth holding and certainly not worth buying.
If revenue growth increases then the calculations change and the bubble valuation level increases. IF revenues instead fall the bubble valuation level also falls. Revenue growth is going to be very very important for sustaining the bull market. Valuations cannot expand indefinitely and at some point growth must increase huge amount. It is going to be interesting to see how this plays out.
Stock prices are very close to bubble valuation levels and it is time for caution and start moving toward the exit.
stocks are not worth holding and buying or indexes? your post implies that all stocks are now richly valued, which is not the case. the thing is that despite rising indexes, plenty of stocks are undervalued now. there are always stocks which remain in a bear market during a raging bull. those may indeed be worth holding/ owning, since the risk/reward is very good. if you own the ones that are currently being pumped, then of course you may have a problem when they pull the rug out from under this market.