Goodbye to $100?, page-40

"...with its high PE and high borrowings, the market is now divesting of CSL. This is why it has fallen so much this month"

CSL share price at close of trade on 31 December, 2015 = $105.31
CSL share price at close of trade on 13 January, 2016 = $104.54

Extent of CSL's fall in percentage terms = 0.7%

If that is all that is required the definition of "it has fallen so much", imagine if CSL had fallen by 1.0%. How would one describe a full one percentage fall. A share price "slump", perhaps? Or a "collapse", even? Maybe "a devastating rout of utter wealth destruction"?

What about a 2% fall (which is almost three times as severe as the 0.7% figure)? What would that constitute? An "absolute meltdown"? A "disaster of epic proportions that is sure to send investors to the poorhouse"? Surely that would be such a terrible thing that it would be so emotionally scarring that people would never invest in shares again.

And, hey, look at this:

All Ordinaries Index value at close of trade on 31 December, 2015 = 5,344
CSL share price at close of trade on 13 January, 2016 = 5041

Extent of Index's fall in percentage terms = 5.7%

That's a jaw-dropping, eye-popping EIGHT times greater fall than the fall in CSL's value!!!

I don't think any adjectives have been invented to describe just how bad that outcome is, based on your scale of commentary on share price movements.