Which presidential candidates will be good, or bad, for the markets?


We should all treasure our right to vote and exercise that right with great forethought. You, our clients, are intelligent, well-educated, patriotic Americans who want the best for this country. Many of you risked your lives or lost loved ones to preserve our democracy. This election is important. We are confident you will cast your votes after careful consideration of the candidates and we thank you for that.

Unfortunately, negativity seems to be a cornerstone of many political campaigns. It is difficult, if not impossible, to ignore. Both parties use fear in their messaging and accuse their opposition of being fear mongers. If you can ignore the negativity, that’s great, you will be better off!  But these days, ignoring the noise is very difficult and we doubt this difficulty will ever go away.

Unfortunately, negativity seems to be a cornerstone of many political campaigns.

There are real issues to address and there is real news to be reported by real journalists. Unfortunately, since there are more sources than ever of information competing for our attention, the amount of noise has never been higher.

While we can’t stop the noise around the election, in keeping with our firm’s motto, “A Sanctuary From The Noise®”, we want to prepare you for what is to come so you can maintain some perspective.

Every election year, we hear the same warning, “If {insert name of candidate} wins, it will be bad for the economy or markets.”

As the primaries narrow the field of candidates, the intensity of the rhetoric will increase and you may come to believe the warning is true. Well folks, it is not true or at least highly unlikely to be true that the election result will be the cause.

It is said the President of the United States is the most powerful person on earth. In many regards, that is true. But when it comes to the economy and markets, the president is not calling the shots. Influence? Certainly, but making the economy “good” or “bad” in the straight line way the various campaigns suggest, no way.

How can we say that?  Well, we look at the facts and ignore the pundits.


Recessions, market corrections and the president

First, we need some definitions. Let’s define a “bad economy” as one that goes into a recession. For a “bad market” we can use the most common definition of a “bear” market – a decline of 20% or more. As you may have noticed a few times since the 2008 financial crisis, the market doesn’t need to drop 20% for it to seem like a bad market, so we will also consider “corrections,” drops of at least 10%.

The data on what became the S&P 500 index of the stocks of large U.S. companies starts in January 1926. Since then, we have had 15 U.S. presidents.  ALL 15 of them had an enormous incentive to have a growing economy and good markets yet 13 had recessions occur during their time in office (LBJ and Clinton did not). Eleven of them suffered through a bear market, with Clinton and George H.W. Bush both experiencing a 19+% decline. ALL 15 suffered through corrections, as corrections tend to happen about every other year, on average.

The behavior of the economy and the markets are not unified and often don’t make sense given the narratives.
The 1950s are fondly remembered for peacetime expansion, but Eisenhower dealt with three recessions. The 1960s were a mess yet most of the decade saw economic growth free of recession. The Carter administration is often called abysmal from an economic standpoint, yet a bear market never materialized.

Consider this four year stretch: +53.97%, -1.43%, +47.66%, and +33.92%. Those are the returns of the S&P 500 from 1933-1936. As bad as the 1930s were economically, the decade produced some of the best years the index has ever seen.

The bottom line is bad stuff happens no matter who is in office. The National Bureau of Economic Research (NBER) data shows that since the start of 20th century, the U.S. economy has been in recession about 22% of the time.

You will surely hear theories during this year’s campaign about this, but no combination of Democrats or Republicans in the White House or either house of Congress can claim to be clearly superior so don’t buy into any of that rubbish.

The other favorite is something like, “The average return in an election year or with a Democrat as president or with a Republican Senate has been X%.” We wrote about these meaningless narratives in September 2012 in an article titled, “Should I Prepare My Portfolio for a Post-Election Drop?


Predictions are a tricky business

Predicting the next recession, correction, or bear market is an obsession of the financial media. If you listen to such things, you will hear that the correction is “signaling” a recession. However, recessions are not reliably preceded by corrections let alone caused by them. According to Dr. Jeremy Siegel in his book, Stocks for the Long Run, of the 11 recessions since WWII, only three were preceded by a correction. Nobel Laureate Paul Samuelson famously quipped, “The stock market has predicted nine out of the last five recessions.”

Despite all the real time data available, the NBER didn’t declare the starting point of the last recession, December 2007, until December 2008. The recession ended in June 2009 but NBER couldn’t identify it as such definitively until September 2010. The press mocked them for this but these are some of the world’s top economists. Even in retrospect, identifying the start and end to a recession isn’t simple.

Predicting the next recession, correction, or bear market is an obsession of the financial media.

There doesn’t have to be a recession for a stock market correction or bear market to occur. Since the end of the last recession in 2009, we’ve experienced several corrections and flirted with a second bear market in 2011 with a 19% decline.

Starting with 1950 and ending in 2015, in 35 of those 66 years – more than half – the S&P 500 fell 10% or more during the year. There have been only four years: 1954, 1958, 1964, and 1995 in which the index did not have at least a 5% fall during the year. Each time, there were plenty of people saying it would get worse. Sometimes it did, of course. But with only 11 of those 35 10%+ drops eventually falling 20% or more, it can be said less than 1/3 of corrections have become bear markets.


Who wins matters but…

Declines are normal even if the news of the day seems scary or unprecedented. The news (and noise) may be different but the outcome has always been the same. Markets settled down and recovered in plenty of time for prudent, long term investors with a good plan.

Markets drop often but they have gone up more than they have gone down. There have been only two years since 1926 (1977 and 1994) during which the S&P 500 did not have at least a 10%+ increase during the year. Those that stayed committed to their investments were rewarded.

If you want to look at the election from a more positive perspective and you are telling people the markets will do well if your favored candidate wins, you will probably be right! At some point during every presidency, a dollar hypothetically invested in the S&P 500 index and left alone has reached an all-time high.

As we noted four years ago, “This is not to imply that who wins doesn’t matter. Without a doubt, the next president will have an effect on the markets, but speculating on what that effect will be is not a sound strategy for investors. We certainly agree that a candidate’s economic positions are relevant to deciding your vote. However, we want to encourage our clients to look at the candidates’ positions on the broader spectrum of issues and not place too much emphasis on meaningless and conflicting data.”

Good results should come to diversified, patient and disciplined investors because they don’t lose sight of the big picture and allow the noise of the day to redirect them to the fears of the here and now.

Who wins this election matters a great deal for many reasons but we invest over our lifetimes, not just for the next presidency. As such, we shouldn’t expect to avoid tough times. We should learn to invest through them and live with the noise that surrounds them. Invest, don’t speculate.


Presidency Recession “Corrections” – decline in index value of 10% or more “Bear Market” – decline in index value of 20% or more All-time high for $1 invested in S&P 500.[i]
Coolidge 1923-1929


2 yes no yes
Hoover 1929-1933



Great Depression yes yes yes
Roosevelt 1933-1945



2 after Great Depression ended yes yes yes
Truman 1945-1953



1 yes yes yes
Eisenhower 1953-1961



3 yes yes yes
Kennedy 1961-1963



1 shared with Ike  ended Feb 1961 yes yes yes
Johnson 1963-1969



no yes yes yes
Nixon 1969-1974



2 yes yes yes
Ford 1974-1977



1 shared with Nixon yes yes yes
Carter 1977-1981



1 yes no yes
Reagan 1981-1989



1 yes yes yes
Bush 1989-1993



1 yes no (-19% in 1990) yes
Clinton 1993-2001



no yes no (-19% during 1998) yes
Bush 2001-2009



2 yes yes yes
Obama 2009- 1 shared with Bush yes yes yes




 Contact Us

Moisand Fitzgerald Tamayo, LLC is an Orlando, Tampa and Melbourne, Florida based fee-only financial planner serving central Florida and clients across the country. Moisand Fitzgerald Tamayo, LLC specializes in providing objective financial planning, retirement planning, and investment management to help clients build, manage, grow, and protect their assets through all phases of one’s life and the many transitions in between. If you have any questions or would like to discuss anything further, please give us a call or send us a note. If you are not a client and wish to receive emails notifying you of new posts – no more than once per month – fill out the subscription information in the sidebar to the right. For more frequent updates, follow us on FacebookLinkedIn, or Twitter.  

Important Additional Information & Disclosures

Please remember that past performance may not be indicative of future results.  Different types of investments involve varying degrees of risk, and there can be no assurance that the future performance of any specific investment, investment strategy, or product (including the investments and/or investment strategies recommended or undertaken by Moisand Fitzgerald Tamayo, LLC-“MFT”), or any non-investment related content, made reference to directly or indirectly in this blog will be profitable, equal any corresponding indicated historical performance level(s), be suitable for your portfolio or individual situation, or prove successful. 

Due to various factors, including changing market conditions and/or applicable laws, the content may no longer be reflective of current opinions or positions.  Moreover, you should not assume that any discussion or information contained in this blog serves as the receipt of, or as a substitute for, personalized investment advice from MFT. 

Please remember that if you are a MFT client, it remains your responsibility to advise MFT, in writing, if there are any changes in your personal/financial situation or investment objectives for the purpose of reviewing/evaluating/revising our previous recommendations and/or services, or if you would like to impose, add, or to modify any reasonable restrictions to our investment advisory services. To the extent that a reader has any questions regarding the applicability of any specific issue discussed above to his/her individual situation, he/she is encouraged to consult with the professional advisor of his/her choosing. MFT is neither a law firm nor a certified public accounting firm and no portion of the blog content should be construed as legal or accounting advice. Tax advice is given only to clients and only when agreed to by MFT. A copy of the MFT’s current written disclosure Brochure discussing our advisory services and fees is available for review upon request.

Please Note: MFT does not make any representations or warranties as to the accuracy, timeliness, suitability, completeness, or relevance of any information prepared by any unaffiliated third party, whether linked to MFT’s web site or blog or incorporated herein, and takes no responsibility for any such content. All such information is provided solely for convenience purposes only and all users thereof should be guided accordingly.

Please Note: Limitations:  While MFT does NOT pay for recognition, awards, or publicity, neither rankings and/or recognition by unaffiliated rating services, publications, or other organizations, nor the achievement of any designation or certification, should be construed by a client or prospective client as a guarantee that he/she will experience a certain level of results if MFT is engaged, or continues to be engaged, to provide investment advisory services. Rankings published by magazines, and others, generally base their selections exclusively on information prepared and/or submitted by the recognized adviser. Rankings are generally limited to participating advisers. No ranking or recognition should be construed as a current or past endorsement of MFT by any of its clients.  ANY QUESTIONS: MFT’s Chief Compliance Officer remains available to address any questions regarding rankings and/or recognitions, including providing the criteria used for any reflected ranking.

Historical performance results for investment indices, benchmarks, and/or categories have been provided for general informational/comparison purposes only, and generally do not reflect the deduction of transaction and/or custodial charges, the deduction of an investment management fee, nor the impact of taxes, the incurrence of which would have the effect of decreasing historical performance results.  It should not be assumed that your MFT account holdings correspond directly to any comparative indices or categories. Please Also Note: (1) performance results do not reflect the impact of taxes; (2) comparative benchmarks/indices may be more or less volatile than your MFT accounts; and, (3) a description of each comparative benchmark/index is available upon request.


About Dan Moisand

Dan Moisand is a fee-only financial advisor with Moisand Fitzgerald Tamayo, LLC. He is a regular contributor for multiple outlets, including Florida Today, MarketWatch, and The Wall Street Journal. His writing and financial advice have also been featured in Financial Planning, Investment Advisor, Wealth Manager/Advising Boomers, Forbes, Smart Money, and The New York Times, among other publications. He is the only two-time winner of the Journal of Financial Planning’s “Call for Papers” competition and has been named a top financial planner and advisor by multiple publications. Investment News named Dan one of the “twenty most influential men and women” in the history of financial planning. He currently serves on the Board of Directors for the CFP (Certified Financial Planner) Board.


As a Sanctuary From The Noise®, we only post information we believe timely and important to the long term financial success of our clients. Follow us to receive emails - no more than once a month - about new posts.

We keep your information private and make stopping our emails as easy as starting them.

Something went wrong. Please check your entries and try again.