Conventional wisdom holds that the second year of a U.S. president’s term in office — which, for President Obama, began this week — tends to be a bad one for stocks. But in his latest MarketWatch column, Mark Hulbert says that’s a misconception, and that the “presidential cycle” likely won’t have much effect on the market this year anyway.
Hulbert looks at the Dow Jones Industrial Average’s returns by presidential year over two periods: 1896 (when the Dow was created) to the present, and 1940 (when many say Franklin D. Roosevelt began the practice of presidents having a major impact on the economy) to the present.
The data shows that the second year in a president’s term on average has been met with a 4.7% Dow gain since 1896 — the worst year of the four-year cycle. But since 1940, the second year has actually been the second-best performer, generating returns of 5.6% per year.
The bottom line : “The picture painted by the data is less of abnormal weakness during the first and second years of the cycle than it is of abnormal strength in the third year,” writes Hulbert, noting that since 1896 the Dow has returned 12.5% in the third year of presidents’ terms; since 1940 the figure is 16.5%.
Continue reading ‘Hulbert on Why You Shouldn’t Fear the Presidential Cycle’