Hacker Read top | best | new | newcomments | leaders | about | bookmarklet login

True. But in a period 1969-1989 it had a return of, IIRC, 5700%.


sort by: page size:

For those curious, it's about a 9.49% annualized rate of return over the last 91 years.

From what I recall, 8% returns might have been correct in 1999.

The 7% rate quoted is after inflation. The actual historical rate of return was more like 11% over that time period if you ignore inflation.

Adjusted for inflation, long term is more like 7%. There have been some really ugly periods where returns were a lot less, however, sometimes lasting more than a decade. For a 30 year timeline, though, it's been a pretty good bet.

Incorrect, please re-read my statement. An average 10% annual return over 10 years. As the other reply to this notes, history shows in general this rule has held since 1970ish.

Based on numbers here: https://seekingalpha.com/article/2789035-s-and-p-500-index-r...

1940-1950: 9.3%/y

1950-1960: 20.0%/y

1960-1970: 7.7%/y

1970-1980: 5.9%/y

1980-1990: 17.2%/y

1990-2000: 18.2%/y

2000-2010: -1.0%/y

So only decade with negative growth.

Add in the depression and you'll probably see a bunch more...


In the last ten years or so, returns have been extremely high. If you look back at all the data available, you get a number closer to 3.5% or maybe at the most 4%.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trinity_study


And you know for a fact it will also return 12.0% annually for the next decade?

But it contained the great depression which probably will never happen again. Same for 2000-2010 period. It may be cherrypicking but given that bull markets are much longer than bear markets, the median return from 1940-1970 and then from1980 to 2000 and then from 2010 to now gives you a better idea of the returns going forward. The odds are you will be in one of the 8 winning decades instead of the two losing ones. In the absence of bad decades, and given how low interest rates are , how fat and strong corporate profits are, and low inflation is, real returns of 15-25 percent per year going forward would not surprise me.

> A 10x return over a decade is pretty damn good

I think it was 100x


"Adjusted for inflation, the historical average annual return is only around 7%. " from your link.

There are a few data points missing from this analysis: like over what timeframe the 5x returns were realized:

I can get that over 20 years with an 8% return!


> ~10% annual returns

That kinda checks out to me given the overall markets tend to return ~7% to 8%


The markets did more than 12% annual returns for that decade.

Returns in the 70s weren't quite as bad as the DJIA graph suggests, because the companies in that average would have been paying substantial dividends.

Cherry-picking dates, but the return from 1929 to 1974 (45 years, not 35) was 7.2% nominal, and only 4.76% inflation-adjusted.

https://www.officialdata.org/us/stocks/s-p-500/1929?amount=1...

Alternatively, 1972-2009 (37 years) gives an inflation-adjusted 5.17%

https://www.officialdata.org/us/stocks/s-p-500/1972?amount=1...

(To be fair, that's from lump-sum investing at the worst time, if you DCA the returns should be better than the numbers above)


That was a misnomer, you're right. But that doesn't meaningfully impact my point. An average annual 70% return, some years greater (notably, 2008) and some years lesser, but only a very small number of down quarters or months in the same time frame.

Please see http://crawlingroad.com - 9.8% over the last 40 years is more like it if you invest wisely.

10% isn't a very high annual rate, it's probably almost exactly what the stock market returned over that period.
next

Legal | privacy