Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 546

A guide to investing in a US election year

US Presidential elections can be divisive and unsettling. At times, the fate of the world seems to hang in the balance. But when it comes to investing, do elections really matter that much?

US voters will have their say in November 2024, but by maintaining a long-term focus, investors can position themselves for a brighter future regardless of the outcome at the voting booth. In fact, overreacting to short term volatility during election cycles can be detrimental to investment returns.

In this guide, we address questions about investing in an election year, drawing insights from our analysis of over 90 years of investment data across 23 election cycles.

Which political party has been better for investors?

Investing during an election year can be tough on the nerves, and 2024 promises to be no different. Indeed, politics can elicit strong emotions and biases, but investors would be wise to tune out the noise and focus on the long-term.

That’s because elections have, historically speaking, made essentially no difference when it comes to long-term investment returns.

What should matter more to investors is staying invested. A US $1,000 investment in the S&P 500 made when Franklin D. Roosevelt took office would have been worth over US$19 million as at 30 June 2023. During this time there have been eight Democratic and seven Republican presidents.

Current economic and political challenges may seem unprecedented but a look at past election cycles shows that controversy and uncertainty have surrounded every campaign. And in each case the market has continued to be resilient over time. Successful investors stay the course and rely on time in the market rather than timing the market.

Bottom line: US stocks have trended up regardless of whether a Democrat or Republican won the White House.

What typically happens to the stock market during election years?

Markets hate uncertainty, and what’s more uncertain than primary season of an election year? With so many candidates on the campaign trail, the range of outcomes can feel daunting.

But the volatility is often short lived. After the primaries are over and each party has selected its candidate, markets have tended to return to their normal upward trajectory.

Patient investors who stay the course have often been rewarded. Since 1932, stocks have gained an average of 11.3% in the 12 months following the conclusion of the primaries (using 31 May as a proxy) compared to just 5.8% in similar periods of non-election years.

But keep in mind, these are just averages. Investors shouldn’t try to time an entry point into the market. Instead, a long-term approach can help investors withstand volatility and feel confident that markets have tended to move higher over time, even in election years.

Bottom line: Primary season tends to be volatile, but markets have bounced back strongly thereafter.

Which sectors have done best in election years?

It‘d be great if there were go to sectors to invest in every election year, but unfortunately investing isn’t that simple. Every election cycle brings its own parade of candidates with their own policy agendas, so market winners and losers are hard to predict.

The health care sector has been in the crosshairs for a number of election cycles. Heated rhetoric over drug pricing put pressure on many stocks in the pharmaceutical and managed care industries. Other sectors have had similar bouts of weakness prior to elections.

Does that mean you should avoid a particular sector altogether? Not according to Rob Lovelace, an equity portfolio manager with 37 years of experience investing through many election cycles. “When everyone is worried that a new government policy is going to come along and destroy a sector, that concern is usually overblown,” Lovelace says.

Regardless of who wins, stocks with strong long-term fundamentals will often rally once the campaign spotlight fades. This pre-election market turbulence can create buying opportunities for investors with a contrarian point of view and the strength to tolerate short term volatility.

Bottom line: Election year volatility can create buying opportunities for long-term investors.

What have been the best ways to invest in election years?

Spoiler alert: The best way to invest in an election year has rarely been by staying on the sidelines.

To verify this, we looked at three hypothetical investors, each with a different investment approach. We then calculated the ending value of each of their portfolios over the last 22 election cycles, assuming a four-year holding period.

The investor who stayed on the sidelines had the worst outcome 16 times and only had the best outcome three times. Meanwhile, investors that were fully invested or made monthly contributions to a pension plan, for example, during election years came out on top. These investors had higher average portfolio balances over the full period and more frequently outpaced the investor who stayed in cash longer.

Sticking with a sound long-term investment plan based on individual investment objectives is usually the best course of action. Whether that strategy is to be fully invested throughout the year or to invest on a regular basis, the bottom line is that investors should avoid market timing around politics. As is often the case with investing, the key is to put aside short-term noise and focus on long-term goals.

Bottom line: Staying on the sidelines has rarely paid off. It’s time, not timing, that matters most.

 

Capital Group Australia is a sponsor of Firstlinks. This article contains general information only and does not consider the circumstances of any investor. Please seek financial advice before acting on any investment as market circumstances can change. Download the full report here (personal details required).

For more articles and papers from Capital Group, click here.

 

  •   7 February 2024
  • 5
  •      
  •   
5 Comments
Gwen I
February 08, 2024

Given the post primary season bounces, it bodes well for markets in 2024. Though how much is priced in already is the big question.

Rick
February 08, 2024

As a retired financial planner, it was always useful to show long term returns to illustrate the benefits of share investing, but using $1,000 invested in 1933 is ludicrous. My parent's house cost $2,000 in 1952, when your illustration shows a value of $10,000. I don't know how many people had $1,000 in the 1930s recession but very few I suspect.
Every investment manager does this, and it is so counter productive.
Please use a more reasonable date (and tell all your investment mates to do the same. Please!!

Kevin
February 09, 2024

I disagree Rick.There has to be a base to start from.I would like to see what $1,000 was in real terms,3 months wages,6 months wages? After that it is a simple understanding of leverage and compounding. Common sense would say you were entering the market around bottom back then.

Compound average income now ,say $90K @ 8 to 12% for a period of 90 years and the result will be astonishing.Would I and children and grandchildren have the ability to pay back a loan of $90 K across that period,I would say yes.

Reality would be in 90 years from now ,ridiculous to start so long ago,here's a hundred hypotheticals and what ifs,and look at the Japanese market.Nobody would have $90K lying around in 2024.

Reality is also, it would be very probable that over a long period of time compounding will be great,and the loan would be paid back.

I use Wal mart as an example 1 share @ $16.50 in 1971,after 11x 2 for 1 splits and a 3 for 1 split at the end of this month work out how much it is worth.

Or use a BRK share price,~ $14 for 1 share way back when,compound that @ 20% for 60 years then see what a BRK share is worth in 2025 or 2026.Would it be a disaster if it had compounded @ 19%,or 19.5%.

I checked what Peter Thornhill said for City of London ( cty ).The annual report said £1,000 pounds in 1966? had grown to whatever it was last year or the previous year.Having worked in the UK within a decade of that date I think I can safely say £1K then was average annual income or slightly less. I don't know why people can't,or refuse to see it.

Trevor
February 09, 2024

Perhaps a start date preceding the Great Depression?

Outsider
February 09, 2024

Well said Rick ! I agree.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

Investors might be paying too much for familiarity

The US is no longer a model for democracy

Does Buffett’s farewell represent peak America?

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Testamentary trusts post-budget: Estate planning, tax reform and the ‘death tax’ debate

Proposed Budget changes to taxation are casting new uncertainty over testamentary trusts, prompting closer scrutiny of estate planning structures and the real implications of reforms still taking shape.

High quality businesses are on sale

Beneath the dominance of the ASX's largest stocks, much of the market has been left behind. High-quality companies are now trading at levels rarely seen, offering opportunities for investors willing to look deeper.

Meg on SMSFs: The CGT changes don’t impact super but what about Div 296 tax decisions?

New CGT rules could tip the scales in the super vs non-super debate. For those facing the Division 296 tax, the case for withdrawing has gotten more complex. A "comparison rate" tool may help assess decisions.

The strange effect of the 30% minimum capital gains tax

The 30% minimum tax on capital gains sits at the heart of the budget's proposed reforms. Yet the mechanics reveal anomalies that introduce unexpected distortions that raise questions about its design.

Ranking three common retirement strategies

The defining challenge of retirement isn't just about building wealth, it's about converting your lifetime savings into sustainable income. A holistic understanding of different strategies can improve long-term outcomes.

Welcome to Firstlinks Edition 667 with weekend update

The downfall of the giant and three lessons for investors.

  • 18 June 2026

Latest Updates

Planning

Does your will qualify for the discretionary testamentary trust exemption?

Treasury has confirmed the exemption many families were hoping for. But buried in the fine print are two conditions that could leave some wills on the wrong side of the exemption, despite years of careful planning.

Lithium's latest drop and what it means for ASX investors

Lithium's latest sell-off has punished ASX miners as prices remain hostage to shifting expectations. The key challenge is navigating a market prone to extreme volatility despite a strong case for the long-term demand outlook.

Investment strategies

CGT reform and fund turnover: who really feels the impact?

The implications of CGT reform are far and wide. As the 50% discount gives way to inflation indexation, turnover and return profiles may become critical drivers of after-tax performance. Some strategies face a far greater hit.

Superannuation

Super was built for a very different Australia

Our retirement system was built around assumptions that no longer hold. Lower homeownership, longer lifespans and changing expectations are exposing cracks that policymakers and super funds need to address.

Retirement

Retirement in reality - 4 months in

Many people spend years planning financially for retirement but little time preparing for what comes next. Four months in, here are the surprising lessons I've learnt on finding purpose, social connection and healthy habits.

Investment strategies

After the Budget, Australia needs its own definition of quality

As tax reforms reshape investment incentives, investors should rethink what quality investing means in the uniquely concentrated Australian market, where traditional frameworks may not translate as effectively.

Datacenters are the new shale oil

Why are tech giants pouring billions into datacentres when the economics look questionable? The most dangerous words in investing may be: "everyone else is doing it". Today's AI boom has striking parallels with the shale bust.

Sponsors

Alliances

© 2026 Morningstar, Inc. All rights reserved.

Disclaimer
The data, research and opinions provided here are for information purposes; are not an offer to buy or sell a security; and are not warranted to be correct, complete or accurate. Morningstar, its affiliates, and third-party content providers are not responsible for any investment decisions, damages or losses resulting from, or related to, the data and analyses or their use. To the extent any content is general advice, it has been prepared for clients of Morningstar Australasia Pty Ltd (ABN: 95 090 665 544, AFSL: 240892), without reference to your financial objectives, situation or needs. For more information refer to our Financial Services Guide. You should consider the advice in light of these matters and if applicable, the relevant Product Disclosure Statement before making any decision to invest. Past performance does not necessarily indicate a financial product’s future performance. To obtain advice tailored to your situation, contact a professional financial adviser. Articles are current as at date of publication.
This website contains information and opinions provided by third parties. Inclusion of this information does not necessarily represent Morningstar’s positions, strategies or opinions and should not be considered an endorsement by Morningstar.