Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 360

Three realities and three mistakes in market recoveries

If market declines make you nervous, then you’re not alone. Especially now, when COVID-19 and its economic impact are fuelling feelings of uncertainty around the world.

But while bear markets can be extraordinarily difficult, they also can be moments of great opportunity. Investors who find the courage and conviction to stick to their long-term plans are often rewarded as markets bounce back. To help put recent markets into perspective, we outline three facts about market recoveries and three mistakes that investors should avoid.

Three facts about market recoveries

Fact #1: Recoveries have been much longer and stronger than downturns

The good news is bear markets have been relatively short compared with recoveries. They can feel like they last forever when we’re in them but in reality, they are much less impactful compared to the long-term power of bull markets.

Although every market decline is unique, in the US, the average bear market since 1950 has lasted 14 months. The average bull market has been more than five times longer.

The difference in returns has been just as dramatic. Even though the average bull has averaged a 279% gain, recoveries are rarely a smooth ride. Investors must often withstand scary headlines, significant market volatility and additional equity declines along the way. But investors who remain focused on the long term are often better equipped to look past the noise and stick to their plan.

Fact #2: After large declines, markets have recovered quickly

Of course, we don’t know exactly what the next recovery will look like, but history shows us that stocks have often recovered sharply following steep downturns. We tracked the 18 biggest US market declines since the Great Depression, and in each case the S&P 500 was higher five years later. Returns over those five-year periods averaged more than 18% per year.

Returns have often been strongest after the steepest declines, bouncing back quickly from market bottoms. The first year following the five biggest bear markets over the last 90 years averaged 71%, underscoring the importance of staying invested and avoiding the urge to abandon stocks during market volatility.

Fact #3: Some of the world’s most influential companies were born during market recoveries

Many companies started during tough economic periods and have gone on to become household names.

To highlight just a few in the US market:

  • McDonald’s emerged in 1948 following a downturn caused by the US government’s demobilisation from a wartime economy.
  • Walmart came along 14 years later, around the time of the ‘Flash Crash of 1962’, a period when the S&P 500 index declined more than 22%.
  • Airbus, Microsoft and Starbucks were founded during the stagflation era of the 1970s, a decade marked by two recessions and one of the worst bear markets in US history.
  • Not long after that, Steve Jobs walked into his garage and started a computer company called Apple.

History has shown that strong businesses find a way to survive and even thrive when times are tough. Those that can adapt to difficult conditions and become stronger often make attractive long-term investments.

Bottom-up, fundamental research is key to separating which companies may help lead a market recovery, and which are more likely to be left behind.

Three mistakes investors should avoid

Mistake #1: Trying to time markets

It’s time, not timing, that matters in investing. Taking your money out of the market on the way down means that if you don’t get back in at exactly the right time, you can’t capture the full benefit of a recovery.

Consider an example of a hypothetical investor who sold stocks during the US market downturn of 2008–2009, and then tried to time the market, jumping back in when it showed signs of improvement. Missing even the 10 best days of the recovery would have significantly hurt that investor’s long-term results. The more of the 'good' days were missed, the steeper the loss.

Investors who are more hesitant to put all their excess capital to work at once may want to consider dollar cost averaging, which often provides stability in volatile markets.

Mistake #2: Assuming today’s negative headlines make it a bad time to invest

Today’s economic and geopolitical challenges may seem unprecedented, but a look through history shows that there have always been reasons not to invest. Despite negative headlines, the market’s long-term trend has always been higher.

Consider an investment in the S&P 500 on the day Pearl Harbour was bombed in 1941. Someone who stayed invested for the next 10 years would have averaged a 16% annual return. Likewise, a $10,000 investment in the S&P 500 Index on the day Lehman Brothers declared bankruptcy in 2008 would have grown to over $30,000 10 years later. History has provided numerous examples of this.

Great investment opportunities often emerge when investors are feeling most pessimistic. The coronavirus outbreak may be unlike anything we have faced before but uncertainty is nothing new to the market, which continues to be resilient over time.

Mistake #3: Focusing too much on the short term

Market volatility is especially uncomfortable when you focus on short-term ups and downs. Instead, extend your time horizon to focus on the long-term growth of your investments and the progress you’ve made toward your goals.

Consider the chart below that shows contrasting perspectives of the same hypothetical investment. The short-term view is one that many investors have of their portfolios, tracing returns over short periods of time.

The long-term view plots the same investment over the same period, but shows annual change in the portfolio value invested instead. With this perspective, the short-term fluctuations have smoothed out over time, and the picture of a growing portfolio becomes clearer.

Bear markets don’t last forever. Maintaining a long-term perspective can help investors to focus on the goals that matter most.

 

Matt Reynolds is an Investment Director at Capital Group, a sponsor of Firstlinks. This article is general information and does not consider the circumstances of any investor. Please seek financial advice before acting on any investment as market circumstances can change.

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

 

  •   3 June 2020
  • 4
  •      
  •   
4 Comments
John
June 03, 2020

The "missing the best 10 days" argument always causes me concern.

What are the chances of an investor actually doing this? Well, simple maths. Probability of missing the best day in 10 years is obviously one chance in 3650. The chance of missing the two worst days, roughly one chance in 3650*3650 - and the chance of missing JUST the 10 best days over a 10 year period happening purely by chance is roughly 1 with 30 zeros after it - a huge number - the same as winning lotto several weeks in a row. It just isn't going to happen.

But, then you also need to look at when the ten WORST days happen. And believe it or not, the 10 WORST days in the stock market just happen to have occurred close to when the BEST 10 days were.

So in all likelihood, if you missed out on the 10 best days, you probably missed out on many of the 10 WORST days too (unless you were really Good/bad) and were out of the market for the 10 best days, and were in the market for the 10 worst days.

Chances of that? Even longer odds than winning lotto many weeks in a row.

So while I agree with the sentiments expressed in the article (about staying in the market), the author has effectively made the correct recommendation, but for an incorrect reason.

Lachlan
July 05, 2020

Hi John,

I think you've made a good point here about the probability of an investor selecting the 10 "best" days to re-invest, however i don't think this completely dismisses the Author's argument.

Firstly, the probability of hitting the 10 best days is as follows:
P(10 best days in 2010-2019) = (10/3065)*(9/3064)*(8/3063) etc... (Since you can't hit the same day twice)

Secondly, the probability of missing the 10 best days is as follows:
P(Missing the 10 best days in 2010-2019) = 1- P(10 best days in 2010-2019) or (3055/3065)*(3054/3064)*(3053/3064)...etc...

Both are very useless numbers with respect to timing the market, however, what the Author is illustrating is the importance of time *in* the market. Sure, this can be more accurately represented by showing net market increases over the period, rather than showing the gains from being in the market for the 10 best days, but the Author illustrates two things:
1. Missing the 10 best days by not being in the market leads to significant decline in return.
2. The earlier you start, the more "best" days you'll benefit from.

If the argument then is "but what if you invest on all the worst days", then, as the author suggested, dollar-cost-averaging is the optimal solution for any investor.

I hope this makes the argument a little clearer for yourself and any future readers.

- Lach

Bill
June 04, 2020

The benefit of hindsight is 2020 Every crisis seems different especially the covid-19. What assurance do we have that the worst is yet to come?

Ian Radbone
June 08, 2020

Thanks John, for pointing out something that hadn't occurred to me before.

 

Leave a Comment:

RELATED ARTICLES

5 insights that put market volatility in perspective

The ASX's 16-year drought: a rebuttal

Suddenly, the market cares if a company makes money (again)

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

Australian stocks will crush housing over the next decade, 2025 edition

Two years ago, I wrote an article suggesting that the odds favoured ASX shares easily outperforming residential property over the next decade. Here’s an update on where things stand today.

Building a lazy ETF portfolio in 2026

What are the best ways to build a simple portfolio from scratch? I’ve addressed this issue before but think it’s worth revisiting given markets and the world have since changed, throwing up new challenges and things to consider.

Get set for a bumpy 2026

At this time last year, I forecast that 2025 would likely be a positive year given strong economic prospects and disinflation. The outlook for this year is less clear cut and here is what investors should do.

Meg on SMSFs: First glimpse of revised Division 296 tax

Treasury has released draft legislation for a new version of the controversial $3 million super tax. It's a significant improvement on the original proposal but there are some stings in the tail.

Property versus shares - a practical guide for investors

I’ve been comparing property and shares for decades and while both have their place, the differences are stark. When tax, costs, and liquidity are weighed, property looks less compelling than its reputation suggests.

10 fearless forecasts for 2026

The predictions include dividends will outstrip growth as a source of Australian equity returns, US market performance will be underwhelming, while US government bonds will beat gold.

Latest Updates

Economy

Ray Dalio on 2025’s real story, Trump, and what’s next

The renowned investor says 2025’s real story wasn’t AI or US stocks but the shift away from American assets and a collapse in the value of money. And he outlines how to best position portfolios for what’s ahead.

Superannuation

No, Division 296 does not tax franking credits twice

Claims that Division 296 double-taxes franking credits misunderstand imputation: franking credits are SMSF income, not company tax, and ensure earnings are taxed once at the correct rate.

Investment strategies

Who will get left holding the banks?

For the first time in decades, the Big 4 banks have real competition in home loans. Macquarie is quickly gain market share, which threatens both the earnings and dividends of the major banks in the years ahead.

Investment strategies

AI economic scenarios: revolutionary growth, or recessionary bubble?

Investor focus is turning increasingly to AI-related risks: is it a bubble about to burst, tipping the US into recession? Or is it the onset of a third industrial revolution? And what would either scenario mean for markets?

Investment strategies

The long-term case for compounders

Cyclical stocks surge in upswings but falter in downturns. Compounders - reliable, scalable, resilient businesses - offer smoother, superior returns over the full investment cycle for patient investors.

Property

AREITs are not as passive as you may think

A-REITs are often viewed as passive rental vehicles, but today’s index tells a different story. Development and funds management now dominate earnings, materially increasing volatility and risk for the sector.

Australia’s quiet dairy boom — and the investment opportunity

Dairy farming offers real asset exposure, steady income and long-term growth, yet remains overlooked by investors seeking diversification beyond traditional asset classes.

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.