Register For Our Mailing List

Register to receive our free weekly newsletter including editorials.

Home / 141

The ‘January effect’ in stock markets

The idea that share prices have historically done better in January than in other months is referred to as the ‘January effect’. Since January 2016 was such a bad month for shares in Australia and around the world, I have had more questions than usual from investors about this phenomenon.

In Part 1 we look at whether there is in fact a ‘January effect’ in the US (where the theory originated) and in Australia.

Then in Part 2 we will look at what January’s returns can tell us about the likely returns for the rest of the year.

The ‘January effect’ in the stock market

In the US stock market, January has delivered above-average returns from shares relative to other months of the year. This phenomenon has been observed at least as far back as the 1920s. I recall first reading about it in the 1980s, and it is still referred to as a market ‘anomaly’ or ‘inefficiency’.

Various logical explanations have been put forward. Most relate to the timing of tax payments and end-of-year bonuses which are invested in shares in January. Other explanations include optimism from the festive season and year-end reflections and commitments to start or accelerate investment plans in the New Year.

This market inefficiency sounds like a way to make easy money. If it were true, we could simply over-weight shares in January and then go under-weight for the rest of the year, generating higher returns than by than simply remaining passive and sticking to the same allocation for the whole year.

Surely the market would not allow such an obvious inefficiency to last for long?

The first pair of charts show price returns from US shares in January compared to the average of all months, using the S&P Composite/S&P500 price index returns from US shares from 1900 to the end of 2015.

The left chart shows the median January return was 1.7%, which has been double the median return from all months. This difference is statistically significant, not a random aberration. The right chart above shows that monthly returns have been positive in 58% of all months, but positive in 66% of Januaries, so the incidence of losses in January has been lower than in other months.

Indeed, averaged over the whole period since 1900, January has been the best month for US shares. January has had the highest median monthly price return of all months (left chart below) and the highest incidence of positive results, meaning the lowest incidence of negative months (right chart below).

So far so good. We could buy or go overweight the market (for example, via a broad market ETF) at the end of December or the start of January and then sell or underweight at the end of January, wait eleven months and do it again next year, and so on.

What’s the problem?

The problem is that the ‘January effect’ has been so extensively written about that it has been ‘arbitraged away’ (exploited so much that the advantage no longer exists) since the 1990s.

The following charts show the January effect by decade:

The left chart shows the excess of January returns over returns for all months. A blue bar means January returns were higher than the overall monthly average return, and a red bar means January returns were lower than the monthly average. The right chart above shows the excess of January incidence of positive months relative to all months. A positive blue bar means Januaries had higher incidence of positive returns than other months.

The January outperformance varied over time but it was consistently positive until it disappeared since the 1990s.

Why? The ‘January effect’ was exploited by a few large investors who had enough scale, access to markets and instruments to overcome the high costs involved in exploiting the anomaly. Since the 1980s, the advent of cheap computing, lower brokerage, accessible futures markets, the rapid proliferation of hedge funds and low cost ETFs has meant that everybody could now try to exploit this ‘free lunch’. Further, the charts show that it may have even reversed in the 2000s and 2010s.

Is there a ‘January effect’ in the Australian stock market?

Just like in the US, there has also been a January effect in Australia over more than a century since 1900.

The left chart shows the median January return was 1.8% (similar to the US). In Australia the median January return has been three times the overall return over all months, even more than in the US. The right chart above shows that monthly returns have been positive in 58% of all months (similar to the US), but positive in 74% of Januaries (even higher than 66% of Januaries in the US).

Averaged over the whole period, January has also been the best month for the Australian stock market, as it has been in the US:

So the January effect has been even more pronounced in Australia than in the US market.

Although the timing of tax payments in Australia is different from the US, and year-end bonuses are not as extensive here, the January effect has still been present in Australia. One reason may be that the Australian market has always been heavily influenced by foreign money flows and our local market has been a natural beneficiary of the US effect. Another reason may be to do with investors re-balancing and setting up new portfolios after December year-end reviews.

However, just like in the US, the ‘January effect’ has not been present in Australia since the 1990s.

There’s no such thing as a free January

Stock markets, like all markets, contain market inefficiencies - ‘free lunches’ – from time to time. Some last for short periods before being discovered, exploited and arbitraged away. Others can persist for long periods before being lost due to the use of new technologies, instruments or changes in market structure. Hedge funds often find a market inefficiency, exploit it quickly before the rest of the market joins the party and closes the gap, and then go in search of the next inefficiency.

The ‘January effect’ persisted for more than a century but alas it has disappeared.

(In Part 2, we will look at what January’s returns can tell us about the likely returns for the rest of the year).

 

Ashley Owen (BA, LLB, LLM, Grad. Dip. App. Fin, CFA) has been an active investor since the mid-1980s, a senior executive of major global banking & finance groups, and currently advises high net worth investors and advisory groups in Australia and Asia. This article is general information and does not consider the personal circumstances of any individual.

 

  •   4 February 2016
  • 1
  •      
  •   

RELATED ARTICLES

Why Australian shares are falling behind the world

Recession surprise may be in store for the US stock market

Australian large caps outperform small caps over long term

banner

Most viewed in recent weeks

It’s time for LICs to die

A high-profile dividend cut and a prominent fund manager’s apology have reignited a long-running debate. If investors can access similar exposures more cheaply and efficiently elsewhere, what exactly is keeping LICs alive?

The retirement scorecard: how many of these questions can you answer?

From the maths of retirement, estimating spending and picking the right asset allocation to survive a poor decade, here are the questions every retiree – current or future – should be able to answer for themselves.

Testamentary trusts: Treasury has picked the wrong reading

A decades-old estate planning tool has survived one tax crackdown only to be caught by another. The surprise isn't who the reform is targeting, but who could end up paying the price for drafting choices made years ago.

How the typical Australian Family could save $844,350 in taxes

The value of a testamentary trust is not determined by wealth alone. Depending on circumstances, it can reduce the tax burden on inherited income, create efficiencies and help build intergenerational wealth.

The housing slide could become a crash

House prices are sliding across Australia, yet the most dangerous ingredient for a housing crash is still missing. If job losses surge amid growing economic risks, today's correction could become a historic property downturn.

Will investors be better or worse off under new housing tax changes?

Housing tax reforms have sparked warnings of market turmoil and promises of greater fairness. But after modelling nearly two decades of property data, the results suggest winners and losers may not be who many investors expect.

Latest Updates

SMSF strategies

Division 296: the initial moves to make before the windows close

What if the best superannuation strategy isn't about earning more, but acting before your options disappear? Several overlooked planning windows are narrowing, with consequences that can last for decades.

Planning

Avoid unnecessary CGT with this estate planning clause

A simple estate plan can create a ticking time bomb. One overlooked clause can pit spouses against children, delay inheritances, and potentially leave a family facing an unexpected tax bill worth hundreds of thousands of dollars.

Exchange traded products

The hidden trade-off in fixed income ETFs

Some investment trade-offs are immediately visible. Others are embedded in the way a portfolio is constructed. Understanding the difference may explain why similar-looking investments can produce surprisingly different results.

Retirement

The mortgage free retirement is fading

What happens when a generation reaches retirement carrying obligations previous generations largely avoided? New research suggests we may need to rethink both how much we need in retirement and what life could look like.

Retirement

The key question to inspire a confident and purposeful retirement

Most people spend decades planning for retirement. Far fewer plan for what happens when they get there. The difference may explain why so many find the transition harder and less fulfilling than expected, despite careful preparation.

Latest from Morningstar

Making the case for a 'good enough' portfolio

Some investors spend years chasing the perfect strategy. Others choose a path that’s simply good enough and move on. Which approach is more likely to deliver both better outcomes and a happier financial life over the long run?

Investment strategies

Is the US market as expensive as CAPE says?

Many investing ideas survive for decades. But that does not make them right. A famous valuation measure implies that US shares are dangerously expensive, but the evidence may point to a very different conclusion.

Sponsors

Alliances

  • ASA-Logo-RGB-ActiveGreen-web.png

© 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.