The midterm results suggest there will be few policy changes in Washington during the next two years.
Last week’s midterm elections are a classic lesson in how difficult it is to predict the future. In late 2020, despite most polls suggesting a “blue wave” was imminent, we experienced what I then characterized as a “blue ripple,” with Democrats capturing the slimmest of majorities in both the House and Senate. Those razor-thin margins, we suggested then, would likely stunt any major policy changes. As one would expect with an almost evenly divided Congress, President Biden’s chief policy initiatives were either dialed back (e.g., Build Back Better) or shelved altogether (e.g., proposed tax increases, elimination of carried interest).
I think the same characterization applies now to what many pundits had claimed would be a “red wave”; last Tuesday’s midterms appear to have resulted in, at most, a “red ripple.” At the moment, it appears Congress will remain closely divided; Democrats have retained their slight majority in the Senate, and Republicans have claimed a slim majority in the House of Representatives.
For those who are either excited or concerned (or both!) about the prospect of future legislative change in Washington, you’d be wise to temper your expectations. These midterm results suggest that little real policy change will likely happen in the next two years. A Republican House will likely reject any major fiscal stimulus or change in tax policy; similarly, a Democratic Senate will likely reject any attempt to cut taxes or federal spending. In our view, given the current high state of economic uncertainty, maintaining the status quo on tax policy and government spending (i.e., legislative gridlock) is probably a good thing for markets right now.
Investors are often tempted to make investment decisions based on their political views. History, however, strongly suggests we should vote with ballots and not with our portfolios. To that end, we believe there are three important takeaways for investors when it comes to elections and portfolios.
Survey data from Pew Research Center shows how Americans regard the economy. Republicans usually feel better about it with a Republican president, while Democrats usually feel better with a president from their party. Yet average annual returns during the Obama and Trump administrations were virtually identical—16.3% for Obama vs. 16.0% for Trump. What’s more, market returns under both administrations were higher than the 30-year average of 10.6%. Consequently, investors who let their political opinions overrule their investing discipline may have missed out on above-average returns during the administration they opposed.
Exhibit: Consumer confidence by political affiliation—percentage of Republicans and Democrats who rate national economic conditions as excellent or good
Source: Pew Research Center, J.P. Morgan Asset Management. Pew Research Center, June 2020. “Republicans, Democrats Move Even Further Apart in Coronavirus Concerns”. Question: Thinking about the nation’s economy, How would you rate economic conditions in this country today… as excellent, good, only fair, or poor? The survey was last conducted in July 2022. Guide to the Markets – U.S. Data are as of August 31, 2022.
Despite what politicians would have us believe, there’s no reliable evidence that either party is better than the other for financial markets. Things such as valuation, interest rate, GDP growth, geopolitical events, demographic developments, and technological innovation arguably have greater influence on market returns than any legislation from Capitol Hill.
Exhibit: Hypothetical growth of $1 invested in the S&P 500 Index, and party control of Congress, January 1926–December 2021
Source: S&P data © 2022 S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC, a division of S&P Global. All rights reserved
For illustrative purposes only.
Market returns have, on average, been higher in nonelection years (11.9%) than in election years (5.4% for midterm, 6.4% for presidential). What’s more, market volatility (risk) has also been lower during nonelection years (12.9%) than in election years (15.7% for midterm, 14.8% for presidential).
But investors should be careful: Averages can be deceiving, and the variation in return from one year to the next strongly cautions against trying to time market returns based on election years. Markets have done well over the long term. Rather than seeking to time their market returns, investors should focus on maximizing their time in markets. The lesson for investors is that the best time to invest is when you have the money. The best time to sell is when you need the money. Politics, regardless of one’s views, should never factor into either decision.
Exhibit: Returns and volatility during election years
Source: S&P data © 2022 S&P Dow Jones Indices LLC, a division of S&P Global. All rights reserved.
Mercer Advisors Inc. is the parent company of Mercer Global Advisors Inc. and is not involved with investment services. Mercer Global Advisors Inc. (“Mercer Advisors”) is registered as an investment advisor with the SEC. The firm only transacts business in states where it is properly registered or is excluded or exempted from registration requirements.
All expressions of opinion reflect the judgment of the author as of the date of publication and are subject to change. Some of the research and ratings shown in this presentation come from third parties that are not affiliated with Mercer Advisors. The information is believed to be accurate but is not guaranteed or warranted by Mercer Advisors. Content, research, tools and stock or option symbols are for educational and illustrative purposes only. For financial planning advice specific to your circumstances, talk to a qualified professional at Mercer Advisors.
Past performance may not be indicative of future results. Therefore, no current or prospective client should assume that the future performance of any specific investment, investment strategy or product made reference to directly or indirectly, will be profitable or equal to past performance levels. All investment strategies have the potential for profit or loss.. Historical performance results for investment indexes and/or categories, generally do not reflect the deduction of transaction and/or custodial charges or the deduction of an investment-management fee, the incurrence of which would have the effect of decreasing historical performance results. Economic factors, market conditions, and investment strategies will affect the performance of any portfolio and there are no assurances that it will match or outperform any particular benchmark.
This document may contain forward-looking statements including statements regarding our intent, belief or current expectations with respect to market conditions. Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. While due care has been used in the preparation of forecast information, actual results may vary in a materially positive or negative manner. Forecasts and hypothetical examples are subject to uncertainty and contingencies outside Mercer Advisors’ control.
Certified Financial Planner Board of Standards, Inc. (CFP Board) owns the CFP® certification mark, the CERTIFIED FINANCIAL PLANNER™ certification mark, and the CFP® certification mark (with plaque design) logo in the United States, which it authorizes use of by individuals who successfully complete CFP Board’s initial and ongoing certification requirements.