Investment Management

Investing during an election year can be tough on the nerves. 2020 promises to be no different. Politics can bring out strong emotions and biases. Investors would be wise to put these aside when making investment decisions.

Benjamin Graham, the father of value investing, famously noted that “In the short run, the market is a voting machine but in the long run, it is a weighing machine.” He wasn’t literally referring to the intersection of elections and investing, but he could have been. Markets can be especially choppy during election years. Sentiment often changes as quickly as candidates open their mouths.

Graham first made his analogy in 1934, in his seminal book, “Security Analysis.” Since then there have been 22 election cycles. We’ve analyzed them all to help you prepare for investing in these potentially volatile periods. Below we highlight three common mistakes made by investors in election years and offer ways to avoid these pitfalls and invest with confidence in 2020.

Mistake #1: Investors worry too much about which party wins the election

There’s nothing wrong with wanting your candidate to win. Investors run into trouble when they place too much importance on election results. That’s because elections have, historically speaking, made essentially no difference when it comes to long-term investment returns.

“Presidents get far too much credit, and far too much blame, for the health of the U.S. economy and the state of the financial markets,” says economist Darrell Spence. “There are many other variables that determine economic growth and market returns and, frankly, presidents have very little influence over them.”

What should matter more to investors is staying invested. Although past results are not predictive of future returns, a $1,000 investment in the S&P 500 made when Franklin D. Roosevelt took office would have been worth over $14 million today. During this time there have been exactly seven Democratic and seven Republican presidents. Getting out of the market to avoid a certain party or candidate in office could have severely detracted from an investor’s long-term returns.

By design, elections have clear winners and losers. But the real winners were investors who avoided the temptation to base their decisions around election results and stayed invested for the long haul.

Mistake #2: Investors get spooked by primary season volatility

Markets hate uncertainty, and what’s more uncertain than primary season of an election year? With so many candidates on the campaign trail — 11 Democrats were still running when primaries kicked off in early February — the range of outcomes can feel daunting.

But volatility caused by this uncertainty 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.

Election year volatility can also bring select buying opportunities. Policy proposals during primaries often target specific industries, putting pressure on share prices. This cycle, it’s the health care sector that’s in the spotlight as several candidates have proposed overhauls to drug pricing and the health care system.

Does that mean you should avoid this sector altogether? Not according to Rob Lovelace, an equity manager with 34 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. “Companies with good drugs that are really helping people will be able to get into the market, and they will get paid for it.”

In the past, those targeted sectors have often rallied after the campaign spotlight dimmed. It happened with health care following the 2016 presidential and 2018 midterm elections. This has happened with other sectors in the past. This can create buying opportunities for investors with a contrarian point of view and the ability to withstand short-term volatility.

Mistake #3: Investors try to time the markets around politics

If you’re nervous about the markets in 2020, you’re not alone. Presidential candidates often draw attention to the country’s problems, and campaigns regularly amplify negative messages. So maybe it should be no surprise that investors have tended to be more conservative with their portfolios ahead of elections.

Since 1992, investors have poured assets into money market funds — traditionally one of the lowest risk investment vehicles — much more often leading up to elections. By contrast, equity funds have seen the highest net inflows in the year immediately after an election. This suggests that investors may prefer to minimize risk during election years and wait until after uncertainty has subsided to revisit riskier assets like stocks.

But market timing is rarely a winning long-term investment strategy. It can pose a major problem for portfolio returns. To verify this, we analyzed investment returns over the last 22 election cycles to compare three hypothetical investment approaches: being fully invested in equities, making monthly contributions to equities, or staying in cash until after the election. We then calculated the portfolio returns after each cycle, assuming a four-year holding period.

The hypothetical investor who stayed in cash until after the election had the worst outcome of the three portfolios in 16 of 22 periods. Meanwhile, investors who were fully invested or made monthly contributions during election years came out on top. These investors had higher average portfolio balances over the full period and more often outpaced the investor who stayed on the sidelines 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 consistently invest through a vehicle such as a 401(k) plan, 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.

How can investors avoid these mistakes?

• Don’t allow election predictions and outcomes to influence investment decisions. History shows that election results have very little impact on long-term returns.
• Expect volatility, especially during primary season, but don’t fear it. View it as a potential opportunity.
• Stick to a long-term investment strategy instead of trying to time markets around elections. Investors who were fully invested or made regular, monthly investments did better than those who stayed in cash in election years.

As Chinese authorities deal with a rapidly spreading coronavirus, investors are raising questions about the potential impact on global economic growth and the financial markets. While much is still unknown about the extent of the outbreak — and, crucially, how long it may last — the initial drag on China and other emerging markets is starting to come into focus.

China’s Economy and the Coronavirus Outbreak

China’s economy was already growing at the slowest rate in 30 years before reports of the outbreak first emerged in the central China city of Wuhan. Since then, the Chinese government has placed a dozen cities under quarantine, shut down businesses and schools, and restricted travel in the affected regions. More than 7,700 infections have been reported as of January 30, including a small number in the U.S., Europe and other parts of Asia.

To get a handle on how the outbreak is affecting global economic conditions, we talked to two Capital Group investment veterans who are based in Hong Kong, as well as one of our U.S. economists. Here’s a look at their perspectives:

“Given the quarantine lockdowns, it’s highly likely that the numbers of infected people in mainland China are significantly underestimated,” says Stephen Green, a Capital Group economist based in Hong Kong, “especially in rural areas where medical facilities are limited.

“Depending on how long it takes to contain the coronavirus, we should expect to see sizable declines in consumer spending and manufacturing activity at least through the end of February,” Green adds. “I wouldn’t be surprised if China’s first-quarter GDP growth falls below 6% and some Wall Street estimates are as low as 5%, which is certainly in the realm of possibility.”

A Global Slowdown from the Coronavirus Outbreak

Outside China, the biggest economic impact is expected to be in Thailand, which relies heavily on Chinese tourism. Among industries, travel and tourism throughout Asia will likely take a significant hit, Green explains, along with sales of luxury goods. In addition, many events associated with China’s lunar new year have been canceled. Energy stocks also have fallen sharply as investors expect oil prices to decline further amid lower demand from China.

Since news reports about the virus accelerated around January 17, emerging markets stocks have declined by about 4%, as measured by the MSCI Emerging Markets IMI. Chinese stocks are down more than 6% and Thai stocks slipped 7%. By comparison, the MSCI World Index declined 1.3% during the period through January 29. 

If the economy and markets continue to deteriorate, Green notes, Chinese authorities are likely to launch new stimulus measures, including potential tax cuts and interest rate cuts.

How will the US economy be affected by the Coronavirus Outbreak?

U.S. stocks, meanwhile, have lost about 2% on worries that the outbreak could have a spillover effect on the U.S. economy, including American companies that do business in China. Starbucks has closed about half of its 4,300 stores in China. Many U.S.-based airlines are also canceling flights to the country. And there are growing concerns about supply-chain disruptions for companies such as Apple that have significant manufacturing operations there.

Coupled with Boeing’s recent troubles returning the 737 Max jet to service, the outlook for the U.S. economy now looks more uncertain than it did just a few weeks ago, says Capital Group U.S. economist Jared Franz. Fourth-quarter U.S. GDP growth came in at 2.1% on an annualized basis, according to Commerce Department figures released on Thursday

“If 737 Max production remains grounded through July, then I estimate the impact on first-half GDP growth will be roughly –0.5 percentage points,” Franz says. “The economic impact of the coronavirus on the U.S. is more difficult to calibrate, but I expect it to be modest and mostly felt through trade disruption and financial linkages.”

Assuming the outbreak is contained soon, Franz said it’s likely global economic growth will experience a V-shaped recovery characterized by slower growth in the first half and a significant acceleration in the second half of the year. The U.S. economy will probably follow the same course.

“U.S. economic fundamentals remain sound, labor markets are resilient and the Federal Reserve stands ready to take action as needed,” Franz adds. “The coronavirus looks to be a modest but temporary restraint on U.S. economic activity via secondary channels of impact, but should not derail my growth expectations of roughly 2% in 2020.”

Coronavirus Outbreak Compared to SARS

That’s similar to the pattern shown after the SARS outbreak that hit China in 2002 and 2003. Key indicators bounced back quickly after the virus was contained. Many investors are looking at the SARS event as a template for what might happen in the weeks and months ahead — although it’s important to note that there were many other factors during that time period, including the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003.

In addition, the structure of the global economy was significantly different. The Chinese economy was largely investment-driven at that time. Consumer spending is a much larger percentage of total economic output today. Travel and tourism activity also was much lower than it is now, with Chinese tourism skyrocketing over the past decade. 

Investment Implications

That’s similar to the pattern shown after the SARS outbreak that hit China in 2002 and 2003. Key indicators bounced back quickly after the virus was contained. Many investors are looking at the SARS event as a template for what might happen in the weeks and months ahead — although it’s important to note that there were many other factors during that time period, including the aftermath of the 9/11 attacks and the U.S. invasion of Iraq in 2003.

In addition, the structure of the global economy was significantly different. The Chinese economy was largely investment-driven at that time. Consumer spending is a much larger percentage of total economic output today. Travel and tourism activity also was much lower than it is now, with Chinese tourism skyrocketing over the past decade.