OT: S&P 493 graph

BoDawg.sixpack

All-Conference
Feb 5, 2010
5,379
2,851
113
Fortunately economists don't prioritize stock index performances as an indicator of the health of an economy. For a more fundamental and encompassing view, the following metrics make a dash board with 5 main gauges to assess the scope and performance in terms of economic health.


1. Real GDP Growth

2. Unemployment Rate + JOLTS metrics (lagging indicator)

3. CPI and Core PCE (Inflation)

4. PMI (leading indicator)

5. Yield Curve (recession signal)

As a 6th important signal my vote would go to median net worth per adult. Median net worth per adult in the US is good for 15th place globally.
 
Last edited:

Boosh

Junior
Sep 14, 2017
214
244
43
Not bad really, considering there was a global shutdown and we had double digit inflation for 3 of those years. I guess it only took 13.1T to keep it afloat.
 
  • Like
Reactions: POTUS

horshack.sixpack

All-American
Oct 30, 2012
11,355
8,255
113
I didn't study it, but let me guess -- something something Trump?**
See, it was interesting to me because I didn’t realize how much performance was driven by just 7 of the 500. Perhaps it was common knowledge to everyone else, most likely, to your point, not Trump because he is as dumb as a box of rocks?

Good lord how do people enjoy anything in a life that is wrapped around politics? I literally never once thought a thing about Trump when looking a the graph or posting the graph. Honestly him, nor any politician occupies much of my day to day mental bandwidth…
 

ckDOG

All-American
Dec 11, 2007
9,993
5,812
113
Probably similar looking chart for other high performing 5 year periods and the biggest 7 or so companies.
 
  • Like
Reactions: dorndawg

POTUS

Heisman
Sep 29, 2022
3,888
10,294
113
Honestly him, nor any politician occupies much of my day to day mental bandwidth…
Penguin Lying GIF by Pudgy Penguins
 
  • Haha
Reactions: Darryl Steight

Perd Hapley

All-American
Sep 30, 2022
5,794
6,841
113
Up 132% over five years is still pretty good.
Its actually closer to 7 years. Starts in January 2019.

Works out to about 7.42% CAGR when adjusted for average annual inflation over that time. That’s pretty middling return for the S&P. Could be worse, but could also be way better.
 

mstateglfr

All-American
Feb 24, 2008
15,952
5,805
113
Fortunately economists don't prioritize stock index performances as an indicator of the health of an economy. For a more fundamental and encompassing view, the following metrics make a dash board with 5 main gauges to assess the scope and performance in terms of economic health.
As a 6th important signal my vote would go to median net worth per adult. Median net worth per adult in the US is good for 15th place globally.
Did you use this data?- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult

If so, that is 2022 and 2023 data. So the economy was healthy a few years ago, per your 6th important signal.
Cool and all, but it seems like that is a pretty significant lag between data and current situation.
Maybe more updated info shows the same thing though.
 

BoDawg.sixpack

All-Conference
Feb 5, 2010
5,379
2,851
113
Did you use this data?- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_wealth_per_adult

If so, that is 2022 and 2023 data. So the economy was healthy a few years ago, per your 6th important signal.
Cool and all, but it seems like that is a pretty significant lag between data and current situation.
Maybe more updated info shows the same thing though.

No, I used the 16th edition of the UBS Global Wealth Report which was released in 2025 for the 2024 data set.
 

mstateglfr

All-American
Feb 24, 2008
15,952
5,805
113
Related to all additional Consumers
tbay coming in hot with another Twitter post. Will this one be real, or will it be yet another time where he posts lies, misrepresentations, or half truths?

No idea if the charts claims are accurate or not.
I don't support people coming to the US illegally.

With that said, I am continually perplexed as to how the number of people who came here illegally is known.
They weren't counted when they arrived, so how does anyone know?
I can't figure out if estimates are low or high...because I cant figure out how the the numbers are reliably calculated.

It seems like people take an estimate, and that estimate varies, then they subtract out groups, and some of those groups are also estimated.
And then small sample sizes are projected out exponentially, which seems obviously questionable.

But boy there sure are people who confidently claim they know the real number!

What does this have to do with the rate of return for a fund over 7 years?
 

paindonthurt

All-Conference
Apr 7, 2025
3,789
2,749
113
See, it was interesting to me because I didn’t realize how much performance was driven by just 7 of the 500. Perhaps it was common knowledge to everyone else, most likely, to your point, not Trump because he is as dumb as a box of rocks?

Good lord how do people enjoy anything in a life that is wrapped around politics? I literally never once thought a thing about Trump when looking a the graph or posting the graph. Honestly him, nor any politician occupies much of my day to day mental bandwidth…
stfu. you are wrapped around polictics just as much as you accuse others they are.
 

BoDawg.sixpack

All-Conference
Feb 5, 2010
5,379
2,851
113
While we're on the topic, for those concerned about the country's economic future, as well as AI encroachment in the job market, keep in mind this forecast:

''Cerulli projects that wealth transferred through 2048 will total $124 trillion—$105 trillion is expected to flow to heirs, while $18 trillion will go to charity. Nearly $100 trillion will be transferred from Baby Boomers and older generations, representing 81% of all transfers. More than 50% of the overall total volume of transfers ($62 trillion) is expected to come from those who are currently high-net-worth and ultra-high-net-worth (HNW/UHNW), which together make up only 2% of all households.

Projections of horizontal, or intra-generational, transfers show that $54 trillion will be passed on to spouses before eventually transferring intergenerationally to heirs and to charities. Nearly $40 trillion of these spousal transfers will be going to widowed women in the Baby Boomer and older generations, creating a massive need, and opportunity, for providers across the wealth and asset management spaces.

Millennials will be inheriting the most of any generation over the course of the next 25 years ($46 trillion). However, Gen X stands to inherit the greatest portion of assets in the next 10 years, totaling $14 trillion to Millennials’ $8 trillion.''

This will be a boon to economy and will undoubtedly help cushion the blow for many Americans if recessions occur in this time period.

As far as technology trends and job displacement, the World Economics Forum estimates there will be a net job creation of +78 million globally in the next decade, with farm workers topping the list, but also significant gains in environmental engineering, retail sales, food processing, nursing, counseling, social workers, construction, software developing and delivery drivers.

While AI will certainly impact some professions there should still be plenty of demand for skilled workers in various fields. AI is not expected to make a sustained, significant increase in the unemployment rate in the near future.
 

UpTheMiddlex3Punt

All-Conference
May 28, 2007
17,962
3,962
113
I'd like to see this done with the top 7 companies each year and what their performance was for the five years before and five years after. I imagine there's a historical survivors bias here. We can probably do this in 2030 when it's a slightly different bag of stock (I think AVGO will be on this list) and you'll see the same thing.
 

Crazy Cotton

All-Conference
Aug 26, 2012
3,644
1,394
113
Probably similar looking chart for other high performing 5 year periods and the biggest 7 or so companies.
That would be interesting to see - Microsoft passed IBM in the mid 90s, and by the end of the decade had I think 3 times the valuation. Probably the banks/finance in the 80s when Reagan deregulated that industry - same as it ever was is probably correct, although I think the # of public companies has been shrinking in the last decade as more and more stay private/venture cap owned.
 

Villagedawg

All-Conference
Nov 16, 2005
1,963
1,919
113
Fortunately economists don't prioritize stock index performances as an indicator of the health of an economy. For a more fundamental and encompassing view, the following metrics make a dash board with 5 main gauges to assess the scope and performance in terms of economic health.


1. Real GDP Growth

2. Unemployment Rate + JOLTS metrics (lagging indicator)

3. CPI and Core PCE (Inflation)

4. PMI (leading indicator)

5. Yield Curve (recession signal)

As a 6th important signal my vote would go to median net worth per adult. Median net worth per adult in the US is good for 15th place globally.
We’re # 15! Yes! USA! USA! USA! Clearly the best country!!
 
  • Haha
Reactions: BoDawg.sixpack

Villagedawg

All-Conference
Nov 16, 2005
1,963
1,919
113
Now do military and military bases in other countries. And then rank the countries in order of desire to immigrate to. That's a list of 1.
Well, if I had known we had the most occupi….errr… military bases in other countries, I would have had much less of a problem paying $14 for 2 pounds of ground chuck! I mean why would I need meat when I could help fund a base in Diego Garcia?
 
  • Like
Reactions: fang

fang

Freshman
Nov 29, 2010
580
71
28
Blow off top to a 40+ year bull then crash (no I didn’t think of that on my own), timing the exit is the trick.
 

johnson86-1

All-Conference
Aug 22, 2012
14,288
4,803
113
Oh, yeah that is a really good addition.
Interesting that the US state 15th.
I’m pretty skeptical of that ranking. Not surprised at all by some of the smaller countries ahead of us. But some of the others I have been to and they don’t seem well off.

of course maybe that’s why their median net worth is higher; we make more but we spend it keeping up with consumption.

Alternatively a good chunk of that could be that the US has had much higher fertility until recently plus higher rates of immigration. Splitting a family house between almost two siblings on average compared to 1.5 probably makes a big difference. And then you move the median down by adding a lot of poor illegal immigrants (which also significantly depresses growth in median income, if also making cost of living lower).
 
  • Like
Reactions: onewoof

Perd Hapley

All-American
Sep 30, 2022
5,794
6,841
113
I'd like to see this done with the top 7 companies each year and what their performance was for the five years before and five years after. I imagine there's a historical survivors bias here. We can probably do this in 2030 when it's a slightly different bag of stock (I think AVGO will be on this list) and you'll see the same thing.
I liked your idea, and decided to do it for the 7 years prior to the chart (2012-2018). 5 of the 7 largest companies were the same. Tesla and Nvidia were swapped with Berkshire and Johnson and Johnson. Here are 2012-2018 results, with 2019-2025 in parenthesis:

GOOG - 232% growth (504%)
AMZN - 848% growth (192%)
META - 261% growth (332%)
AAPL - 158% growth (647%)
MSFT - 286% growth (368%)
BERK.B - 164% growth (161%)
JNJ - 96% growth (62%)

So, GOOG and AAPL accelerated their growth. META, MSFT, and BERK more or less had stable growth. AMZN slowed down substantially. But the biggest thing that hits you is that there is no Tesla or NVIDIA with astronomical market cap. It definitely seems that the largest 7 companies have much more impact now than they did then.