We're using cookies, but you can turn them off in your browser settings. Otherwise, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more in our Privacy Policy

Bridge over ocean
14 November 2023 Financial Analysts Journal Volume 80, Issue 1

Stocks for the Long Run? Sometimes Yes, Sometimes No

  1. Edward F. McQuarrie

Analyzing historical data for 19th century US stock and bond returns, this study challenges Jeremy Siegel’s “Stocks for the Long Run” thesis. Evidence indicates that 20th century US asset returns cannot be generalized out of sample.

Register here to view "New Insights on Stocks for the Long Run". CFA Institute Research and Policy Center brought together McQuarrie, Siegel, Rob Arnott, Roger Ibbotson, Elroy Dimson, and Laurence Siegel in a digital debate over stocks versus bonds and McQuarrie’s new research.

Read the Complete Article in the Financial Analysts Journal CFA Institute Member Content In Practice: Member Companion Feature Read Brief CFA Institute Member Content Register for the on-demand video debate featuring some of the best minds in finance Register here Stocks outperform bonds by less than you think Read Financial Times Article Edward McQuarrie: Rethinking Portfolio Theory Listen to the Podcast

Author Shares Key Message

Abstract

When Jeremy Siegel published his “Stocks for the Long Run” thesis, little was known about 19th-century stock and bond returns. Digital archives have made it possible to compute real total return on US stock and bond indexes from 1792. The new historical record shows that over multi-decade periods, sometimes stocks outperformed bonds, sometimes bonds outperformed stocks and sometimes they performed about the same. New international data confirm this pattern. Asset returns in the US in the 20th century do not generalize. Regimes of asset outperformance come and go; sometimes there is an equity premium, sometimes not.