9/19/2012 7:12 PM ET|
Portfolio planning for the election
Analysts caution investors that betting on the election’s outcome is more difficult than usual this year. And heeding the conventional wisdom about election cycles may be a mistake.
The presidential election is less than 50 days away, and investors are re-examining their portfolios. Some sectors and stocks figure to do well if President Barack Obama is re-elected, while others should benefit if challenger Republican Mitt Romney moves into the White House.
But some caution that it may be tougher than usual to predict the outcome of this election, let alone figure out how to make money from the results. Indeed, some Wall Street pros detect more caution than in some past years among investors playing the election game.
James Bianco, who runs trading and research firm Bianco Research in Chicago, says financial markets aren't yet placing big bets on either Obama or Romney. He cites polls showing the candidates neck and neck.
Conventional wisdom holds that the stock market does well when a Republican wins. Presidents from the GOP tend to favor lower taxes and less spending, analysts say. Some go as far as to say the stock market's strength this year comes as Romney's chances of victory have improved.
But the policies of presidents don't always match their campaign planks, and post-election returns also don't always fit a clear pattern, suggesting there's just so much a president can dictate when it comes to the stock market. For example, the Dow Jones Industrial Average ($NDU) fell 7.5% in the 12 months after Ronald Reagan, a Republican, won the presidential election in 1980. But it rose 12.8% the year after he was re-elected in 1984.
The Dow soared 23.3% in the year after George H.W. Bush, also a Republican, was elected in 1988. But the average also jumped 12.6% after Democrat Bill Clinton was elected in 1992 and rose 26.5% after he was re-elected in 1996.
Overall, data from Citigroup point to better returns under Democratic presidents over the course of their terms. The market also tends to do better when a challenger wins, data show.
Focus on specific sectors
A better bet is to focus on specific sectors that might outperform if a candidate wins. Tobias Levkovich, Citigroup's chief U.S. equity strategist, says "a Romney victory may benefit several industries such as energy, health care, defense, utilities and financials."
Financial shares could rise because Romney has pledged to repeal various restrictions of the Dodd-Frank financial-regulation law, Levkovich says. Defense stocks may be helped because the industry currently faces major spending cuts, but Romney has pledged his commitment to defense spending, analysts note.
John Brynjolfsson, who runs hedge fund Armored Wolf, is a fan of technology and green-energy shares if Obama is re-elected, because he's considered more open to spending in this area, and recommends PowerShares Cleantech Portfolio (PZD) exchange-traded fund. Others favor generic-drug makers, which could profit from Obama's health plan.
An Obama victory also could help Microsoft (MSFT), says Brynjolfsson, because "Obama's leaning toward industrial policy, and centrally managing major productivity initiatives," could help the tech giant. (Microsoft owns and publishes MSN Money.)
More from The Wall Street Journal:
VIDEO ON MSN MONEY
It's pretty simple. Take a company you hate, unless of course you are old rich and white. Exxon, Monsanto, News Corp, Merck, etc for example. Big oil, screw the farmers, Fox news, Big pharma, Big insurance, and Big Finance are all in this group. If Republican'ts win, these go up. If Obama wins, the rest of the stock market stays the course, which nearing all-time highs doesn't seem so bad does it?
If as to paraphrase the author, the markets do better under Democrats. Than why would anyone with even a small investment vote otherwise?
Yes, our CIA and military branches did such a great job foretelling the Arab Spring, an overthrow of all the Bush-paid dictators who protected Big Oil's interests but murdered their own peoples, that we definitely should elect Romney and throw more money into defense spending. What did Eisenhower say, "Beware the military-industrial complex." Is this Wall Street Journal guy delusional? Romney has as much chance of winning now as Obama does of turning white. The election is already over.and this guy is just an obvious hack for the soon-to-be extinct GOP. VOTE OBAMA so we can do the opposite of everything this secret "Republican" has written. This isn't journalism based on facts, it's a personal political diatribe that MSN Money should be avoiding if they are truly unbiased. GO BAMA!!!
Copyright © 2014 Microsoft. All rights reserved.
Fundamental company data and historical chart data provided by Morningstar Inc. Real-time index quotes and delayed quotes supplied by Morningstar Inc. Quotes delayed by up to 15 minutes, except where indicated otherwise. Fund summary, fund performance and dividend data provided by Morningstar Inc. Analyst recommendations provided by Zacks Investment Research. StockScouter data provided by Verus Analytics. IPO data provided by Hoover's Inc. Index membership data provided by Morningstar Inc.
[BRIEFING.COM] The Nasdaq Composite (+0.5%) and S&P 500 (+0.2%) posted modest gains on Thursday, but not before enduring a morning dip into the red, which took place in reaction to reports indicating Russia has commenced military exercises on the Ukrainian border.
The news from Europe knocked the key indices from their early highs, while giving a boost to safe-haven assets like gold futures (+0.5% to $1290.80/ozt), Treasuries (10-yr yield -1 bps to 2.69%), and the Japanese yen (102.30 ... More
More Market News
|There’s a problem getting this information right now. Please try again later.|
MUST-SEE ON MSN
- Video: Easy DIY smoked meats at home
A charcuterie master shares his process for cold-smoking meat at home.
- Jetpacks about to go mainstream
- Weird things covered by home insurance
- Bing: 70 percent of adults report 'digital eye strain'