Global Investing

Obama better bet for US stocks?

The wealthy in the United States have a reputation for being firmly on the side of the Republican Party, but maybe they shouldn’t be for the November presidential election.

According to Tom Stevenson, investment director at asset manager Fidelity Worldwide Investments, past evidence points to Democrat Barack Obama as possibly the more lucrative bet for equity  investors.  He says:

Looking at stock market performance following the last 12 elections suggests that investors should, in the short term at least, be rooting for an Obama victory. History shows that markets tend to rally after a win for the incumbent party by more than 10% on average, but fall modestly if the challenger is successful.

The graphic below provides the comparitive returns after Democrat and Republican presidential election victories.

 

But there’s more.  U.S. Big Business  tends to support the Republican Party which supports lower taxes and less government involvement in the economy.  But Fidelity says this stance has not delivered stock market returns; in fact the S&P 500 has delivered an average annual return of over more than 10%  under the Democrats in the past half century, compared with around 5% under the Republicans, Fidelity says.

More than a nice-to-have, buy-side considers its actions

More than a “nice to have,” investor sentiment is running heavily on the side of environment, social and governance (ESG) factors, according to the latest Thomson Reuters Perception Snapshot.

Feedback from 25 global buy-side investors found that 84 percent evaluate ESG criteria to some degree when making an investment decision.

The remaining 16 percent say ESG issues are not considered until a company’s ability to generate high returns is hindered by these factors.

What about the Whigs?

pols.jpgAs Democrats and Republicans kick off the final countdown to the Nov. 4 election, strategists at U.S. investment bank Lehman Brothers have done some interesting data mining.

Figures looking back economic conditions in 1948-2007 show the economy under Democrats enjoyed a higher GDP growth rate (4.2 percent vs 2.8 percent for Republican adminsitrations) and a lower average unemployment rate (5.1 percent vs 5.9 percent).

Looking at a longer timeframe since 1828, however, Lehman strategists found that government and corporate bonds fared better when a Republican occupied the White  House (it excluded Whigs).