Recommended Free Tools
The Balance’s historical series shows how dramatically investment outcomes varied with both the index and the length of time invested. For the S&P 500, Dana Anspach reports rolling one-year returns from a 43% loss to a 61% gain, while the worst reported annualized result improves over the longer sampled periods. These are historical index results—not forecasts or guarantees—and the article’s figures use monthly rolling windows rather than calendar years.
What were the best and worst rolling index returns from 1973 to 2016?
The figures below are those reported by Dana Anspach in The Balance’s article, updated in 2020. The S&P 500 and three bond indexes are covered from January 1973 through December 2016; the Russell 2000 small-cap series begins in January 1979 because earlier data was unavailable for that chart. The article’s twenty-year discussion also identifies its coverage as January 1979 through December 2016.
For periods longer than one year, the article describes the results as annualized returns. Dates in the table identify the end of the relevant window.
| Holding period | Index or category | Worst reported result | Best reported result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 year | S&P 500 | -43%, ending February 2009 | 61%, ending June 1983 |
| 1 year | Intermediate bonds | -1.7% | 27.9% |
| 3 years | Long-term government bonds | -6% a year, ending September 1981 | 25% a year, ending August 1986 |
| 5 years | S&P 500, annualized | -6.6%, ending February 2009 | 30%, ending July 1987 |
| 10 years | S&P 500, annualized | -3%, ending February 2009 | 20%, ending August 2000 |
| 15 years | S&P 500, annualized | 3.7%, ending August 2015 | 20%, ending July 1997 |
| 20 years | S&P 500, annualized | 6.4%, ending May 1979 | 18%, ending March 2000 |
The table is not a complete ranking of every index and duration shown in the article. Its figures should be read with the specific index, window length, and end date attached; they are not interchangeable measures of one generic “stock” or “bond” return.
What’s actually slowing this PC down?
Pick the symptom - the matching free tool is one click away.
#1 Best Overall
What is a rolling return?
A rolling return measures performance over a fixed period, recalculated from successive start dates. Instead of looking only at January-to-December calendar years, the method starts a new one-year, three-year, or other chosen window each month. As Anspach explains, “Rolling returns do not go by the calendar year; instead, they look at every time period beginning anew each month over the historical time frame selected (e.g., one-year, three-years, five-years).”
This approach shows how much results depended on when an investor entered and exited during the sample. A calendar-year table answers what happened in particular named years; monthly rolling windows capture many overlapping periods that cross those year boundaries. Their extremes can therefore differ, even when both analyses use the same broad historical era.
How did the S&P 500’s reported worst outcomes change with time?
In Anspach’s series, the worst reported S&P 500 result was negative for the one-, five-, and ten-year windows. The worst annualized result reported for the fifteen- and twenty-year windows was positive. That pattern describes only the windows available in this particular historical sample, from its stated dates and using the article’s return conventions.
It does not mean stocks cannot lose over a future fifteen- or twenty-year period. Future returns can differ, and results depend on the measurement period and treatment of dividends. Nor does an annualized figure mean an investor earned that percentage in every year of the period: it expresses the period’s compound growth rate as an annual rate.
Why do rolling returns differ from calendar-year figures?
Changing the start and end dates changes which market rises and declines fall inside a window. A result ending in February 2009, for example, covers a different sequence of market performance than a calendar year ending in December. The number of observations also differs: monthly starts create many overlapping windows, while a calendar-year summary uses discrete year boundaries.
A separate analysis in the search results reports calendar-year S&P 500 total returns and gives different extremes. Those numbers answer a different sampling question and should not be combined with The Balance’s monthly-start series as though they were one calculation. Independently reconciling the figures would require a common historical return series and consistent dividend and annualization conventions.
Does the index include dividends?
Price return and total return are not the same. The S&P 500 price index reflects changes in stock prices; the total-return index includes price movements and reinvested dividend income. The SEC filing describing the index methodology says the S&P 500 Total Return Index represents the return on a portfolio tracking the index and reinvesting dividend income in the index, rather than in the specific stock paying the dividend. See the SEC filing’s explanation of the S&P 500 Total Return Index.
The Balance article’s rendered text does not provide a complete downloadable return series or enough calculation detail to independently verify every displayed extreme. Its results are best presented as figures reported by that article, not as a new calculation. When comparing any return chart, check whether it uses price or total returns and whether dividends are reinvested.
Best Value
What the bond comparisons show—and do not show
The article reports a narrower one-year range for intermediate bonds than for the stock indexes, with a best result of 27.9% and a worst of -1.7%. Its long-term government bond example also includes widely separated three-year outcomes: a worst annualized result of -6% ending September 1981 and a best of 25% ending August 1986.
These examples illustrate that bonds are not free of losses and that bond-index results vary by maturity and period. They are not a direct comparison of every bond investment with every stock investment: the asset categories, indexes, and holding periods differ.
How close are index returns to an investor’s fund returns?
An index is a benchmark, not an account statement. Index mutual funds and exchange-traded funds seek to track an index, but an investor’s result can be lower because fees and expenses reduce returns and because trading costs and tracking error affect how closely a fund follows its benchmark. The SEC’s Investor Bulletin on index funds explains these distinctions.
Taxes, contribution timing, withdrawals, and the particular fund’s tracking also affect an individual’s realized return. The historical index figures therefore provide context about market outcomes, not a personalized estimate of what an investor earned or will earn.
Quick wins for a faster PC:
Clear out junk files and repair common Windows errorsFree Scan →Fix the driver behind crashes, sound loss and screen glitchesFind Drivers →Repair Windows errors before they cause bigger problemsFix Now →Quick Recap
Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change. Any price and availability information displayed on Amazon at the time of purchase will apply.
