Is the Fed Responsible for an 800% Gain in the Stock Market?

In a recent post I shared how the U.S. stock market is now up more than 800% since the lows of the financial crisis.

Right on schedule my Twitter replies and inbox were full of people bemoaning the fact that this entire bull market is an artifact the Federal Reserve policies.

Well yeah if you print trillions of dollars what do you expect?

Sure stocks are up but only because the Fed took away price discovery.

It’s all a house of cards.

I know I shouldn’t be surprised by these comments because they’ve been coming for well over a decade now but it is surprising how many investors really hate the Fed.

A lot of this has to do with the fact that so many people have been wrong about the market’s direction ever since the bull market began but it would be hard to ignore how intertwined the Fed has become with financial markets.

Since the 2008 financial crisis the Fed’s balance sheet has ballooned to epic proportions:

From a little less than $1 trillion in early 2008, the Fed now has nearly $9 trillion on its balance sheet.

Now look at a simple chart of the S&P 500 overlaid with the Fed’s balance sheet:

They’re both much higher. Case closed right?

But what about Japan and Europe? Their central banks have also taken on trillions of dollars of assets on their balance sheets.

Here is the Bank of Japan’s balance sheet (this number is in Yen so it’s really more like $6-7 trillion) compared to the MSCI Japan:

And here’s the European Central Bank assets in relation to the MSCI Europe:

I mean just look at all of these charts. There are two lines heading in the same direction.

So what if the scales are off, this is clear evidence that central banks are the only reason stocks are higher, right?

At first glance this looks like an open and shut case but it’s not always this easy.

Just because two lines on a chart are going in the same direction does not mean correlation implies causation. Case in point:

Ok, this is ridiculous but you get the idea. It’s not that hard to show two datasets going in the same direction.

And while it looks like the returns for stocks in the U.S., Japan and Europe are all up over the past 10 years, they are not up by nearly the same magnitude:

The S&P 500 is outperforming stocks in each of these developed countries by more than 200% in total over the past decade. These countries have been providing similar levels of monetary stimulus over this time and their interest rates have been even lower than ours.

While the 10 year U.S. treasury bond currently yields around 1.7%, yields in Japan (0.1%) and Germany (-0.1%) are much lower. Why aren’t stocks exploding higher in those countries?

Interest rates certainly have an impact on how people allocate their capital but low interest rates alone don’t explain everything that happens in financial markets. Just look at Japan’s 10 year government bond yields going back to the turn of the century:

It’s been under 2% for the entire 21st century. This means Japan must have an enormous stock market bubble, right?

Au contraire, the MSCI Japan Index is up just 2% per year since 2000 and that number includes dividends reinvested. Stocks have basically gone nowhere despite persistently low rates.

And think about where interest rates were in the United States during the last true stock market mania in the dot-com bubble of the late-1990s.

From 1995-1999, when the Nasdaq was up 450% in total (41% per year), the 10 year treasury averaged a yield of more than 6%. Interest rates have nothing on human behavior when it comes to sending markets into a frenzy.

Obviously, it would be ridiculous to say the Fed hasn’t had an impact on the markets since 2008. Without Fed intervention, the financial system may have imploded in 2008 and 2020.

Just look at the crash and subsequent recovery in corporate bonds in March 2020:

Corporate bonds were down 22% in two weeks. They basically round-tripped that entire loss three weeks later. This doesn’t happen if the Fed doesn’t give their implicit backing to the bond market.

This makes sense though when you consider the Fed is basically the lender of last resort for the financial system. They don’t want to see a run on the banks or a repeat of the Great Depression and they have the tools to make sure that doesn’t happen.

The Fed likely also has a psychological hold over the markets now that they’re such a big player in the bond market.

I’m not going to argue with you if you claim the Fed has overstayed their welcome when it comes to buying mortgage bonds and treasuries with the recovery we’ve seen in stocks, GDP,  housing, bonds and the unemployment rate (not to mention the spike in inflation).

Consumer balance sheets have likely never been stronger than they are today:

If the Fed isn’t going to pump the brakes now, when will they?

If we can’t handle 4 or 5 rate hikes in this environment the Fed might as well tell us they’re never going to raise rates again.

So while the Fed has been a big player in the markets since 2008 it would be silly to assume they are the only reason for the upward trajectory of stocks.

Interest rates and bond purchases alone aren’t enough to inflate a stock market bubble. Human nature can do that all on its own.

Michael and I talked about the conundrum the Fed finds itself in and more on this week’s Animal Spirits:

Subscribe to The Compound so you never miss an episode.

Further Reading:
Emotions Matter More than Interest Rates

Now here’s what I’ve been reading lately:

This content, which contains security-related opinions and/or information, is provided for informational purposes only and should not be relied upon in any manner as professional advice, or an endorsement of any practices, products or services. There can be no guarantees or assurances that the views expressed here will be applicable for any particular facts or circumstances, and should not be relied upon in any manner. You should consult your own advisers as to legal, business, tax, and other related matters concerning any investment.

The commentary in this “post” (including any related blog, podcasts, videos, and social media) reflects the personal opinions, viewpoints, and analyses of the Ritholtz Wealth Management employees providing such comments, and should not be regarded the views of Ritholtz Wealth Management LLC. or its respective affiliates or as a description of advisory services provided by Ritholtz Wealth Management or performance returns of any Ritholtz Wealth Management Investments client.

References to any securities or digital assets, or performance data, are for illustrative purposes only and do not constitute an investment recommendation or offer to provide investment advisory services. Charts and graphs provided within are for informational purposes solely and should not be relied upon when making any investment decision. Past performance is not indicative of future results. The content speaks only as of the date indicated. Any projections, estimates, forecasts, targets, prospects, and/or opinions expressed in these materials are subject to change without notice and may differ or be contrary to opinions expressed by others.

The Compound Media, Inc., an affiliate of Ritholtz Wealth Management, receives payment from various entities for advertisements in affiliated podcasts, blogs and emails. Inclusion of such advertisements does not constitute or imply endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation thereof, or any affiliation therewith, by the Content Creator or by Ritholtz Wealth Management or any of its employees. Investments in securities involve the risk of loss. For additional advertisement disclaimers see here:

Please see disclosures here.