If Santa Claus decides to “socially distance” and take off Christmas this year, Jeremy Siegel is ready to fill in.
A widely-respected and well-known professor and author, Siegel has long advocated for investing in stocks for the long run.
He’s now here to bring Christmas cheer to investors. And he’s doing so early.
Here’s what he recently said:
Christmas is coming early for investors.
Now let’s break down why he said it.
In an interview with CNBC, there were four key factors that were cited as catalysts for the market over the next few years.
First, there’s the transition to President-elect Joe Biden.
President Donald Trump has delayed the transition due to his unfounded belief that there was widespread fraud with the US election process. This transition resistance has ended, giving the market more certainty. In addition, Biden is seen as a moderate. With Congress also likely to remain divided, it’s improbable that major reforms can get through (particularly as it relates to tax increases). Siegel believes the current makeup of the US government is the best possible outcome that investors could hope for.
Second, there’s the nomination of a market-friendly Treasury Secretary in Janet Yellen.
Yellen, a former Chair of the Federal Reserve, has a reputation for pragmatism, with her near-term focus most likely to be on fixing the economy. That could potentially translate to a better harmony between the fiscal and monetary strategies. Also, there’s less fear over additional banking regulations. A great relationship between the Fed and the US Treasury bodes well for the stock market and the US economy in general.
Third, there’s the ongoing expectation for another large fiscal stimulus package.
Building on what I just noted about Yellen, it’s believed that another Washington stimulus package is almost certain now. It’s not a matter of if. It’s about when and how much. This additional flow of money should end up buoying the US economy and the the stock market from a number of angles. We could be looking at additional consumer spending power, greater consumer confidence, increasing earnings, liquidity, modest inflation, more demand for equity, and reduced risk of a large recession in 2021. Siegel notes that M1 money supply has increased 44% since March – the kind of jump the US hasn’t seen since WWII.
Fourth, there’s the extremely positive news around vaccines for COVID-19.
We didn’t know very much about this virus back in March. We certainly didn’t know if a vaccine was even possible to rid ourselves of it. But we now have a greater understanding of the virus. And we have numerous treatment options. Most importantly, we’ve very recently experienced some of the most exciting medical/vaccine breakthroughs in decades with excellent data coming out of trials from a number of companies developing COVID-19 vaccines. Some of the efficacy numbers are topping 90%, greatly exceeding expectations. It appears that we’ll be mostly past this virus by the summer of 2021.
And all of this is on the back of incredibly low interest rates, which automatically make equities more attractive on a relative basis. Plus, the weak dollar helps US multinationals.
Siegel sure sounds like Santa, even if he doesn’t necessarily look like Santa.
While this is all very good news, I think it’s important to keep something in mind.
Siegel likes stocks for the long run. The research he does, the things he says, and the books he writes use decades of US stock market data as a foundation.
Focusing on the long term is something I’ve also stressed repeatedly over the years.
Look, I’ve been investing in and writing about stocks for a decade now. I started just as the Great Recession was ending. And now here we are, in the aftermath of a once-in-a-century global pandemic. That’s two historic stock market crashes that I’ve seen. I’ve come to expect the unexpected.
On the other hand, I’ve also come to expect that the US stock market is unbelievably resilient over the long run. It’s a machine that bogs down from time to time, but it does chug along at an amazing pace when you zoom out and look at it over the course of decades.
In fact, it’s a machine that works well enough to allow regular guys like myself to achieve financial freedom at a very young age.
I’ve written about how that’s possible in both of my best-selling books: The Dividend Mantra Way and 5 Steps To Retire In 5 Years (also available in paperback).
I’m living off of dividends in my 30s. My portfolio produces enough passive income for me to cover my bills. It’s a dream come true.
And the dream keeps getting dreamier: I invest in high-quality dividend growth stocks, which means those dividends get bigger every year all by themselves.
However, I was only able to make this dream come true by believing in the market’s long-term power. If I fell victim to short-term chaos, I wouldn’t be here.
Click here for exclusive access to my real-money stock portfolio and real-time stock trades.
Siegel is the kind of guy who focuses on the long-term nature of the stock market. He’s my kind of guy.
That said, he’s been known to occasionally come on TV and make some bold short-term predictions.
If you weren’t happy with your presents thus far, here’s another wrapped gift from Siegel-as-Santa:
In case you don’t want to watch that second interview, I’ll tell you what Siegel said.
He said there are numerous factors in the market that will cause “2021 to be a very good year.”
To be fair, almost anything would be better than 2020.
But what’s more important for your eventual wealth and passive income is 2030, 2040, and 2050.
Stay focused on the long term. Stick to your goals. And let short-term volatility be your long-term opportunity.
What do you think? Agree with what Siegel has to say? Why or why not?
Thanks for reading.
P.S. Make sure to check out some excellent resources for making better investment decisions, becoming financially free, and living off of dividends.
Glad to see someone focusing on the positives.
But to be fair I don’t overly concern myself with the macro, just look for great dividend-paying companies that are trading at attractive valuations.
DA,
Can’t help myself. I’m an optimist. The world tends to get better and better over time. 🙂
I also don’t pay too much attention to the macro. But it is nice to see someone like Siegel looking at things from 5,000 feet in the air and saying that there’s a lot to look forward to. If nothing else, one might be able to sleep better at night without thinking things will just crash right after they invest.
Cheers!
Thanks for the reading Jason. Would be nice with an update on your personal life..
Best wishes,
Markus, and thanks for the coffee in Chiang Mai Dec-19 🙂
Markus,
Thanks for stopping by. 🙂
I “retired” from blogging earlier this year. It was a very rewarding decade of my life, and I was fortunate enough to show a journey from start to finish, but I was ready to take things in a new direction. I now focus exclusively on investing content, and I’m enjoying things more than ever.
Hope all is well!
Cheers.
Very nice! All THE best to you and thank you so much for the inspiration over the years. I’m very close to FI now and without a doubt partly because of you 🙂
Hi Jason,
Something I never understood, is how sustainable is printing money/stimulus in the long-term? Won’t the continued printing of money cause more inflation, because the value of the dollar becomes lower so people can’t buy what they did with that same dollar,10 years from now vs. today?
And is the 20-some-odd trillion dollar U.S. debt just a number, at this point? Or will that debt ‘come home to roost’ at some time in the future?
I never understood how governments (not just U.S.) can just keep printing money, seemingly indefinitely.
I mean, it’s great if it works – all the power to it, but hopefully it won’t bite us in the behind later.
thanks for your insight,
Joe
Joe,
You’re kind of delving into a theoretical conversation about MMT, which is beyond the scope of this article.
But based on the robust demand for US debt, as well as incredibly low interest rates, it does seem like we’re a ways off from any kind of large-scale issue revolving around US government debt as a whole. It’d be a different story if there were few takers and debt servicing were much more expensive.
Cheers!