Author: admin

It’s been years since Subway offered a $5 footlong sandwich, a deal celebrated with an ear-catching jingle. Now, the sandwiches can cost up to $15.

And the chain’s regular customers are none too happy about the inflationary state of affairs.

Most Read from MarketWatch

“People too broke for $15 subs,” one Reddit user said.

“I made my own sandwich last night. I calculated it cost me ~$3-$4 worth of ingredients.” another Reddit user noted.

The discussion about Subway’s pricing has been a hot topic of late, especially since news broke that the chain was reportedly having a large-scale meeting with North American franchisees about ways to boost business.

Naturally, customers want to see a return to the good ol’ days of those $5 footlongs and say that’s the best path forward to win their business. “It’s that easy,” another Reddit user said.

The $5 deal ended in 2014, and Subway’s footlongs currently range from around $8 to $15, though prices vary by location. A sandwich combo meal with chips and a drink adds a few dollars to the tab. Extras like more meat and cheese also increase the price.

Admittedly, few fast-food industry watchers predict the $5 deal will ever return. But Subway franchisees told MarketWatch that bargain offerings are still important sales boosters.

“Promotions can only help us increase traffic,” said Monica Laldin, a Subway franchisee in Georgia with seven locations.

Subway does have offers that bring down the cost of a sandwich below the $10 mark, such as a current buy-one-footlong-get-one-free deal. But the chain — which generates around $10 billion in annual sales, and was purchased last year by Roark Capital in a reported $9.6 billion transaction — faces pushback from some franchisees because the offers can cut into profits.

Subway is far from the only fast-food chain dealing with a difficult financial environment, driven in recent years by higher food and labor costs. As chains have increased prices to counter these developments, inflation-weary customers have voiced their displeasure and have often opted not to frequent establishments as much.

Story continues

McDonald’s MCD has become something of a focal point in this regard, especially when word spread of one location charging nearly $18 for a Big Mac meal. In a recent letter to customers, McDonald’s U.S. President Joe Erlinger indicated that was more the exception than the rule, though he did note that the price for a Big Mac has risen 21% since 2019.

“Inflationary pressures have affected all sectors of the economy, including ours,” Erlinger said.

To woo customers back, fast-food chains have begun offering a wave of deals and discounts, as exemplified by the McDonald’s $5 value meal — which includes a McDouble cheeseburger or McChicken sandwich, a four-piece order of Chicken McNuggets, a small order of french fries and a small soft drink. All items on the McDonald’s $5 meal deal used to be on its dollar menu, which no longer exists.

A Subway spokesperson told MarketWatch that it’s indeed “challenging times for the entire restaurant industry. Our approach to value is thoughtful and strategic, based on data to help balance consumer needs while protecting franchisee profits.”

In some ways, Subway was a victim of its own success with the triumph of the $5 footlong deal and its accompanying jingle, industry experts say. It cemented the idea of the chain as a low-cost leader and arguably left it with less wiggle room to raise prices without facing consumer backlash.

Plus, as Arlene Spiegel, a New York-based hospitality consultant, argues, consumers can find top-of-the-line sandwich options at those higher price levels, so why should they opt for a chain sub that could cost as much as $15?

“Not when you can go to a mom-and-pop Italian deli and get a sandwich with freshly sliced prosciutto,” Spiegel said.

Adding to Subway’s woes: One of its other major marketing campaigns promoted the low-calorie aspect of some of its offerings and spotlighted Jared Fogle, who reportedly lost 245 pounds on a diet of Subway sandwiches. But Fogle later pled guilty in a child sex-abuse case, which damaged the Subway brand, experts say.

“There are still people who won’t go because of the Jared fiasco,” said Mark Kalinowski, a veteran fast-food industry analyst.

Add it all up and Kalinowski said it should come as no surprise that Subway has seen its U.S. store count drop considerably, from 27,129 in 2015 to 20,133 last year. Yet Kalinowski remains relatively bullish about Subway, even with the growing competition it faces from other sandwich chains.

The bottom line: Plenty of people still like their Subway footlongs regardless of how much they cost, he said: “Subway will be around for decades to come.”

Most Read from MarketWatch

Chevron (NYSE: CVX) has a lot going for it as an energy investment, not least of which is the dividend, which has been increased annually for 37 consecutive years and supports a lofty 4.4% dividend yield at present. With the stock more than 20% below its most recent highs, should you buy Chevron? Here are some important factors to consider before making the final call.

What does Chevron do in the energy industry?

The headline is actually a trick question because Chevron pretty much does everything, which is why it is classified as an integrated energy company. But to be more specific, it has operations in the upstream segment (energy production), the midstream arena (pipelines and other transportation and storage infrastructure), and the downstream niche (chemicals and refining). Each segment of the broader energy sector operates a little differently and has different market dynamics.

Putting upstream, midstream, and downstream businesses all under one roof not only creates a diversified company, which is further enhanced by Chevron’s global reach, but tends to help soften the ups and downs of the energy cycle. Commodity prices are the main driver of Chevron’s top and bottom lines, but the inherent swings won’t be quite as material as they would be if it were solely focused on the upstream.

Chevron is also keenly focused on the strength of its balance sheet. To put a number on that, Chevron’s debt-to-equity ratio is a minuscule 0.15 today. That would be a low number for any company, but it also happens to be the lowest figure relative to Chevron’s closest peers. This gives Chevron more leeway to take on leverage to support its business and dividend during the inevitable oil downturns it will face. Simply put, Chevron is a conservative way to invest in the energy sector.

Is Chevron a buy under $150?

Chevron’s stock is under $150 today, which represents a roughly 20% decline from the recent price peak of roughly $188 per share in late 2022. That could be seen as a solid entry point for dividend investors who want to add energy exposure to their portfolios, noting the stock’s attractive 4.4% yield. After all, the S&P 500 index is only yielding around 1.2% or so, and the average energy stock, using Energy Select Sector SPDR ETF as a proxy, is yielding about 3.1%.

Now add in Chevron’s strong financial position, diversified business, and long history of weathering energy downturns while continuing to reward investors with regular dividend increases. You can see where a conservative type would be making a wise choice to buy the stock if they are looking for an energy investment right now.

Story continues

But there’s one problem: Oil prices are actually fairly high right now. Sure, they’ve been higher, but they’ve also been a lot lower. Given the nature of the oil industry, it is highly likely that Chevron will have to deal with materially lower energy prices at some point in the not-too-distant future.

Chevron is ready, noting its very low debt-to-equity ratio, but that won’t change the fact that revenue and earnings fall when energy prices decline. That, in turn, will lead investors to sell the stock.

In fact, over the past decade, Chevron’s stock has dipped below $80 a share three times. The dividend yield, meanwhile, has risen as high as 9% at one point. That was an extreme peak related to the coronavirus pandemic. But 6% isn’t out of bounds, having been reached three times as well.

It wouldn’t be at all shocking to see a deep oil downturn that leads to a deep drawdown in Chevron’s stock and pushes the yield up to materially more attractive levels. Or to put it another way, if you are looking to buy Chevron at a bargain price, you’ll want to wait until the next big oil sell-off.

Chevron is a good company

Here’s the thing: For long-term investors with an income focus, Chevron is probably a good choice right now. You won’t be getting the best possible price, but you are probably buying it at a fair level if you add the stock below $150.

However, if you are willing to watch and wait, you can probably buy it at a much better price at some point in the future, given the inherent volatility of the energy sector. The one caveat here is that you should get to know the company today and create a concrete plan for when you want to buy it (perhaps when the yield hits 6%).

Indeed, the best time to buy Chevron is likely to be when the fear of owning it seems highest, and if you don’t plan ahead, fear might lead you to miss the opportunity.

Should you invest $1,000 in Chevron right now?

Before you buy stock in Chevron, consider this:

The Motley Fool Stock Advisor analyst team just identified what they believe are the 10 best stocks for investors to buy now… and Chevron wasn’t one of them. The 10 stocks that made the cut could produce monster returns in the coming years.

Consider when Nvidia made this list on April 15, 2005… if you invested $1,000 at the time of our recommendation, you’d have $779,735!*

Stock Advisor provides investors with an easy-to-follow blueprint for success, including guidance on building a portfolio, regular updates from analysts, and two new stock picks each month. The Stock Advisor service has more than quadrupled the return of S&P 500 since 2002*.

See the 10 stocks »

*Stock Advisor returns as of August 12, 2024

Reuben Gregg Brewer has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Chevron. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Should You Buy Chevron While It’s Below $150? was originally published by The Motley Fool

(Bloomberg) — Toronto-Dominion Bank is setting aside $2.6 billion to cover fines it expects to pay for failures in its money-laundering controls, and the company sold part of its stake in Charles Schwab Corp. to fund it.

Most Read from Bloomberg

Including a $450 million provision announced in April, the lender now estimates it will pay $3 billion related to its US compliance lapses.

“The bank expects that a global resolution will be finalized by calendar year-end,” Toronto-Dominion said in a statement after markets closed Wednesday.

Canada’s second-biggest bank said its ownership interest in Schwab will fall to 10.1% from 12.3% after selling 40.5 million shares of the discount broker. Toronto-Dominion acquired that stake in 2020 as part of a transaction to sell its interest in online brokerage TD Ameritrade Holding Corp. to Schwab.

The shares were being marketed at $61.35 to $62.65 each, according to terms of the deal seen by Bloomberg News. The range represents a potential discount of as much as 5% to Wednesday’s closing price of $64.57 apiece, Bloomberg calculations show.

Analysts and investors had speculated that Toronto-Dominion could sell some or all of its interest in Schwab to help cover the financial penalties it’s facing in the criminal and regulatory money-laundering matters.

“We recognize the seriousness of our US AML program deficiencies,” Chief Executive Officer Bharat Masrani said in the statement, adding, “The work required to meet our obligations and responsibilities is of paramount importance to me, our senior leaders, and our boards.”

Bribe Allegations

Last year, Toronto-Dominion’s landmark $13.4 billion deal to acquire First Horizon Corp. collapsed, with the Canadian lender saying it was unclear regulators would ever approve the deal. Soon after, TD acknowledged that it was receiving inquiries from the US Department of Justice, in addition to financial regulators and the Treasury Department.

The core allegations are that it failed to catch money laundering and other financial crimes at several US branches where customer-facing employees took bribes to help move money. So far, federal prosecutors in New Jersey have filed at least four cases alleging serious misconduct by branch employees in New York, New Jersey and Florida. The bank has said it fired about a dozen front-line workers for code-of-conduct breaches.

TD also replaced about 10 senior leaders in compliance and legal roles in the wake of the money-laundering allegations. But Masrani, who has been CEO for almost a decade, remains in his post despite swirling speculation that the board could look to replace him.

Story continues

On top of fines, analysts have suggested the bank could also face years of restrictions on either organic growth or acquisitions in the US, where it has built a significant retail business. It has more than 10 million clients in the country and a network of almost 1,200 branches along the US east coast.

“While the market now has certainty surrounding the amount of the charge, this is offset by the fact that it is larger than expectations and the impact this has on capital,” Jefferies Financial Group Inc. analyst John Aiken said in a note to clients. “The valuation impact will hinge on tomorrow’s earnings, but it is already behind the eight-ball.”

Toronto-Dominion said the provision, which will be reflected in its fiscal third-quarter report on Thursday, will reduce its common equity tier 1 ratio to 12.%. That’s still above the 11% minimum ratio of capital to risk-weighted assets required by Canada’s bank regulator.

TD said the provision will further dent its CET1 ratio by 35 basis points in the fiscal fourth quarter, but that the Schwab sale will increase the ratio by 54 basis points in the period.

“The big question remains: What could the non-monetary penalties be? Hard to tell at this point in time,” Desjardins Capital Markets analyst Doug Young said in a report. “And we highly doubt that management will comment on this right now.”

–With assistance from Bre Bradham.

(Updates with compliance costs in second paragraph, analyst’s comment in third-to-last.)

Most Read from Bloomberg Businessweek

©2024 Bloomberg L.P.

Morgan Stanley International chairman Jonathan Bloomer is among the missing after a tornado struck a luxury yacht off the coast of Sicily on Monday. Billionaire tech entrepreneur Mike Lynch, dubbed the “British Bill Gates,” as well as his daughter and three others, is also missing and presumed dead.

The disaster came weeks after Lynch was acquitted in the U.S. of fraud charges. Bloomer—who has served as Morgan Stanley’s chair for almost eight years and is also the chair of insurance group Hiscox, according to his LinkedIn profile—played a small role in the trial.

Lynch, 59, founded software company Autonomy in 1996 and sold it to Hewlett-Packard in 2011 for $11 billion. HP paid a 60% premium over Autonomy’s stock price, but just one year after the blockbuster deal, HP reported an $8.8 billion write-down, attributing over $5 billion of that to inflated revenue data from Autonomy. Lynch was charged with 16 counts of conspiracy and fraud, with one fraud charge later dismissed. In June, Lynch was acquitted of fraud and cleared of charges.

Bloomer, 70, served on Autonomy’s audit committee and as a non-executive on the company’s board in 2010. He also testified during Lynch’s trial, telling the court in May that Lynch was “more interested in the strategy, new products, new areas to look at, potential acquisitions,” rather than looking at the financial side of the company.

The trip aboard the Bayesian was a celebration following the decades-long trial, but Bloomer and Lynch were declared missing after high winds and a vortex of water struck and capsized the superyacht. There were 22 passengers aboard the 180-foot sailing yacht, 15 of whom were rescued, and one who was declared dead. Italian emergency services brought Lynch’s wife, Angela Bacares, who owned the yacht, to safety. Bloomer’s wife remains missing.

The Bayesian yacht accident has odd timing: It coincided with the death of Lynch’s co-defendant Stephen Chamberlain, who died after being hit by a car in Cambridgeshire, England, on Saturday.

“We are deeply shocked and saddened by this tragic event,” Hiscox CEO Aki Hussain said in a statement. “Our thoughts are with all those affected, in particular our chair, Jonathan Bloomer, and his wife Judy, who are among the missing, and with their family as they await further news from this terrible situation.”

Hiscox senior independent director Colin Keogh will serve as interim chair, the company told Fortune. Morgan Stanley did not respond to Fortune’s request for comment.

Bloomer’s tumultuous career

Prior to his tenure at Morgan Stanley and Hiscox, Bloomer was the CEO of insurance company Prudential Financial; he was ousted in 2005. The timing of Bloomer’s rising up the ranks was ill-timed, coinciding with the dotcom crash and 9/11, which sent Prudential’s share prices plummeting 40%.

Story continues

During that time, Bloomer proposed buying U.S. insurer American General, a move that was largely doomed thanks to American International Group’s bid for the company that topped Prudential’s, as well as lack of investor confidence in the acquisition that sent Prudential’s shares tanking. Bloomer had to backtrack on the move, but through the takeover proposal, exposed Prudential’s relatively weak U.S. presence.

To make matters worse, Prudential’s internet banking arm, Egg, fell short of expectations, but Bloomer couldn’t find an adequate buyer. Prudential eventually sold Egg to Citigroup for about $750 million in 2007, but the company estimated a $190 million operating loss from Egg, twice what was originally expected.

Investors’ outcry reached a fever pitch in 2004, when Bloomer surprise-launched a $1.3 billion rights issue in an effort to expand the firm’s U.K. business, despite having to assuage concerns the company needed to raise more capital to do so. The CEO was ousted less than a year later and replaced with HBO’s finance chief Mark Tucker. Bloomer called it “part of the ups and downs of corporate life.”

“We have had to manage the company through difficult times and not everything has made us popular,” he said at the time. “But my job has been to lead a transformation and Prudential is now set fair to deliver further substantial growth and returns.”

This story was originally featured on Fortune.com

(Reuters) – Wolfspeed forecast first-quarter revenue below estimates on Wednesday, anticipating manufacturing issues that could affect its production capacity amid slowing EV sales.

Shares of the chipmaker, however, surged around 6% in extended trading, as CEO Gregg Lowe said the company continues to see strong growth from its Mohawk Valley, New York-based chip fabrication facility.

In June, Wolfspeed had said it faced issues with equipment at its Durham-based 150-mm chip fabrication plant and which could potentially impact its first-quarter revenue by about $20 million.

Meanwhile, Wolfspeed’s Mohawk Valley chip fabrication plant is targeted to reach 25% of its operating capacity in the first quarter, ahead of schedule.

“Our 200mm device fab is currently producing solid results … This improved profitability gives us the confidence to accelerate the shift of our device fabrication to Mohawk Valley,” Lowe said in a statement.

Shares started to recover as the market acknowledged the cost benefits of the new 200-mm Mohawk Valley fabrication unit, compared to the old 150-mm one, said Michael Ashley Schulman, chief investment officer, Running Point Capital.

The company counts General Motors and Mercedes-Benz among its customers and makes chips using silicon carbide, which is more energy-efficient material than standard silicon, for tasks such as transmitting power from an electric car’s batteries to its motors.

Wolfspeed expects first-quarter revenue to be between $185 million and $215 million, the mid-point of which is below analysts’ average estimate of $211.7 million, according to LSEG data.

It expects adjusted loss per share to be between $1.09 and $0.90, compared with estimate of loss of 84 cents per share.

Revenue for the fourth-quarter came in at $200.1 million, compared with average estimate of $201.2 million.

Wolfspeed’s net loss per share was $1.39 per share, compared with loss of $0.73 per share a year earlier.

(Reporting by Jaspreet Singh in Bengaluru; Editing by Mohammed Safi Shamsi)

I am approaching the time when I’ll take required minimum distributions (RMDs) from my individual retirement account (IRA). I am in a quandary about what I can do with this anticipated largesse of cash. I do not necessarily need the money dumped into my checking account.

-Tommy

Retirees who don’t need the cash from required minimum distributions (RMDs) aren’t required to dump it directly into a checking account. Fortunately, a range of options exists that allows the RMDs to work more effectively for you.

Keep in mind that how you handle your RMDs may come with tax consequences, so it’s important to keep an eye out for those repercussions. Here’s what to do with RMDs when you don’t need the cash. (If you have additional questions about investing or retirement, this tool can help match you with potential advisors.)

Consider an In-Kind Distribution

An in-kind distribution allows you to transfer or withdraw the assets from your account while maintaining their invested status, rather than cashing them out.

The benefit of distributing assets this way is that your money will stay invested in a stock, exchange-traded fund, mutual fund or other investment. That may be particularly beneficial if you’ve experienced losses recently and would like to wait to see your investments recover before cashing them in.

One downside is that you’ll still need to be able to cover the tax bill that accompanies the distribution. (If you have additional questions about the tax repercussions of investing decisions, this tool can help match you with potential advisors.)

Opt for a QCD

A qualified charitable distribution (QCD) allows taxpayers to transfer assets directly to a charity, bypassing the need to pay taxes on the distribution.

QCDs are an option for folks who truly don’t need RMD money to pay for living expenses and would prefer to use it to fund charitable causes.

Additionally, strategically utilizing QCDs can result in other important retirement benefits. They remove money from the accountholder’s taxable income, which can reduce Medicare premiums. Plus, folks who utilize this strategy before RMD age (they become available for individuals who are 70 1/2 and older) can reduce the value of their overall tax-advantaged retirement account, minimizing RMDs in the future. (If you have additional questions about investing or retirement, this tool can help match you with potential advisors.)

If you’re ready to be matched with local advisors that can help you achieve your financial goals, get started now.

Try Converting to a Roth

As you approach RMD age, consider the benefits of strategically converting dollars from your traditional IRA to a Roth.

Story continues

Roth accounts are not subject to RMDs, and executing a Roth conversion may allow you to both reduce future taxes and minimize or eliminate mandated distributions, giving you more control of that money in the future. Again, there will be a tax consequence to these conversions, so plan accordingly. (If you have additional questions about the tax repercussions of investing decisions, this tool can help match you with potential advisors.)

Bottom Line

There is a range of ways to approach RMDs that don’t involve dumping them in a checking account. But some of these approaches may have implications for your tax bill, investment strategy and retirement income. Consider working with a knowledgeable financial advisor if you’re unsure of how to proceed.

Tips for Finding a Financial Advisor

• Finding a financial advisor doesn’t have to be hard. SmartAsset’s free tool matches you with up to three vetted financial advisors who serve your area, and you can interview your advisor matches at no cost to decide which one is right for you. If you’re ready to find an advisor who can help you achieve your financial goals, get started now.

• Consider a few advisors before settling on one. It’s important to make sure you find someone you trust to manage your money. As you consider your options, these are the questions you should ask an advisor to ensure you make the right choice.

• Keep an emergency fund on hand in case you run into unexpected expenses. An emergency fund should be liquid — in an account that isn’t at risk of significant fluctuation like the stock market. The tradeoff is that the value of liquid cash can be eroded by inflation. But a high-interest account allows you to earn compound interest. Compare savings accounts from these banks.

• Are you a financial advisor looking to grow your business? SmartAsset AMP helps advisors connect with leads and offers marketing automation solutions so you can spend more time making conversions. Learn more about SmartAsset AMP.

Susannah Snider, CFP® is SmartAsset’s financial planning columnist, and answers reader questions on personal finance topics. Got a question you’d like answered? Email AskAnAdvisor@smartasset.com and your question may be answered in a future column.

Please note that Susannah is not a participant in the SmartAsset AMP platform and was an employee of SmartAsset at the time of writing.

Photo credit: ©Jen Barker Worley, ©iStock.com/Halfpoint, ©iStock.com/Tom Merton

The post Ask an Advisor: I Don’t Need Them ‘Dumped Into My Checking Account.’ What Can I Do With RMDs? appeared first on SmartAsset Blog.

X, formerly known as Twitter, looks like a pretty bad investment right about now.

As readers might recall, Elon Musk borrowed $13 billion from Morgan Stanley, Bank of America and five other major banks to help finance its $44 billion acquisition. According to the WSJ, the deal has since become the worst merger-finance deal for banks since the 2008-2009 financial crisis.

Why? When banks lend money for takeovers, they usually sell that debt on to others, earning fees on the transaction. That hasn’t been possible with X because of its weak financials, so the loans have weighed the banks down, becoming, in industry parlance, “hung deals.”

The WSJ notes that the banks agreed to underwrite these loans “largely because the allure of banking the world’s richest person was too attractive to pass up.” Now, it looks like a costly mistake unless they can extract interest payments from X, plus a repayment of principal once the loans mature.

HOUSTON (Reuters) – Shares in U.S. oil producer Occidental Petroleum fell to $56.17 on Tuesday, below a level that has routinely triggered purchases by its biggest holder, billionaire investor Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway.

Past multimillion-share purchases were so routinely timed to drops below $60 that Wall Street analysts called it “the Berkshire put,” for setting a price floor on the oil firm’s shares.

But Occidental has traded below that price all month, the longest period since a swoon in January that ended after Berkshire acquired 4.3 million shares in early February.

The lack of purchases may reflect the Omaha, Nebraska, investor’s decision not to add to his nearly 30% stake, analysts said. Berkshire is the largest owner of Occidental shares with a stake worth $16.1 billion, and holds U.S. regulatory approval to buy up to 50% of the firm.

Spokespeople for Berkshire and Occidental did not reply to requests for comment.

Occidental shares are off 12.3% in the last 52 weeks compared with a flat performance by the XLE fund that tracks the overall energy sector.

The stock is under pressure after CrownRock LP investors this month filed to sell 29.6 million Occidental shares acquired in Occidental’s $12 billion deal for the Midland, Texas, oil producer.

Prior drops have routinely triggered big purchases. In June, Berkshire acquired 2.56 million shares at prices between $59.86 and $59.75 apiece. It bought nearly $590 million in Occidental shares after the price fell last December on the debt required in the CrownRock deal. The trend dates to fall 2022 with large Berkshire share acquisitions between $57.91 and $61.38.

In addition to its common shares, Berkshire owns warrants to purchase 83.5 million shares of Occidental at $59.62 per share, and holds preferred stock in the Houston-based company.

(Reporting by Gary McWilliams; editing by Jonathan Oatis)

There’s a 64% probability that Kamala Harris will win this November’s presidential election, given the stock market’s strong year-to-date performance.

This is moderately higher than the 58% probability I reported in a column this past May. That’s because the stock market is higher now than it was then, and there is a significant correlation between the stock market’s election-year performance and the incumbent party’s chances of retaining the White House.

Most Read from MarketWatch

Read more economic and political news

Many readers have been urging me to update that column, now that President Biden has withdrawn from the race and Kamala Harris is the presumptive Democratic Party nominee. But the change in candidates does not impact the statistical conclusion, which is based on the identity of the incumbent party rather than the nominee. The only input to my simple statistical model is the Dow Jones Industrial Average’s DJIA year-to-date return, which is higher today than three months ago.

It’s important to put this model’s conclusion in its proper context. On the one hand, it by no means is a guarantee. In 2016, for example, the stock market on Election Day was sitting on modest year-to-date gains and the incumbent party still lost. In any case, it’s entirely possible the stock market will fall between now and Election Day and thereby reduce the probabilities currently calculated by my model. Harris’s probability of winning would drop below 50%, for example, if the DJIA’s year-to-date return on Election Day were to be negative.

On the other hand, the stock market has a stronger statistical record than the several other indicators that I analyzed, such as the economy (as measured by GDP), the Conference Board’s consumer-confidence index and the University of Michigan’s consumer-sentiment survey. Look at the accompanying chart, which was built by dividing all election years since 1900 into thirds, based on the DJIA’s year-to-date return on Election Day. Notice that the incumbent party’s chances of winning rise with each tertile.

Story continues

What about the electronic futures and betting markets? Given that they have been around for just a handful of presidential election cycles, there is too little data to know whether they have a better track record than the stock market. Nevertheless, I note that those markets currently are placing similar odds on a Harris victory as my stock market model. The Harris contract at PredictIt.org, for example, is giving her a 58% probability of winning.

Most Read from MarketWatch