Read much? My response was to this: $114 in 1942 was a lot of money ($1,756 in purchasing power today). No 11 year old kid got that from "shoveling snow or whatever". It wasn't to imply that people paid that in 1942. Idiot.
Read your post again. You threw out numbers as if to imply if anything (even if you don't think so) that is was plausible.
Looking at that chart, volatility of annual returns prior to 1940 was pretty insane. I doubt many people in 1942 would want to buy and hold long term based on the historic data available at that time. Its really only post 1980 that buy and hold looks relatively sensible on a yearly basis.
Since the 1987, the Fed has been "managing" the market more. We no longer have a free market since 2008 crash. This smoothed volatility is a controlled illusion and unnatural. I wonder how long can Central Banks around the world keep this up. So the volatility you see prior to the 80s and definitely prior to 2009 are actually how markets work! Not this super smooth curve. Markets are driven by fear and greed. As daytraders, we don't really care. Just in and out all day long. Just thinking outloud about the macro picture here.
%% That is one reason its tough for some to beat the S&P 500/SPY; commissions/ fees/slippage/ are not included. Some annual reports may disclose that .....LOL. Good benchmark anyway; much preferred to DOW/DIA
I downloaded yearly S&P return data and I must be missing something because $114 doesn't turn into $400k, I get $26,800 which seems more reasonable. How did he get $400k???
The difference between 7.5% a year and 11.5% a year (if you reinvest dividends) is huge after 76 years. 7.5% for 76 years returns 28K, 11.5% returns 400K