Why ‘timing the market’ is a fool’s errand

It’s an age-old question – is it possible to consistently time the sharemarket? All the data seems to be pointing very firmly to ‘no’. It’s simply too hard to do.

Many investors try to pick the bottom of the market to take advantage of any following rebound. This approach is referred to as ‘market timing’ and involves making investment decisions based on short-term market movements.

In contrast, a buy-and-hold approach involves buying shares and holding them over the long-term, irrespective of market movements. An overwhelming body of research finds that this passive buy-and-hold, long-term approach to owning shares produces better long-term results.

We crunched the numbers using the S&P/ASX 200 benchmark index, and our analysis showed just how big a difference it can make when investors miss out on a handful of the biggest rallies.

Source: Bloomberg, Betashares. As at 31 January 2023. Past performance is not indicator of future performance. Top five and top 20 days since over the last 30 years have been removed from the respective data sets. None of these days occurred in the past year so one year returns are unaffected. 

This might seem like ‘cherry-picking’, but in reality, if you tried market timing, there’s a good chance you’d miss out on some of the biggest rallies. Humans have a tendency to try to avoid loss (called loss-aversion bias) which can cause investors to throw their strategy out the window and sell when markets turn bad. However, this can be precisely the worst time to sell, as the biggest rallies can happen in the middle of major market falls (see table below). And the more of those big rallies that you miss out on, the lower your gains over the long term.

The 20 biggest 1-day rallies have occurred during or soon after a major crash

Biggest rallies on the ASX and Nasdaq

Source: Bloomberg, Betashares. As at 31 January 2023. Past performance is not an indicator of future performance.

In contrast, by staying invested in the benchmark share market index, you automatically capture all market movements, which over time may prove to be advantageous.

Independent research points to the same result

It is not just our research that is coming to this conclusion. A recent paper from JP Morgan, Is market timing worth it during periods of intense volatility?, revealed that timing the market is almost impossible to achieve given that good and bad trading days typically fall so closely together.1

As at the end of 2021, seven of the best days in the US had occurred within two weeks of their corresponding worst day; but often the gap between the best and worst days was much shorter.

For example, March 12, 2020 was the second-worst day of the year in US share markets, yet that was immediately followed by the second-best day of the year.

JP Morgan’s study found that the worst days overwhelmingly occured before the best days: over the last 20 years, six of the seven best days occurred after the worst day.

The close proximity of the best and worst days makes it virtually impossible to buy shares at the bottom before they climb again as most people are not that quick or lucky.

In other words, it is very unlikely that an investor could be lucky enough to consistently miss the worst days while being invested in the market for the best days.

JP Morgan’s final thought is this: “It is important to remind investors that success is achieved through time in the market, not timing the market. And, to quote Dolly Parton, ‘If you want the rainbow, you gotta put up with the rain’.”

We’d have to agree with that.

The pain of missing out

Separate research from the Schwab Center for Financial Research, Does Market Timing Work?, found that even badly timed sharemarket investments were much better than having no share market investments at all.

That’s because investors who procrastinate and do nothing are likely to miss out on the stock market’s potential growth.

“Procrastination can be worse than bad timing. Long term, it’s almost always better to invest in stocks—even at the worst time each year—than not to invest at all,” according to their research.

“Given the difficulty of timing the market, the most realistic strategy for the majority of investors would be to invest in stocks immediately.”

If you don’t have a large single sum to invest, or you like the discipline of investing small amounts regularly, then dollar-cost averaging can assist in mitigating market timing risk and can help you gradually accumulate wealth.

Similar to a regular savings plan, dollar cost averaging involves investing the same amount of money at set intervals over a long period – whether market prices are up or down.

The key takeaway

It is almost impossible to time the market consistently whether it is over a short time frame or over the long term.

Instead, investors should consider having a well-diversified portfolio and holding it over the long-term.

Index-tracking funds are well-suited to this investment approach by providing a convenient, cost-effective way to get exposure to all the major asset classes, including domestic and global equities, fixed income, cash and commodities.

You can use funds such as Betashares PIE Funds to build the core of your portfolio – investments that will provide your portfolio with a foundation for the long term, through the market’s up and down cycles. For example, the Betashares Australia 200 Fund provides exposure to the largest 200 companies on the ASX at an annual management cost of just 0.25% – making it the lowest cost Australian shares fund in New Zealand. The Betashares Global Quality Leaders Fund provides exposure to a diversified portfolio of 150 quality global companies.

So you can sit back and enjoy your investment growing over time, without trying to time the market.

There are risks associated with an investment in each of the Funds, including market risk, security specific risk, industry sector risk and index tracking risk. An investment in the Funds should only be made after the investor considers their particular circumstances, including their tolerance for risk. Before making any investment, investors should read the relevant Product Disclosure Statement and Quarterly Fund Update (when available).

1. https://am.jpmorgan.com/us/en/asset-management/adv/insights/market-insights/market-updates/on-the-minds-of-investors/is-market-timing-worth-it-during-periods-of-intense-volatility/

Photo of Annabelle Dickson

Written by

Annabelle Dickson

Annabelle Dickson was previously a journalist at Financial Standard and prior to that at The Inside Investor and The Inside Adviser. She holds a Bachelor of Arts in Communication (Journalism) from The University of Technology Sydney.

Read more from Annabelle.


4 comments on this

  1. george smith  /  1 March 2023

    for most investors, true. which makes it more lucrative for those that can.

    1. Patrick Poke  /  1 March 2023

      Hi George,

      If you’ve found a reliable way to time markets make sure you guard that information carefully! It would be extremely valuable.

      In the source referenced for this article, Jack Manley, Global Market Strategist at JP Morgan, addresses this point.

      “However, some may ask: what if an investor misses the worst days but still benefits from the best? There are two key issues with this question:

      First, there is no guaranteed “signal” to get out of the market, and market bottoms are only determined in hindsight.
      Second, the investor would need to buy in on the worst days during some of the most significant market drawdowns when loss aversion is at its greatest.

      As a result, it is hard to believe that someone could be smart enough to consistently miss the worst days while courageous enough to invest for the best days.”


  2. Jeffrey Parkin  /  1 March 2023

    Good article however the table showing the returns minus the top 5 & 20 days over different time periods has failed to take out the top 5 & 20 days over the 1 year period.

    If you update with the correct figures can you let me know so I can access it.



    1. Patrick Poke  /  1 March 2023

      Hi Jeff,

      The data removes the top five and top 20 days respectively over the entire 30-year period of the data series, not the top five and top 20 of each individual period. Because none of those top five or top 20 days occurred within the last year, there are no days removed from those numbers.

      Thanks for raising this. I’ve updated the caption to explain this a little more clearly.


Leave a reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous article
Next article