it's the same pattern too. except for 2000 or 2008 it tends to come back really fast too .

> meaning that we get a decline like this roughly every 100 trading days, which means about twice a calendar year, very roughly.

Stock volatility is typically clustered. So, we can't make this type of claim. Just like this statement is flawed: Chicago experiences below freezing weather 10% of the time, so every 10 days you see below freezing weather.

It happened in 2016, 2018, 2020, 2022, 2025 and 2026, so 6 out of last 11 years. Not sure if I would count it as too rare.

That's every other year, which is quite different from 2+yearly, which is exactly the point the gp was making.

"Four times every two years" isn't exactly the same as "twice every year", but also reflects a similar, "not that unusual" answer.

Although I didn't claim "twice every year" in my top-level comment either. It's just a very basic statement of the base rate.

Make it eight-times every four years or sixteen-times every eight years. I don't think it really changes the point.

[delayed]

I think "every other year" is 100% of a piece with grandparent's point, which is that this is "newsworthy but not notable".

Markets move. Sometimes they move more than normal. This is one of those times.

Will it keep moving? Will it crash? Maybe! But what it has done right now is not that.

Every other year is much less frequent than twice a year?

Multiple times every other year.

'Biannual' finally found it's perfect use case.

yes almost every year this happens

Just to come back and clarify: it bounced this morning. Yesterday wasn't the crash. It's not a cluster. Grandparent point was fundamentally correct. "Nothing to see here", as it were.

It's funny: for all the "pattern recognition" people try to apply to markets, they often miss the very basic ones. "Record highs" are incredibly common, and "corrections" also happen regularly.

June had two similar NASDAQ corrections, July had one as well. Sept was flat, but October was a straight downward trend. On the flip side, April to June was a constantly increasing.

The last time the NASDAQ was this low was all the way back in April 2026...

By definition it is either at a record high or in a correction, especially with inflation

I get what you're saying, however, a correction is technically a 10% drawdown from a recent high: https://www.schwab.com/learn/story/market-correction-what-do... so you can be neither in a correction nor at an all-time high. You can be down 0.01% to 9.99%

Probably more helpful to see the Z-score.

It seems what happens, because of regime change, is investors will take profit moving to cash, and in the common weeks reposition. For example, Elon is going to have to pay for Doge so he is a political loser. Moving out of SpaceX is pragmatic and expect those who do drive up demand for something else in the coming weeks.

At the end of the day, everyone's retirement is tied to the SP500 and it will always go up.

> At the end of the day, everyone's retirement is tied to the SP500 and it will always go up.

Not when more retired boomers are pulling more money out than GenZ/Alphas are putting in.

That’s literally impossible. The market requires a buyer and a seller. If the retired boomers pull their money out, it’ll move the markets to a place that is attractive and affordable for the Gen Alpha.

> retired boomers

That isn't where the money propping up the SP500 is coming from. It is a ponzi scheme, yes. It is held up by $40,000,000,000,000 in national debt. That can is getting kicked down the line to one or two generations that haven't been born yet.

You and I don't need to worry about it because we will be long gone by then.

All we know know is that Elon isn't getting any more freshly minted currency.

Indexes are essentially 'the rich getting richer'. Great news for wealth disparity if true. But I suspect boomer inheritances will become intergenerational wealth given average number of children and rising age people inherit at.

You are not taking into account foreign investors. Plenty of countries have a healthy population pyramid and are quickly industrializing.

Statistics about up and down days or particular periods of the stock market can say whatever you want, because they're so easy to cherry-pick.

A more interesting stat is the current CAPE.

https://www.thetrading.tools/shiller-cape

It is at levels only seen three times in the last century.

To be fair, there is no theoretical model for estimating natural CAPE. I’d argue the world of the post 1990s deserves a higher CAPE than the one which preceded it, though we’re trying hard in American to undo that stability.

And has been since 2016

If the bank collapse in Paraguay hadn’t happened today, and stocks hadn’t initially risen yesterday, I’d tend to agree with you. This is odd enough to potentially have a better explanation than everyone got happy and then sad all of a sudden.

Paraguayan banks don't mean a whole lot in the global financial markets.

Paraguayan banks with close ties to a politician with, in turn, ties to the Trump family absolutely hint at money moving around.

The fall of the bank didn't cause Nasdaq to fall. But the opposite direction, or both events having a common cause? Entirely possible.

Read enough of these “explanations” of what the market did and a portrait emerges of extreme emotional volatility combined with a fantastic imagination. The market is insanely happy because x went up, which means the Fed will do y, and so pork belly futures will do z. Oh no! Now it is sad! But for the same reason?

For the same reason, spot FX commentary is utter garbage, yet there seems to be unlimited amounts of it.

I thought the bank collapsed on Monday? And it was only like a 3 billion dollar bank? So note huge.

Wall Street banks avoided becoming a political talking point with that action yesterday.

Correction territory is 10% from All-time-high (ATH). 20% from ATH is bear market. I don't think there's an exact number for crashes. What's probably more interesting here is looking by industry, in that case probably AI.

Also, I wonder who defines these "territories"

People seem to call it a "correction" to make themselves feel better but they're all just crashes to me, and crashes are normal

What about 6% or more?

https://finviz.com/index/COMP?p=d I find those square visualisations valuable since they indicate both size and delta.

AI infra stocks are down more than 50% from the peak and hyperscalers stocks have underperformed the market in 1 year.

It's just diversity at work. Money is diversifying out of US corporations and flooding into other assets and markets. Expectations of the American economy's near-term future have outrun the realities on the ground, so you could say it is a diversification of expectations, too.

As others have said, averages aren't useful unless the behavior matches the average.

If those 147 4% drops actually happened every 100 days or so then it's not newsworthy or interesting, just an occasional correction.

If those 147 days happened all in a row that would mean the nasdaq dropped to 0.25% of its original value in about 4 months, which would be catastrophic.

The real answer is presumably somewhere in the middle, but the specifics are what determines if it's worth noting or not.