Thursday, October 15, 2026
Source trace. Via News points to the documents behind its reporting and shows what we drew from each — so you can check any claim. How we source
Source document· January 10, 2026

How Likely Is It That the Stock Market Crashes Under President Donald Trump in 2026? 3 Historically Accurate Correlations Weigh In.

View original at nasdaq.com
How Likely Is It That the Stock Market Crashes Under President Donald Trump in 2026? 3 Historically Accurate Correlations Weigh In…
Opening lines of the source · short snapshot — read the full document at the original

What we drew from this source

The claims Via News extracted from this document. We point to the source; we don't replace it.

  • Three historically accurate correlations point to growing possibility of a steep correction, if not a stock market crash, under Trump in 2026

    80% confidence
  • 14 out of 27 S&P 500 bull markets have lasted longer than the lengthiest bear market (630 calendar days), with average bull market persisting for 1,011 calendar days from September 1929 to June 2023

    80% confidence
  • Long-term outlook for the stock market remains as rosy as ever, regardless of what headwinds are thrown Wall Street's way

    80% confidence
  • When you buy the S&P 500 at a 23x P/E, your 10-yr annualized return has always fallen between +2% and -2%, in every case

    80% confidence
  • Since 1950, off the midterm year lows, stocks have never been lower a year later and are up more than 30% on average

    80% confidence
  • Stock Advisor's total average return is 969%, compared to 196% for the S&P 500

    80% confidence
  • Out of 27 bear markets analyzed, only eight endured for at least one year, with average S&P 500 bear market decline finding its bottom in just 286 calendar days

    80% confidence
  • S&P 500 experiences larger peak-to-trough corrections during midterm years, with average decline since 1950 standing at 17.5%

    80% confidence
  • All 106 rolling 20-year periods from 1900 through 2005 would have produced a positive annualized total return for S&P 500

    80% confidence
What we know · the intelligence behind this page
Live from the substrate
What we're seeing
Q4 2026 Clinical Catalyst Season: Big-Pharma Data Flow, Regulatory Milestones, and a Thin AI-Drug Fringe
October 2026 conferences (EASD, IGCS, NACFC, HFSA) are producing a dense run of late-stage readouts from Novo Nordisk, Lilly, Roche, Bayer, Vertex and Galderma. Regulatory milestones are scheduled behind them: the ivonescimab BLA PDUFA date on 2026-11-14, FDA acceptance of Roche's vamikibart BLA, and Scholar Rock's EMA resubmission. The AI-and-finance angle is peripheral. It consists of the AI-designed drug Rentosertib and QAIAx, a speculative microcap whose trial claims (the QIII pilot, anticipated 2027-01-01, and a patent update) are forecasts and filings rather than data, so they warrant skepticism.
Our read on the data ›
Signals we're tracking
EPKINLY Regulatory-Clinical Success Cascade
High probability of expanded label indications, additional combination approvals, and competitive positioning strength in follicular lymphoma market. Predicts positive commercial uptake and potential accelerated review for related indications.
Patterns we're watching ›
Where sources disagree
ING Group
Both facts record the same metric (shares_outstanding) for ING Group at the identical observation date (2025-12-31). FACT A states 2,902,437,688 shares; FACT B states 2,902 million shares (2,902,000,000). The difference is 437,688 shares (~0.015%). This is a genuine value conflict, though the discrepancy appears to result from FACT B rounding to the nearest million while FACT A provides the precise count.
We flag conflicts openly ›
Recently verified
✓ Checked against the original source
4,986
facts traced to their source — and we flag the ones that don't hold up.
101 entities tracked4,986 facts checked against source5,375 source documents archived
Query this data → isubstrate.com
How Likely Is It That the Stock Market Crashes Under President Donald Trump in 2026? 3 Historically Accurate Correlations Weigh In. — Source | Via News | Via News