I brought up this chart as a counterpoint to the OP's graph in a separate discussion. The difference is that this one factors in "taxes and fees". In this cha

I brought up this chart as a counterpoint to the OP's graph in a separate discussion. The difference is that this one factors in "taxes and fees". In this chart, it says 1979-1999 is +8.2% per year. Using the OP's data source, 1979-1999 would be 12.464% (using https://dqydj.com/sp-500-return-calculator/ https://dqydj.com/sp-500-return-calculator/ which uses the same Schiller data set). That's 4.2% per year obliterated by "taxes and fees". That seems excessive for "taxes and fees", given that it's buy-and-hold. I don't know what to make of this discrepancy but I find it aggravating. Either Schiller's data has some strange assumptions built into it, or the OP's analysis draws improperly bullish conclusions from it, or the NYT chart is unreasonably bearish. Either way, I still strongly believe people should not be generally expecting their investments to quadruple in 20 years. There's a whole investment industry that is based off of bad assumptions, and it's keeping people from investing in actually producing value for themselves and others.