Isn't this kind of... stupid? > So around 5% of all years since 1926 have seen average returns. In fact, there have been just as many yearly returns above 40%

Isn't this kind of... stupid? > So around 5% of all years since 1926 have seen average returns. In fact, there have been just as many yearly returns above 40% as returns in the 8% to 12% range. Well yeah sure but 3 of the 5 years that saw those >40% returns were 3 consecutive years 100 years ago. I think all we can take from this article is that there are a multitude of factors that drive the value of the stock market and if you don't think about any of them in any detail then you're going to spot lots of statistical patterns that don't mean anything.