The Relative Performance of the Economy under the Presidents of the United States from 1900 to 2026
Samuel H. Williamson
Founder of MeasuringWorth
and
Professor of Economics Emeritus Miami University
sam@mswth.org
With assistance from
Ben Hogewood
MeasuringWorth Research Associate
Economic performance has been an important issue in elections for decades. Voters look at economic variables to gain some insight into the incumbent's record. The health of our economy, however, is determined by monetary and fiscal policy, external shocks, and even bubbles. The economy faced by an incumbent president and Congress, good or bad, is the result of events that occurred before as well as during his term of office. Elections have been won and lost by the timing of the business cycle where incumbents were caught on the right or wrong side of the slope. Of course, this does not stop claims and blames during election campaigns. Some are rhetorical, such as "the best economy ever" or "you are worse off than you were two or four years ago." Others are specific such as "your taxes are higher today than they were" or "the unemployment rate fell last month." In many cases, these statements have little context or are misleading. For example, taxes may be higher than four years ago, but, at that time, there may have been a one-time rebate to deal with a recession, or the unemployment rate may have fallen, but from an unusually high rate.
The goal of this paper is to help the reader better understand how the economy performed during each of the presidential terms from 1900 to 2026. It was updated in October of 2026 to include the first eighteen months of the second Trump term. For all the Presidents in the 21st century we also present the performances during the first three years of their terms. This is done so the comparisons of Trump’s first-term performance with others can also be made excluding his last year in office when there was a 9% drop in real GDP during the Covid epidemic.
Sources
MeasuringWorth is a website devoted to presenting the best historical time series of economic data and providing comparators that help make useful comparisons of these data. The tables presented here can be reproduced easily using data from the MeasuringWorth website, FRED, and government sources.1 They can be studied using the site's Annualized Growth Comparator, which analyzes the growth of dozens of variables. The tables use annual data from 1900 to 2026 augmented by quarterly or monthly data when available.
Comments on Data.
The data are reported for each president. A separate observation has been created for those terms in which a Vice President succeeded to the presidency. In four cases, this was a result of the President's death; in one case, the President's resignation.2 For example, there is one observation encompassing FDR's first three terms, one for the term in which he died and Truman took over, and one for the term that Truman was elected. For the annual data we have set the length of a Presidential term as change in levels from the year the President was elected, to the year of the next election. Thus, we have four years of observations.3
The quarterly data sets the term from the quarter they were elected to the quarter their successor was elected. These were the quarters before they were inaugurated. And for the monthly labor data, we've used the January observations of the year they took office to the January of the year they left office.4
Stock and Flow Variables
There are two types of variables we use in talking about the economy. One is a stock variable, an economic quantity that, in principle, is measured at a point in time. Prices, tax rates, interest rates, home values, stock indexes and the price of gold are examples of stock variables. The other is a flow variable, which has a time dimension: it is measured over a period, such as a quarter or a year. Wages, incomes and output are flow variables. This distinction matters when comparing presidential terms, which are not all the same length. To make those comparisons, we convert most of the observations to be the annualized growth rate.
Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is the total market value of all final goods and services produced in a country during one year. Put another way, it is the total spending on newly produced goods and services. In the United States, annual GDP is about $31 trillion, meaning that much is spent on U.S. output each year.5
Four groups buy what is produced. Households, buying food, cars, medical care, and whatever else they want and can afford, account for about 68 percent of GDP. Business firms purchasing new equipment, buildings, and inventories, along with households buying new homes, account for another 18 percent. Government spending on schools, highways, and Air Force F-16s takes up about 17 percent. Finally, foreign buyers of U.S. exports account for 11 percent.
These shares add up to more than 100 percent because about 14 percent of what Americans spend goes to goods and services produced overseas. Imports must be subtracted to get an accurate measure of domestic product.
Three of these sectors (households, businesses, and foreign buyers) respond to market forces that are influenced by macroeconomic policy. Government spending is different: it rests on legislative decisions, from the local town council to the U.S. Congress. In 1944, for example, government spending on World War II and personal consumption each made up 48 percent of GDP. By 1947, government spending had fallen to 16 percent of GDP, and consumer spending had risen to a peacetime level of 65 percent.
The Consumer Price Index (CPI) is a weighted measure of the cost of a bundle of things that the average household buys. In theory, it is the cost at a point in time or a stock variable.6
In the tables that follow, we report the changes in these series over each term rather than their levels.
There are many concerns when making comparisons over time. One problem is that, while the name remains the same, these variables measure different things over time. GDP is a measure of total product in each year, but what is produced each year changes, and so does the bundle of things the CPI prices. In 2024, 1.2 billion smartphones were produced; in 1990 there were none. There was no TV or internet in the 1930s. Further, there was no government agency measuring the GDP before the Great Depression, so those observations have been estimated by historians. Their earlier measures of prices and output are far less accurate than those of today.
The first table presents annualized growth rates of key economic variables for the terms of 23 presidents. It covers real GDP, and real GDP per capita, the inflation rate, the growth in the S&P stock index, population, and the price of gold. Each variable has had its ups and downs (sometimes coincidental) during the presidential terms.
Economic growth, measured either as the growth in real GDP or real GDP per capita, is the most often used measure of a President’s success in managing the economy, whether or not they have had any control over the sources of growth.7
Inflation, as measured by the rate of increase in the CPI, was highest during the Wilson administration because of World War One and the Roosevelt/Truman term because of the ending of the World War II price controls.
Another period of high inflation was during the Nixon/Ford and Carter administrations when the Federal Reserve was increasing the money supply at a rapid rate. Ford and Carter were both criticized for not being able to bring inflation under control, and both lost the elections of 1976 and 1980, respectively. Biden received similar criticism during the 2024 campaign, and inflation has since run at 2.63% in 2025 and above 3% through mid-2026.
Stock prices rose during every administration, except Hoover's. Only during the Wilson, Nixon/Ford, Carter and G. W. Bush administrations did the stock index grow slower than the inflation rate. We will have more on stock index comparisons below.
Gold has only been a true market commodity for part of the time.8 It is easy to see the relationship between its price and the inflation rate during the Nixon/Ford and Carter administrations. As inflation increased, gold was bought as a hedge against the falling value of the dollar. Gold prices and the stock market can be countercyclical as took place during the G. W. Bush administration. The 43.12% rise in the price of gold in 2025 is the largest in any term since the Carter administration.
Population generally grew fastest during the early years of the 20th century, up to the 1920s. This was due to higher birth and immigration rates. The rate of growth dropped during the Depression, then increased because of the post-World War II baby boom. During the 21st century, the population growth rate has fallen to its lowest levels ever, a little over half a percent a year, as birth rates have continued to fall and migration has been more restricted than in the first half of the 20th century.
Table 1 -- The Annualized Growth Rate of Economic Measures during Presidential terms from 1900 to 2026
| President | Term Years | Real GDP | Real GDP per Capita | CPI | S&P Index | Population | Gold |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Theodore Roosevelt | 1901 to 1908 | 1.82% | -0.11% | 1.15% | 5.82% | 1.94% | 0.00% |
| William Howard Taft | 1909 to 1912 | 4.01% | 2.16% | 1.32% | 12.84% | 1.82% | -0.03% |
| Woodrow Wilson | 1913 to 1920 | 2.22% | 0.82% | 9.92% | 5.92% | 1.39% | 3.65% |
| Harding/ Coolidge | 1921 to 1924 | 4.73% | 2.93% | -3.89% | 6.32% | 1.75% | -4.57% |
| Calvin Coolidge | 1925 to 1928 | 2.72% | 1.33% | 0.04% | 24.82% | 1.37% | -2.42% |
| Herbert Hoover | 1929 to 1932 | -5.67% | -6.62% | -5.50% | -12.11% | 0.91% | 8.58% |
| F. D. Roosevelt | 1933 to 1944 | 9.09% | 8.17% | 2.13% | 8.59% | 0.86% | 2.98% |
| Roosevelt/Truman | 1945 to 1948 | -2.58% | -3.97% | 8.15% | 10.72% | 1.46% | 0.00% |
| Harry S. Truman | 1949 to 1952 | 5.00% | 3.23% | 2.47% | 20.23% | 1.72% | 0.00% |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower | 1953 to 1960 | 2.99% | 1.19% | 1.38% | 16.24% | 1.78% | 0.20% |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 1961 to 1964 | 4.69% | 3.14% | 1.17% | 10.47% | 1.51% | -0.13% |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | 1965 to 1968 | 5.18% | 4.00% | 2.91% | 8.84% | 1.13% | 2.47% |
| Richard M. Nixon | 1969 to 1972 | 2.95% | 1.80% | 4.72% | 5.38% | 1.12% | 10.73% |
| Nixon/Ford | 1973 to 1976 | 2.53% | 1.56% | 8.00% | 2.08% | 0.96% | 21.04% |
| Jimmy Carter | 1977 to 1980 | 3.24% | 2.13% | 9.67% | 8.41% | 1.09% | 48.83% |
| Ronald Reagan | 1981 to 1988 | 3.45% | 2.51% | 4.63% | 15.45% | 0.92% | -4.13% |
| George H. W. Bush | 1989 to 1992 | 2.23% | 1.03% | 4.36% | 17.30% | 1.19% | -5.83% |
| Bill Clinton | 1993 to 2000 | 3.88% | 2.66% | 2.59% | 19.06% | 1.19% | -2.57% |
| George W. Bush (3 years) | 2001 to 2003 | 1.81% | 0.84% | 2.23% | -13.09% | 0.96% | 9.20% |
| George W. Bush | 2001 to 2008 | 2.20% | 1.24% | 2.83% | 1.21% | 0.95% | 15.31% |
| Barack H. Obama (3 years) | 2009 to 2011 | 0.54% | -0.30% | 1.47% | -0.09% | 0.84% | 21.70% |
| Barack H. Obama | 2009 to 2016 | 1.66% | 0.85% | 1.37% | 6.47% | 0.80% | 4.61% |
| Donald Trump 1st (3 years) | 2017 to 2019 | 2.67% | 2.05% | 2.13% | 12.99% | 0.60% | 3.66% |
| Donald Trump 1st | 2017 to 2020 | 1.46% | 0.90% | 1.90% | 16.50% | 0.55% | 9.09% |
| Joseph R. Biden (3 years) | 2021 to 2023 | 3.86% | 3.32% | 5.59% | 8.11% | 0.52% | 3.10% |
| Joseph R. Biden | 2021 to 2024 | 3.63% | 3.00% | 4.93% | 11.69% | 0.62% | 7.99% |
| Donald Trump 2nd (1 year) | 2025 | 2.34% | 1.79% | 2.63% | 25.93% | 0.54% | 43.12% |
Table 2 -- Ranking the growth of the Economy during the President's term as measured using the Annualized Growth Rate of GDP (annual)
| President | Real GDP Growth | President | Real GDP per Capita Growth |
|---|---|---|---|
| F. D. Roosevelt | 9.09% | F. D. Roosevelt | 8.17% |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | 5.18% | Lyndon B. Johnson | 4.00% |
| Harry S. Truman | 5.00% | Joseph R. Biden (3 years) | 3.32% |
| Harding/ Coolidge | 4.73% | Harry S. Truman | 3.23% |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 4.69% | Kennedy/Johnson | 3.14% |
| William Howard Taft | 4.01% | Joseph R. Biden | 3.00% |
| Bill Clinton | 3.88% | Harding/ Coolidge | 2.93% |
| Joseph R. Biden (3 years) | 3.86% | Bill Clinton | 2.66% |
| Joseph R. Biden | 3.63% | Ronald Reagan | 2.51% |
| Ronald Reagan | 3.45% | William Howard Taft | 2.16% |
| Jimmy Carter | 3.24% | Jimmy Carter | 2.13% |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower | 2.99% | Donald Trump 1st (3 years) | 2.05% |
| Richard M. Nixon | 2.95% | Richard M. Nixon | 1.80% |
| Calvin Coolidge | 2.72% | Donald Trump 2nd (1 year) | 1.79% |
| Donald Trump 1st (3 years) | 2.67% | Nixon/Ford | 1.56% |
| Nixon/Ford | 2.53% | Calvin Coolidge | 1.33% |
| Donald Trump 2nd (1 year) | 2.34% | George W. Bush | 1.24% |
| George H. W. Bush | 2.23% | Dwight D. Eisenhower | 1.19% |
| Woodrow Wilson | 2.22% | George H. W. Bush | 1.03% |
| George W. Bush | 2.20% | Donald Trump 1st | 0.90% |
| Theodore Roosevelt | 1.82% | Barack H. Obama | 0.85% |
| George W. Bush (3 years) | 1.81% | George W. Bush (3 years) | 0.84% |
| Barack H. Obama | 1.66% | Woodrow Wilson | 0.82% |
| Donald Trump 1st | 1.46% | Theodore Roosevelt | -0.11% |
| Barack H. Obama (3 years) | 0.54% | Barack H. Obama (3 years) | -0.30% |
| Roosevelt/Truman | -2.58% | Roosevelt/Truman | -3.97% |
| Herbert Hoover | -5.67% | Herbert Hoover | -6.62% |
These two tables rank the Presidents by the amount of annual growth in both real GDP and GDP per capita. For each President there were events that influenced growth during their term. Some might have been their policies; some might have been the policies of their predecessor; and most were probably the result of other things beyond their control.
With these cautions in mind, FDR stands at the top of the lists. He took office near the trough of the Great Depression and died near the peak of the cycle, close to the end of World War II. Roosevelt/Truman ranks second to last,9 which is explained partly by the fall in government’s share of GDP from 42% to 16% between 1945 and 1947. Obama ranks near the bottom because he came to office in the middle of the Great Recession, the worst downturn since the Depression of the 1930s.
We also see that of the top seven administrations on the list, five are Democrats. While some of this is explained by business cycles, and war and peace, the higher ranking of Clinton and Carter administrations is not. Of the twelve full terms at the bottom of the list, nine are Republicans.
Table 3 separates the growth in GDP into the share contributed by government expenditures, and that from the private sector. Note, these are government expenditures and do not include transfer payments.10 The government share of GDP is not available until after WWII. Because Table 3 uses quarterly data, with each term measured from the quarter a president was elected to the quarter his successor was elected, its growth rates will not exactly match the annual figures in Tables 1 and 2.
Table 3 -- Annualized Growth rate of Quarterly GDP with and without the Government Share (quarterly observations in $billions)
| Year & Quarter | Real GDP | Real Gov Expenditures | GDP - Gov | President | GDP Growth | Gov Growth | GDP - Gov Growth |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1948 IV | 2,292 | 618 | 1,674 | ||||
| 1952 IV | 2,844 | 1,103 | 1,741 | Truman | 5.54% | 15.59% | 0.98% |
| 1960 IV | 3,470 | 1,187 | 2,284 | Eisenhower | 2.52% | 0.91% | 3.45% |
| 1968 IV | 5,202 | 1,723 | 3,479 | Kennedy/Johnson | 5.19% | 4.77% | 5.40% |
| 1976 IV | 6,451 | 1,710 | 4,741 | Nixon/Ford | 2.73% | -0.09% | 3.94% |
| 1980 IV | 7,316 | 1,842 | 5,474 | Carter | 3.19% | 1.87% | 3.66% |
| 1988 IV | 9,673 | 2,434 | 7,240 | Reagan | 3.55% | 3.55% | 3.56% |
| 1992 IV | 10,559 | 2,593 | 7,965 | Bush I | 2.21% | 1.60% | 2.42% |
| 2000 IV | 14,230 | 2,865 | 11,365 | Clinton | 3.80% | 1.25% | 4.54% |
| 2003 IV | 15,163 | 3,179 | 11,984 | Bush II (3 years) | 2.14% | 3.53% | 1.78% |
| 2008 IV | 16,485 | 3,459 | 13,026 | Bush II | 1.86% | 2.38% | 1.72% |
| 2011 IV | 17,223 | 3,395 | 13,828 | Obama (3 years) | 1.47% | -0.62% | 2.01% |
| 2016 IV | 19,304 | 3,390 | 15,914 | Obama | 1.99% | -0.25% | 2.53% |
| 2019 IV | 20,985 | 3,655 | 17,330 | Trump 1st (3 years) | 2.82% | 2.54% | 2.88% |
| 2020 IV | 20,792 | 3,713 | 17,079 | Trump 1st | 1.87% | 2.30% | 1.78% |
| 2023 IV | 23,033 | 3,912 | 19,121 | Biden (3 years) | 3.47% | 1.75% | 3.84% |
| 2024 IV | 23,642 | 4,067 | 19,575 | Biden | 3.26% | 2.30% | 3.47% |
| 2026 II | 24,408 | 4,087 | 20,321 | Trump 2nd (6 quarters) | 2.15% | 0.32% | 2.53% |
One way to see how well the private economy performs is to compare its growth rate with the growth of the economy as a whole. The second part of this table shows the difference between the two. The larger the number, the more the private sector is leading the economy. We see that peacetime presidents do the best. First it is Nixon/Ford, then Eisenhower followed by Clinton, Obama and Carter. The G. W. Bush administration is negative in this comparison, as is Truman’s, as explained below. Through the first eighteen months of his second term, Trump’s total GDP growth of 2.15% is low, slightly above Obama’s 1.99% and well below the 2.82% of his first three years.
A perpetual platform of the Republican Party is to reduce the share of government in the economy. The Eisenhower and Nixon/Ford administrations were leaders in doing just that. Reagan and the Bushes were not able to follow this prescription as well and were worse at it than all Democrat administrations except Truman and Kennedy/Johnson. An increase in military expenditures shows up in the Truman administration with the Korean War, the Kennedy/Johnson administrations with the Vietnam War, the doubling of the defense budget during the Reagan administration,11 and the wars with Iraq by both Bush presidents.12
Table 4 presents the interest and maximum tax rates by each administration. The interest rate reported is the federal funds rate. The tax rates are the maximum marginal individual and corporate rates, that is, the rate paid on each additional dollar of income in the top bracket.13
Table 4 -- The change in Interest Rates, Income and Corporate Tax Rates by Presidential Terms 1900 to 2026 (annual observations)
| President | Years | Interest Rate (Start) | Interest Rate (End) | Change | Income Tax Rate Change | Corporate Tax Rate Change |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Theodore Roosevelt | 1901 to 1908 | 2.94% | 1.92% | -1.02% | ||
| William Howard Taft | 1909 to 1912 | 1.92% | 3.52% | 1.60% | 1% to 1% | |
| Woodrow Wilson | 1913 to 1920 | 3.52% | 7.74% | 4.22% | 7% to 73% | 1% to 10% |
| Harding/ Coolidge | 1921 to 1924 | 7.74% | 3.08% | -4.66% | 73% to 46% | 10% to 13% |
| Calvin Coolidge | 1925 to 1928 | 3.08% | 6.04% | 2.96% | 46% to 25% | 13% to 12% |
| Herbert Hoover | 1929 to 1932 | 6.04% | 2.05% | -3.99% | 25% to 63% | 12% to 13.75% |
| F. D. Roosevelt | 1933 to 1944 | 2.05% | 1.00% | -1.05% | 63% to 94% | 13.75% to 40% |
| Roosevelt/Truman | 1945 to 1948 | 1.00% | 1.55% | 0.55% | 94% to 91% | 40% to 40% |
| Harry S. Truman | 1949 to 1952 | 1.55% | 2.48% | 0.93% | 91% to 92% | 40% to 51% |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower | 1953 to 1960 | 2.48% | 3.22% | 0.74% | 92% to 91% | 51% to 52% |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 1961 to 1964 | 3.22% | 3.50% | 0.28% | 91% to 77% | 52% to 50% |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | 1965 to 1968 | 3.50% | 5.66% | 2.16% | 77% to 70% | 50% to 52.8% |
| Richard M. Nixon | 1969 to 1972 | 5.66% | 4.43% | -1.23% | 70% to 70% | 52.8% to 48% |
| Nixon/Ford | 1973 to 1976 | 4.43% | 5.04% | 0.61% | 70% to 70% | 48% to 48% |
| Jimmy Carter | 1977 to 1980 | 5.04% | 13.35% | 8.31% | 70% to 70% | 48% to 46% |
| Ronald Reagan | 1981 to 1988 | 13.35% | 7.57% | -5.78% | 70% to 28% | 46% to 34% |
| George H. W. Bush | 1989 to 1992 | 7.57% | 3.52% | -4.05% | 28% to 39.6% | 34% to 34% |
| Bill Clinton | 1993 to 2000 | 3.52% | 6.24% | 2.72% | 39.6% to 39.1% | 34% to 35% |
| George W. Bush | 2001 to 2008 | 6.24% | 1.93% | -4.31% | 39.1 to 35% | 35% to 35% |
| Barack H. Obama | 2009 to 2016 | 1.93% | 0.40% | -1.53% | 35% to 39.6% | 35% to 35% |
| Donald Trump 1st | 2017 to 2020 | 0.40% | 0.38% | -0.02% | 39.6% to 37% | 35% to 21% |
| Joseph Biden | 2021 to 2024 | 0.38% | 5.14% | 4.76% | 37% to 37% | 21% to 21% |
| Donald Trump 2nd (17 months) | 2025 to Q2 2026 | 5.14% | 3.63% | -1.51% | 37% to 37% | 21% to 21% |
Carter and Biden had the largest increase in interest rates for four years or less, and as we mentioned above, both faced above average inflation rates. Higher inflation usually generates higher interest rates. The rate increases in 1928 were the FED’s attempt to dampen stock speculation. The 2.72% increase in the Clinton term reflects the problem of using just the first and last observations. The large interest rate increase during the Biden term was due to the FED maintaining a very low rate for two years from April 2020 to April 2022 and then increasing it rapidly for the next 12 months to fight inflation.
The story from the maximum marginal income tax rates is consistent with political expectations; five of the eight times income tax rates were decreased, it was during a Republican administration. In only one case, Harding/Coolidge, does a Republican administration raise the maximum corporate tax rate. And in only one case out of the four times the maximum corporate tax was decreased was it done by a Democrat administration.
The largest increase in the maximum of both taxes rates was to finance the two world wars, the largest decrease in the personal income tax was during the Reagan administration and in the corporate tax during the first Trump administration.
Table 5 shows the number of employees in the different sectors of the economy using monthly data.
Table 6 gives the percentage increase in the number of employees in each category by administration
and Table 7 gives the ranking of that growth by the seven different measures. These data are also only available after WWII.
Table 5 -- Number of Workers Employed in January at the end of the term of Fifteen Post WWII Administrations (observations in thousands)
| President | All Employees | All Employees Private | Manufacturing | Services | All Government | Federal Government | State & Local Government |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Truman | 49,470 | 42,667 | 15,973 | 23,313 | 6,803 | 2,482 | 4,321 |
| Eisenhower | 52,780 | 44,208 | 14,697 | 26,245 | 8,572 | 2,316 | 6,256 |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 58,561 | 48,603 | 16,044 | 29,008 | 9,958 | 2,437 | 7,521 |
| Johnson | 68,494 | 56,234 | 18,271 | 34,096 | 12,260 | 2,869 | 9,391 |
| Nixon | 74,613 | 60,862 | 18,076 | 38,486 | 13,751 | 2,779 | 10,972 |
| Nixon/Ford | 79,540 | 64,471 | 17,601 | 42,747 | 15,069 | 2,819 | 12,250 |
| Carter | 89,837 | 73,487 | 18,482 | 49,880 | 16,350 | 2,927 | 13,423 |
| Reagan | 105,743 | 88,003 | 17,939 | 64,435 | 17,740 | 3,126 | 14,614 |
| Bush I | 108,099 | 89,260 | 16,661 | 67,702 | 18,839 | 3,075 | 15,764 |
| Clinton | 130,668 | 109,915 | 16,993 | 85,936 | 20,753 | 2,741 | 18,012 |
| Bush II (3 years) | 128,709 | 107,266 | 14,171 | 86,105 | 21,443 | 2,707 | 18,736 |
| Bush II | 132,022 | 109,551 | 12,440 | 90,212 | 22,471 | 2,772 | 19,699 |
| Obama (3 years) | 131,095 | 109,285 | 11,717 | 91,507 | 21,810 | 2,810 | 19,000 |
| Obama | 143,374 | 121,203 | 12,245 | 101,863 | 22,171 | 2,800 | 19,371 |
| Trump 1st (3 years) | 150,057 | 127,407 | 12,666 | 106,820 | 22,650 | 2,835 | 19,815 |
| Trump 1st | 140,975 | 119,315 | 12,066 | 99,675 | 21,660 | 2,866 | 18,794 |
| Biden (3 years) | 154,942 | 131,909 | 12,800 | 110,728 | 23,033 | 2,963 | 20,070 |
| Biden | 157,095 | 133,595 | 12,676 | 112,345 | 23,500 | 3,002 | 20,498 |
| Trump 2nd (18 months) | 158,726 | 136,598 | 12,703 | 114,752 | 22,128 | 2,687 | 19,441 |
Table 6 -- Annualized Growth in Employment for Different Administrations
| President | All Employees | All Employees Private | Manufacturing | Services | All Government | Federal Government | State & Local Government |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Truman | 2.88% | 2.68% | 3.66% | 2.22% | 3.73% | 5.71% | 2.67% |
| Eisenhower | 0.81% | 0.44% | -1.04% | 1.49% | 2.93% | -0.86% | 4.73% |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 2.63% | 2.40% | 2.22% | 2.53% | 3.82% | 1.28% | 4.71% |
| Johnson | 3.99% | 3.71% | 3.30% | 4.12% | 5.34% | 4.16% | 5.71% |
| Nixon | 1.07% | 0.84% | -1.65% | 1.96% | 2.12% | -0.52% | 2.88% |
| Nixon/Ford | 2.71% | 2.61% | 0.73% | 3.79% | 3.11% | 0.08% | 3.87% |
| Carter | 3.09% | 3.33% | 1.23% | 3.93% | 2.06% | 0.94% | 2.31% |
| Reagan | 2.06% | 2.28% | -0.37% | 3.25% | 1.03% | 0.83% | 1.07% |
| Bush I | 0.55% | 0.36% | -1.83% | 1.24% | 1.51% | -0.41% | 1.91% |
| Clinton | 2.40% | 2.64% | 0.25% | 3.03% | 1.22% | -1.43% | 1.68% |
| Bush II (3 years) | -0.50% | -0.81% | -5.87% | 0.07% | 1.10% | -0.42% | 1.32% |
| Bush II | 0.13% | -0.04% | -3.82% | 0.61% | 1.00% | 0.14% | 1.13% |
| Obama (3 years) | -0.23% | -0.08% | -1.98% | 0.48% | -0.99% | 0.45% | -1.20% |
| Obama | 1.04% | 1.27% | -0.20% | 1.53% | -0.17% | 0.13% | -0.21% |
| Trump 1st (3 years) | 1.53% | 1.68% | 1.13% | 1.60% | 0.72% | 0.41% | 0.76% |
| Trump 1st | -0.42% | -0.39% | -0.37% | -0.54% | -0.58% | 0.58% | -0.75% |
| Biden (3 years) | 3.20% | 3.40% | 1.99% | 3.57% | 2.07% | 1.12% | 2.21% |
| Biden | 2.74% | 2.87% | 1.24% | 3.04% | 2.06% | 1.17% | 2.19% |
| Trump 2nd (18 months) | 0.69% | 1.49% | 0.14% | 1.42% | -3.93% | -7.12% | -3.47% |
Table 7 -- Ranking of Annualized Growth in Employment by Sector
| All Employees | All Employees Private | Manufacturing | Services | All Government | Federal Government | State & Local Government |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1Johnson | 1Johnson | 1Truman | 1Johnson | 1Johnson | 1Truman | 1Johnson |
| 2Biden (3 years) | 2Biden (3 years) | 2Johnson | 2Carter | 2Kennedy/ |
2Johnson | 2Eisenhower |
| 3Carter | 3Carter | 3Kennedy/ |
3Nixon/ |
3Truman | 3Kennedy/ |
3Kennedy/ |
| 4Truman | 4Biden | 4Biden (3 years) | 4Biden (3 years) | 4Nixon/ |
4Biden | 4Nixon/ |
| 5Biden | 5Truman | 5Biden | 5Reagan | 5Eisenhower | 5Biden (3 years) | 5Nixon |
| 6Nixon/ |
6Clinton | 6Carter | 6Biden | 6Nixon | 6Carter | 6Truman |
| 7Kennedy/ |
7Nixon/ |
7Trump 1st (3 years) | 7Clinton | 7Biden (3 years) | 7Reagan | 7Carter |
| 8Clinton | 8Kennedy/ |
8Nixon/ |
8Kennedy/ |
8Carter | 8Trump 1st | 8Biden (3 years) |
| 9Reagan | 9Reagan | 9Clinton | 9Truman | 9Biden | 9Obama (3 years) | 9Biden |
| 10Trump 1st (3 years) | 10Trump 1st (3 years) | 10Trump 2nd (18 months) | 10Nixon | 10Bush I | 10Trump 1st (3 years) | 10Bush I |
| 11Nixon | 11Trump 2nd (18 months) | 11Obama | 11Trump 1st (3 years) | 11Clinton | 11Bush II | 11Clinton |
| 12Obama | 12Obama | 12Trump 1st | 12Obama | 12Bush II (3 years) | 12Obama | 12Bush II (3 years) |
| 13Eisenhower | 13Nixon | 13Reagan | 13Eisenhower | 13Reagan | 13Nixon/ |
13Bush II |
| 14Trump 2nd (18 months) | 14Eisenhower | 14Eisenhower | 14Trump 2nd (18 months) | 14Bush II | 14Bush I | 14Reagan |
| 15Bush I | 15Bush I | 15Nixon | 15Bush I | 15Trump 1st (3 years) | 15Bush II (3 years) | 15Trump 1st (3 years) |
| 16Bush II | 16Bush II | 16Bush I | 16Bush II | 16Obama | 16Nixon | 16Obama |
| 17Obama (3 years) | 17Obama (3 years) | 17Obama (3 years) | 17Obama (3 years) | 17Trump 1st | 17Eisenhower | 17Trump 1st |
| 18Trump 1st | 18Trump 1st | 18Bush II | 18Bush II (3 years) | 18Obama (3 years) | 18Clinton | 18Obama (3 years) |
| 19Bush II (3 years) | 19Bush II (3 years) | 19Bush II (3 years) | 19Trump 1st | 19Trump 2nd (18 months) | 19Trump 2nd (18 months) | 19Trump 2nd (18 months) |
Six of the seven top administrations in rank of growth in total private employment are Democratic administrations.
There were 18.5 million manufacturing workers at the end of the Carter administration in 1981, the largest total in the country’s history. This number declined for the next four decades and was 12.7 million when Trump took office for the second time in 2025. Almost 80% of that decline took place from 2001 to 2009, the G. W. Bush term when globalization was in vogue. During the first three years of the first Trump administration, there was an increase of about 420,000 jobs in manufacturing, but his term ended with about 180,000 fewer such workers than when it started because of the COVID epidemic.
Government Employment is a bit paradoxical. The maximum number of Federal Government employees was 3.1 million at the end of the Reagan administration. For the rest of the 20th century it dropped with the largest decrease of a third of a million workers during the Clinton Administration. It then increased back to the 3 million level by the end of the Biden administration, before falling by 315,000 in the first eighteen months of the second Trump administration. At the same time, there has been about a 21% increase in the population.
State and Local Government employment saw steady increases from the time of Truman to the end of the 20th century. For this century, the employment of these governments has stayed about the same while the population they serve increased by about 60 million.
Table 8 presents the total federal debt at the end of each president’s term in $billions from 1900, and its ratio to GDP.14 The third column presents the annualized growth of the total debt during their years in office. The debt goes up when the government increases its spending or has a reduction in revenue. The latter happens in recessions when tax revenue falls with the fall in incomes, or when tax rates have been decreased. Spending is set by Congress, either in its annual budget process or by existing law for programs such as Social Security and Medicare.
Table 8 -- Total Federal Debt at the end of each President's term in $ billions and the annualized growth during their years in Office.
| Year | Debt in $Bill | Growth | President | Debt/GDP |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1900 | $2.14 | 0.1 | ||
| 1908 | $2.63 | 2.61% | Theodore Roosevelt | 0.09 |
| 1912 | $2.87 | 2.22% | William Howard Taft | 0.08 |
| 1920 | $25.95 | 31.69% | Woodrow Wilson | 0.29 |
| 1924 | $21.25 | -4.87% | Harding/ Coolidge | 0.24 |
| 1928 | $17.60 | -4.60% | Calvin Coolidge | 0.18 |
| 1932 | $19.49 | 2.57% | Herbert Hoover | 0.33 |
| 1944 | $201.00 | 21.47% | F. D. Roosevelt | 0.9 |
| 1948 | $252.29 | 5.85% | Roosevelt/Truman | 0.92 |
| 1952 | $259.10 | 0.67% | Harry S. Truman | 0.71 |
| 1960 | $290.53 | 1.44% | Dwight D. Eisenhower | 0.54 |
| 1964 | $316.06 | 2.13% | Kennedy/Johnson | 0.46 |
| 1968 | $354.74 | 2.93% | Lyndon B. Johnson | 0.37 |
| 1972 | $433.95 | 5.17% | Richard M. Nixon | 0.34 |
| 1976 | $634.70 | 9.97% | Nixon/Ford | 0.34 |
| 1980 | $907.70 | 9.36% | Jimmy Carter | 0.32 |
| 1988 | $2,602.18 | 14.07% | Ronald Reagan | 0.49 |
| 1992 | $4,064.62 | 11.80% | George H. W. Bush | 0.62 |
| 2000 | $5,674.18 | 4.26% | Bill Clinton | 0.55 |
| 2003 | $6,783.32 | 6.13% | George W. Bush (3 years) | 0.59 |
| 2008 | $10,024.73 | 7.37% | George W. Bush | 0.67 |
| 2011 | $14,790.34 | 13.84% | Barack H. Obama (3 years) | 0.95 |
| 2016 | $19,573.45 | 8.72% | Barack H. Obama | 1.04 |
| 2019 | $22,719.44 | 5.09% | Donald Trump 1st (3 years) | 1.05 |
| 2020 | $26,945.39 | 8.32% | Donald Trump 1st | 1.24 |
| 2023 | $33,167.33 | 7.17% | Joseph Biden (3 years) | 1.18 |
| 2024 | $35,464.67 | 7.11% | Joseph Biden | 1.20 |
| 2026 (Q2) | $39,462.40 | 6.29% | Donald Trump 2nd (7 quarters) | 1.21 |
Table 8b -- Ranking of increase in Federal Debt during each President's term.
| President | Growth |
|---|---|
| Harding/ Coolidge | -4.87% |
| Calvin Coolidge | -4.60% |
| Harry S. Truman | 0.67% |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower | 1.44% |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 2.13% |
| William Howard Taft | 2.22% |
| Herbert Hoover | 2.57% |
| Theodore Roosevelt | 2.61% |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | 2.93% |
| Bill Clinton | 4.26% |
| Donald Trump 1st (3 years) | 5.09% |
| Richard M. Nixon | 5.17% |
| Roosevelt/Truman | 5.85% |
| George W. Bush (3 years) | 6.13% |
| Donald Trump 2nd (7 quarters) | 6.29% |
| Joseph Biden | 7.11% |
| Joseph Biden (3 years) | 7.17% |
| George W. Bush | 7.37% |
| Donald Trump 1st | 8.32% |
| Barack H. Obama | 8.72% |
| Jimmy Carter | 9.36% |
| Nixon/Ford | 9.97% |
| George H. W. Bush | 11.80% |
| Barack H. Obama (3 years) | 13.84% |
| Ronald Reagan | 14.07% |
| F. D. Roosevelt | 21.47% |
| Woodrow Wilson | 31.69% |
It is not surprising that the largest increases were during the terms of Wilson and FDR who were financing the two World Wars. Between the wars, the attitude was to reduce the debt by running surpluses to pay off the war borrowing. After WWII, the same attitude prevailed and in January 1956, Eisenhower was to say "In this connection, I should mention our enormous national debt. We must begin to make some payments on it if we are to avoid passing on to our children an impossible burden of debt."15 For the next two administrations the growth was back to the peacetime levels. After that, the growth rate went up. When Carter left office, it was at the low rate of 32% of GDP, the lowest level since the Coolidge administration.16 It is now 121%.
Eisenhower was opposed to any tax cuts until the budget was balanced. Kennedy proposed a tax cut that Johnson was able to get passed, and the economy grew so fast (as we saw in Table 1) that “it paid for itself.”17
The three large tax cuts of Reagan, Bush II, and Trump were all promoted with the claim that they also would pay for themselves. The rhetoric ran that if the Kennedy/Johnson cut had paid for itself, further cuts should do the same. This was a flawed analogy. After the Kennedy/Johnson cut, which lowered the top rate from 91% to 77%, most high incomes were still heavily taxed. Reagan’s cut, from 70% to 28%, meant that less than a third of that income was now being taxed. Estimates suggest that financing this cut through growth alone would have required the economy to expand at 8% to 10% a year for years on end. As Table 1 showed, the only time the economy grew at that pace was during the mobilization for World War II, beginning in 1941.
The largest post-war deficit increase was during the Reagan administration.18 The exception for the rest of the years of our study was during the Clinton administration where there were budget surpluses. Eisenhower would have been pleased with what Clinton accomplished. For the entire twenty-first century, the U.S. Federal debt has been growing at an average of almost 8% a year. Of the ten administrations that the deficit increased the most, five were Democrats including the two World War presidents while five were Republicans.
Tables 9 and 10 show the performance of the stock market during the Presidential terms since 1900.
Households are the owners of the stocks in the economy and in the 126 years we are studying, the S&P index of the value of this wealth, assuming dividends are reinvested, has increased at an annualized rate of 9.87%. The MeasuringWorth saving comparator shows that a dollar invested in 1900 and held to 2024, with all dividends reinvested, would be worth $102,000.
The stock market is an important part of household wealth. The performance of the market during a president’s term is often used as a measure of economic performance. When the market goes up, people’s wealth goes up, and they are happier regardless of whether or not the president’s actions were responsible.
Table 9 -- Gain in the Stock market from Election and Inauguration Day, deflated by the GDP deflator, by Presidents since 1900, in 1900 dollars. (daily observations)
| President | Real DJIA on Election day* | Real annualized growth to next election day | Real DJIA on Inauguration Day | Real annualized growth to next Inauguration | Real percent change between Election and Inauguration | Real DJIA on the date of the term high | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McKinley/Roosevelt | 46.71 | -2.71% | 48.09 | 0.32% | 3% | 55.68 | 17-Jun-1901 |
| Theodore Roosevelt | 41.85 | 4.52% | 48.70 | -0.22% | 16% | 63.69 | 19-Jan-1906 |
| William Howard Taft | 49.94 | 0.58% | 48.27 | -1.99% | -3% | 59.32 | 19-Nov-1909 |
| Woodrow Wilson 1st | 51.11 | 7.65% | 44.54 | 2.66% | -13% | 70.76 | 21-Nov-1916 |
| Woodrow Wilson 2nd | 68.63 | -17.16% | 49.47 | -9.13% | -28% | 52.17 | 3-Nov-1919 |
| Harding/ Coolidge | 32.32 | 11.09% | 33.73 | 13.85% | 4% | 57.59 | 3-Mar-1925 |
| Calvin Coolidge | 49.22 | 24.65% | 56.67 | 26.61% | 15% | 149.44 | 5-Feb-1929 |
| Herbert Hoover | 118.83 | -25.61% | 145.63 | -30.79% | 23% | 176.86 | 3-Sep-1929 |
| F. D. Roosevelt 1st | 36.38 | 29.90% | 33.42 | 33.56% | -8% | 102.73 | 16-Jan-1937 |
| F. D. Roosevelt 2nd | 103.60 | -7.38% | 102.86 | -9.63% | -1% | 107.53 | 10-Mar-1937 |
| F. D. Roosevelt 3rd | 76.25 | -3.01% | 68.59 | -0.19% | -10% | 69.46 | 11-Jan-1945 |
| Roosevelt/Truman | 67.48 | -2.87% | 68.06 | -2.65% | 1% | 84.09 | 29-May-1946 |
| Harry S. Truman | 60.05 | 8.43% | 61.13 | 9.22% | 2% | 88.75 | 5-Jan-1953 |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 1st | 83.01 | 14.21% | 87.00 | 10.79% | 5% | 148.56 | 6-Apr-1956 |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 2nd | 141.24 | 2.55% | 131.08 | 5.84% | -7% | 179.66 | 5-Jan-1960 |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 156.23 | 8.68% | 164.47 | 7.47% | 5% | 219.61 | 19-Jan-1965 |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | 217.92 | -0.90% | 219.37 | -2.64% | 1% | 237.11 | 9-Feb-1966 |
| Richard M. Nixon | 210.16 | -3.73% | 197.13 | -2.63% | -6% | 182.94 | 11-Jan-1973 |
| Nixon /Ford | 180.48 | -7.36% | 177.22 | -8.36% | -2% | 177.22 | 22-Jan-1973 |
| Jimmy Carter | 132.95 | -7.67% | 125.00 | -7.99% | -6% | 94.66 | 6-Jan-1981 |
| Ronald Reagan 1st | 96.62 | 1.50% | 89.57 | 2.99% | -7% | 109.91 | 29-Nov-1983 |
| Ronald Reagan 2nd | 102.54 | 11.48% | 100.77 | 12.04% | -2% | 208.04 | 25-Aug-1987 |
| George Bush | 158.40 | 7.38% | 158.77 | 6.60% | 0% | 221.01 | 1-Jun-1992 |
| Bill Clinton 1st | 210.61 | 14.52% | 205.05 | 18.23% | -3% | 400.09 | 17-Jan-1997 |
| Bill Clinton 2nd | 362.23 | 13.99% | 400.72 | 9.56% | 11% | 654.59 | 14-Jan-2000 |
| George W. Bush 1st | 611.55 | -4.19% | 577.33 | -2.52% | -6% | 618.79 | 21-May-2001 |
| George W. Bush 2nd | 515.30 | -3.65% | 521.39 | -8.57% | 1% | 665.99 | 9-Oct-2007 |
| Barack H. Obama 1st | 444.18 | 6.76% | 364.42 | 12.68% | -18% | 584.76 | 18-Jan-2013 |
| Barack H. Obama 2nd | 577.07 | 7.04% | 587.44 | 8.19% | 2% | 825.50 | 20-Dec-2016 |
| Donald Trump 1st | 757.64 | 9.09% | 804.99 | 9.31% | 6% | 1,146.13 | 8-Jan-2021 |
| Joseph Biden | 1,072.89 | 6.20% | 1,149.46 | 4.80% | 7% | 1,455.19 | 4-Dec-2024 |
| Donald Trump 2nd (thru 6/30/2026) | 1,364.92 | 10.28% | 1,386.80 | 10.64% | 2% | 1,603.98 | 30-Jun-2026 |
DJIA closes divided by the GDP deflator for the calendar year of each date, expressed in 1900 dollars. The 2026 values use a provisional deflator: the 2025 annual deflator extended by the change in BEA’s quarterly deflator through the second quarter of 2026.
If a new President is regarded as good for the stock market, we would expect that this will be reflected by faster increases in the indexes than a President who is regarded as a danger to the market. This impact can start the day they are elected or the day they are inaugurated. As expectations change, the market will change. Between the day Herbert Hoover was elected and the day he took office, the real DJIA increased 22.5%. Investors were pleased with their new president. On the last day Hoover was in office, with the economy deep in depression, the real DJIA stood at 28% of its value four years earlier on his election day. Many people make comparisons of the four years between the days after the election and others choose the four years between inaugurations, so both are presented here. One argument is that investors are thinking about who will be president, while the other is that they only think of who is president.
In 2008, between the day Obama was elected and the day he was inaugurated, the economy was in the downturn of a recession, and the real DJIA fell 18%. The market would be falling regardless of who was the president. His next term it went up 1.8% during that same period.
During their terms, all presidents have had a day where the market was highest. Measured in 1900 dollars on that day, the highest value during the two terms of Reagan was 120% higher than the highest in Carter's term. The highest value in the Clinton administration was 215% higher than the highest during the Reagan term.
In real terms, the highest value in the Trump term was 39 percent higher than the highest during the previous Obama term, while the highest value in the Biden term was 27 percent higher than the highest during the first Trump term. Through June 2026, the highest value in the second Trump term was 10 percent higher than the highest during the Biden term.
Table 10 -- Ranking of real (GDP-deflated) Gain in the Stock Market by Presidents since 1900.
| President | Since Election | President | Since Inauguration |
|---|---|---|---|
| F. D. Roosevelt 1st | 29.90% | F. D. Roosevelt 1st | 33.56% |
| Calvin Coolidge | 24.65% | Calvin Coolidge | 26.61% |
| Bill Clinton 1st | 14.52% | Bill Clinton 1st | 18.23% |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 1st | 14.21% | Harding/ Coolidge | 13.85% |
| Bill Clinton 2nd | 13.99% | Barack H. Obama 1st | 12.68% |
| Ronald Reagan 2nd | 11.48% | Ronald Reagan 2nd | 12.04% |
| Harding/ Coolidge | 11.09% | Dwight D. Eisenhower 1st | 10.79% |
| Donald Trump 2nd (thru 6/30/2026) | 10.28% | Donald Trump 2nd (thru 6/30/2026) | 10.64% |
| Donald Trump 1st | 9.09% | Bill Clinton 2nd | 9.56% |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 8.68% | Donald Trump 1st | 9.31% |
| Harry S. Truman | 8.43% | Harry S. Truman | 9.22% |
| Woodrow Wilson 1st | 7.65% | Barack H. Obama 2nd | 8.19% |
| George Bush | 7.38% | Kennedy/Johnson | 7.47% |
| Barack H. Obama 2nd | 7.04% | George Bush | 6.60% |
| Barack H. Obama 1st | 6.76% | Dwight D. Eisenhower 2nd | 5.84% |
| Joseph Biden | 6.20% | Joseph Biden | 4.80% |
| Theodore Roosevelt | 4.52% | Ronald Reagan 1st | 2.99% |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 2nd | 2.55% | Woodrow Wilson 1st | 2.66% |
| Ronald Reagan 1st | 1.50% | McKinley/Roosevelt | 0.32% |
| William Howard Taft | 0.58% | F. D. Roosevelt 3rd | -0.19% |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | -0.90% | Theodore Roosevelt | -0.22% |
| McKinley/Roosevelt | -2.71% | William Howard Taft | -1.99% |
| Roosevelt/Truman | -2.87% | George W. Bush 1st | -2.52% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 3rd | -3.01% | Richard M. Nixon | -2.63% |
| George W. Bush 2nd | -3.65% | Lyndon B. Johnson | -2.64% |
| Richard M. Nixon | -3.73% | Roosevelt/Truman | -2.65% |
| George W. Bush 1st | -4.19% | Jimmy Carter | -7.99% |
| Nixon /Ford | -7.36% | Nixon /Ford | -8.36% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 2nd | -7.38% | George W. Bush 2nd | -8.57% |
| Jimmy Carter | -7.67% | Woodrow Wilson 2nd | -9.13% |
| Woodrow Wilson 2nd | -17.16% | F. D. Roosevelt 2nd | -9.63% |
| Herbert Hoover | -25.61% | Herbert Hoover | -30.79% |
While the growth in financial holdings such as 401(k)s and IRAs are important to the improvement of a household's well-being, the changes in the value of their home is much more important.
Tables 11 and 12 show the value of housing during the Presidential terms since 1900, using the Case-Shiller Home Price Index (HPI) as the measure. Today there are close to 150 million homes in the US, and they are owned by 65% of households. Around 4 million of them are sold each year. At least since WWII, the ratio of the value of the average house to the annual median household income has been around five. For example, today the median price of existing homes is $434,100 and median household income is around $87,500. A one percent increase in the home value of the owner of a median price home today represents about a $4,300 increase in wealth, or about 5% of the median household’s income.
To most of these households their home is their most important asset and often what the owners plan to sell to retire. There is little Presidents do that directly impacts housing prices, however, when discussing how much better or worse off people are after each president’s term, the value of their most important asset should be considered. While there are considerable concerns in today’s discussions about the high cost of housing, millions of homeowners are not complaining about how their wealth has increased.
Over the long run the main driving force of the value of housing is prices. For the 126 years we are studying, the correlation between the HPI and the GDP deflator is .96, however, there are exceptions to the close relationship:
1 Between 1945 and 1947, the HPI increased 50% as the deflator went up 25%.
2 During the Carter administration, the HPI increased 63% as the deflator went up 34%.
3 From 2006 to 2011, the HPI fell 24% while the deflator dropped only 9%.
4 During the Obama administration, the HPI increased 10.3%, or an increase in average household wealth of $44,600.
5 During the first Trump administration, the HPI increased 22.8%, or an increase in average household wealth of $98,800.
6 For the Biden administration, the HPI increased 44.7%, or an increase in average household wealth of $194,000. This shows that, since Biden was elected, 65% of US households have seen their wealth increase by more than two years of their annual income.
7 Through June 2026 of the second Trump administration, the HPI has increased 4.8%, while the GDP deflator increased 6.2%, so there was a real loss in household wealth.
In contrast to prices and wages, most households do not have a clear idea of the value of their home though the process of refinancing that requires an appraisal and sites such as Zillow have changed that a bit.
This may explain why, in reading the many discussions of which president was best for the economy, there is much talk about the costs of commodities, often compared to incomes, but hardly any discussion of the changes in the largest component of household wealth, the home.19
Table 11 -- The Annualized Annual Growth of the Case-Shiller Home Price Index
| President | Years in Office | HPI Year of Election | HPI Year of Inauguration | Annualized Rate (Election to Election) | Annualized Rate (Inauguration to Inauguration) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McKinley/Roosevelt | 1901 to 1904 | 3.749 | 3.145 | 1.25% | 2.36% |
| Theodore Roosevelt | 1905 to 1908 | 3.94 | 3.453 | 0.87% | 3.66% |
| William Howard Taft | 1909 to 1912 | 4.08 | 3.987 | 1.73% | 2.32% |
| Woodrow Wilson 1st | 1913 to 1916 | 4.37 | 4.37 | 1.05% | 1.56% |
| Woodrow Wilson 2nd | 1917 to 1920 | 4.555 | 4.648 | 6.95% | 5.81% |
| Harding/ Coolidge | 1921 to 1924 | 5.96 | 5.826 | 0.19% | 2.05% |
| Calvin Coolidge | 1925 to 1928 | 6.006 | 6.32 | -0.34% | -2.11% |
| Herbert Hoover | 1929 to 1932 | 5.925 | 5.803 | -6.30% | -6.72% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 1st | 1933 to 1936 | 4.567 | 4.393 | 2.91% | 4.57% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 2nd | 1937 to 1940 | 5.122 | 5.253 | 0.90% | -1.90% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 3rd | 1941 to 1944 | 5.309 | 4.864 | 5.31% | 10.68% |
| Roosevelt/Truman | 1945 to 1948 | 6.531 | 7.3 | 14.47% | 11.35% |
| Harry S. Truman | 1949 to 1952 | 11.212 | 11.222 | 3.52% | 6.29% |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 1st | 1953 to 1956 | 12.877 | 14.323 | 3.02% | 1.01% |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 2nd | 1957 to 1960 | 14.506 | 14.911 | 1.18% | 0.60% |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 1961 to 1964 | 15.2 | 15.274 | 1.05% | 1.27% |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | 1965 to 1968 | 15.848 | 16.065 | 1.82% | 3.08% |
| Richard M. Nixon | 1969 to 1972 | 17.032 | 18.139 | 6.04% | 4.92% |
| Nixon /Ford | 1973 to 1976 | 21.532 | 21.979 | 6.42% | 8.91% |
| Jimmy Carter | 1977 to 1980 | 27.621 | 30.919 | 13.03% | 11.61% |
| Ronald Reagan 1st | 1981 to 1984 | 45.087 | 47.971 | 4.05% | 3.89% |
| Ronald Reagan 2nd | 1985 to 1988 | 52.839 | 55.889 | 7.72% | 7.81% |
| George Bush | 1989 to 1992 | 71.152 | 75.513 | 1.77% | 0.63% |
| Bill Clinton 1st | 1993 to 1996 | 76.33 | 77.415 | 2.07% | 2.47% |
| Bill Clinton 2nd | 1997 to 2000 | 82.843 | 85.356 | 6.05% | 7.31% |
| George W. Bush 1st | 2001 to 2004 | 104.777 | 113.186 | 9.47% | 10.99% |
| George W. Bush 2nd | 2005 to 2008 | 150.465 | 171.781 | 2.19% | -3.57% |
| Barack H. Obama 1st | 2009 to 2012 | 164.056 | 148.544 | -3.72% | 0.99% |
| Barack H. Obama 2nd | 2013 to 2016 | 140.983 | 154.512 | 6.43% | 5.49% |
| Donald Trump 1st | 2017 to 2020 | 180.904 | 191.368 | 5.26% | 7.96% |
| Joseph Biden | 2021 to 2024 | 222.094 | 259.973 | 9.68% | 5.63% |
| Donald Trump 2nd (17 months) | 2025 to | 321.353 | 328.525 | 2.46% | 2.71% |
| Jun 2026 | 336.663 | 336.663 | * | * |
Table 12 -- Ranking of Annualized Growth of Case-Shiller Home Price Index for Presidents Since 1900
| President | Since Election | President | Since Inauguration |
|---|---|---|---|
| Roosevelt/Truman | 14.47% | Jimmy Carter | 11.61% |
| Jimmy Carter | 13.03% | Roosevelt/Truman | 11.35% |
| Joseph Biden | 9.68% | George W. Bush 1st | 10.99% |
| George W. Bush 1st | 9.47% | F. D. Roosevelt 3rd | 10.68% |
| Ronald Reagan 2nd | 7.72% | Nixon/Ford | 8.91% |
| Woodrow Wilson 2nd | 6.95% | Donald Trump 1st | 7.96% |
| Barack H. Obama 2nd | 6.43% | Ronald Reagan 2nd | 7.81% |
| Nixon/Ford | 6.42% | Bill Clinton 2nd | 7.31% |
| Bill Clinton 2nd | 6.05% | Harry S. Truman | 6.29% |
| Richard M. Nixon | 6.04% | Woodrow Wilson 2nd | 5.81% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 3rd | 5.31% | Joseph Biden | 5.63% |
| Donald Trump 1st | 5.26% | Barack H. Obama 2nd | 5.49% |
| Ronald Reagan 1st | 4.05% | Richard M. Nixon | 4.92% |
| Harry S. Truman | 3.52% | F. D. Roosevelt 1st | 4.57% |
| Eisenhower 1st | 3.02% | Ronald Reagan 1st | 3.89% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 1st | 2.91% | Theodore Roosevelt | 3.66% |
| Donald Trump 2nd (17 months) | 2.46% | Lyndon B. Johnson | 3.08% |
| George W. Bush 2nd | 2.19% | Donald Trump 2nd (17 months) | 2.71% |
| Bill Clinton 1st | 2.07% | Bill Clinton 1st | 2.47% |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | 1.82% | McKinley/Roosevelt | 2.36% |
| George H. W. Bush | 1.77% | William Howard Taft | 2.32% |
| William Howard Taft | 1.73% | Harding/Coolidge | 2.05% |
| McKinley/Roosevelt | 1.25% | Woodrow Wilson 1st | 1.56% |
| Eisenhower 2nd | 1.18% | Kennedy/Johnson | 1.27% |
| Woodrow Wilson 1st | 1.05% | Eisenhower 1st | 1.01% |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 1.05% | Barack H. Obama 1st | 0.99% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 2nd | 0.90% | George H. W. Bush | 0.63% |
| Theodore Roosevelt | 0.87% | Eisenhower 2nd | 0.60% |
| Harding/Coolidge | 0.19% | F. D. Roosevelt 2nd | -1.90% |
| Calvin Coolidge | -0.34% | Calvin Coolidge | -2.11% |
| Barack H. Obama 1st | -3.72% | George W. Bush 2nd | -3.57% |
| Herbert Hoover | -6.30% | Herbert Hoover | -6.72% |
Tables 13 and 14 present the rates of inflation during the terms of the presidents. While the inflation rate is one of the most watched monthly announcements, its impact is not always clear. In contrast with the other measures we have discussed, rising prices do not have a clear cost or benefit.20
In the aggregate, if someone pays more for an item, someone else receives more income. Consumers see costs go up, but businesses see revenue go up, and households see their incomes, portfolios and homes go up, as we have shown above.
The point is we adapt to a low inflation rate and do not suffer. For the last 30 years the average percentage increase in the CPI has been 2.8%. There have been only eleven short periods where the rate was less than this, eight of those were during the financial meltdown of 2008 and the period of COVID and its aftermath. Most macroeconomists would say that a constant inflation rate of around 3% is good for the economy.
On the other hand, unexpected increases in the inflation rate can be costly to the average household. The reasons are that it erodes purchasing power, redistributes wealth, distorts the tax system, hurts the retiree on fixed income, and causes many more unfair redistributions that usually hurt the average household. Another reason a change in the inflation rate can cause complaints is psychological. People think that increases in their wages are deserved, but when prices at the grocery store go up, that is gouging by monopoly supermarket chains.
While there are many who blame or credit particular presidents for certain inflation “spells”, with few exceptions, most economists say their actions have little to no effect on the rate of price changes during those terms. The consensus is that the FED’s control of the money supply and its setting of short-term interest rates are the important tools.21
The important question, however, is how much the inflation rate matters to the health of the economy. As described above, the real per capita GDP tells us how many goods and services are available per person. It is the measure economists use to determine the health of the economy. Prices in themselves will not matter if the economy is growing. Since 1900 the CPI increased at an average rate of 3% and real GDP per capita increased at 1.87%.22 Our hypothesis, then, is that real GDP per capita grows more slowly in terms with higher inflation. If so, that would be a real effect. If we determined that certain presidents were responsible for that higher inflation, then we would say that is important when ranking their overall performance. The data do not support this hypothesis. The correlation of the 23 observations of the increase in these two variables as shown in table 1 is 0.13. That is, there is essentially no correlation. For example, during the term of Jimmy Carter there was the highest inflation of any term since Wilson’s, and yet he ranked 10th out of 23 in growth of real GDP per capita. In contrast, Calvin Coolidge had zero to slightly negative inflation during his term and ranked 14th in growth of real GDP per capita.23
Table 13 -- The Annualized Growth of the Consumer Price Index
| President | Years in Office | CPI Year of Election | CPI Year of Inauguration | Annualized Rate (Election to Election) | Annualized Rate (Inauguration to Inauguration) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| McKinley/Roosevelt | 1901 to 1904 | 8.14 | 8.24 | 1.47% | 0.87% |
| Theodore Roosevelt | 1905 to 1908 | 8.63 | 8.53 | 0.83% | 0.84% |
| William Howard Taft | 1909 to 1912 | 8.92 | 8.82 | 1.32% | 2.14% |
| Woodrow Wilson 1st | 1913 to 1916 | 9.4 | 9.6 | 3.15% | 7.50% |
| Woodrow Wilson 2nd | 1917 to 1920 | 10.64 | 12.82 | 17.15% | 8.70% |
| Harding/ Coolidge | 1921 to 1924 | 20.04 | 17.9 | -3.89% | -0.52% |
| Calvin Coolidge | 1925 to 1928 | 17.1 | 17.53 | 0.04% | -0.58% |
| Herbert Hoover | 1929 to 1932 | 17.13 | 17.13 | -5.50% | -6.74% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 1st | 1933 to 1936 | 13.66 | 12.96 | 0.36% | 2.60% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 2nd | 1937 to 1940 | 13.86 | 14.36 | 0.31% | 0.64% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 3rd | 1941 to 1944 | 14.03 | 14.73 | 5.83% | 5.14% |
| Roosevelt/Truman | 1945 to 1948 | 17.6 | 18 | 8.15% | 7.29% |
| Harry S. Truman | 1949 to 1952 | 24.08 | 23.85 | 2.47% | 2.91% |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 1st | 1953 to 1956 | 26.55 | 26.75 | 0.59% | 1.28% |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 2nd | 1957 to 1960 | 27.18 | 28.15 | 2.17% | 1.54% |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 1961 to 1964 | 29.62 | 29.92 | 1.17% | 1.34% |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | 1965 to 1968 | 31.03 | 31.56 | 2.91% | 3.82% |
| Richard M. Nixon | 1969 to 1972 | 34.8 | 36.67 | 4.72% | 4.93% |
| Nixon /Ford | 1973 to 1976 | 41.85 | 44.45 | 8.00% | 8.06% |
| Jimmy Carter | 1977 to 1980 | 56.94 | 60.61 | 9.67% | 10.67% |
| Ronald Reagan 1st | 1981 to 1984 | 82.38 | 90.93 | 5.97% | 4.30% |
| Ronald Reagan 2nd | 1985 to 1988 | 103.9 | 107.6 | 3.30% | 3.61% |
| George Bush | 1989 to 1992 | 118.3 | 124 | 4.36% | 3.90% |
| Bill Clinton 1st | 1993 to 1996 | 140.3 | 144.5 | 2.84% | 2.66% |
| Bill Clinton 2nd | 1997 to 2000 | 156.9 | 160.5 | 2.35% | 2.49% |
| George W. Bush 1st | 2001 to 2004 | 172.2 | 177.1 | 2.34% | 2.48% |
| George W. Bush 2nd | 2005 to 2008 | 188.9 | 195.3 | 3.32% | 2.38% |
| Barack H. Obama 1st | 2009 to 2012 | 215.3 | 214.54 | 1.62% | 2.08% |
| Barack H. Obama 2nd | 2013 to 2016 | 229.59 | 232.96 | 1.12% | 1.28% |
| Donald Trump 1st | 2017 to 2020 | 240.01 | 245.12 | 1.90% | 2.54% |
| Joseph Biden | 2021 to 2024 | 258.81 | 270.97 | 4.93% | 4.17% |
| Donald Trump 2nd (17 months) | 2025 to | 313.7 | 319.09 | 4.06% | 3.27% |
| 332.985 (Q2 2026) | 333.952 (June 2026) |
Table 14 -- Ranking of Annualized Growth of CPI for Presidents Since 1900
| President | Since Election | President | Since Inauguration |
|---|---|---|---|
| Woodrow Wilson 2nd | 17.15% | Jimmy Carter | 10.67% |
| Jimmy Carter | 9.67% | Woodrow Wilson 2nd | 8.70% |
| Roosevelt/Truman | 8.15% | Nixon/Ford | 8.06% |
| Nixon/Ford | 8.00% | Woodrow Wilson 1st | 7.50% |
| Ronald Reagan 1st | 5.97% | Roosevelt/Truman | 7.29% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 3rd | 5.83% | F. D. Roosevelt 3rd | 5.14% |
| Joseph Biden | 4.93% | Richard M. Nixon | 4.93% |
| Richard M. Nixon | 4.72% | Ronald Reagan 1st | 4.30% |
| George H. W. Bush | 4.36% | Joseph Biden | 4.17% |
| Donald Trump 2nd (17 months) | 4.06% | George H. W. Bush | 3.90% |
| George W. Bush 2nd | 3.32% | Lyndon B. Johnson | 3.82% |
| Ronald Reagan 2nd | 3.30% | Ronald Reagan 2nd | 3.61% |
| Woodrow Wilson 1st | 3.15% | Donald Trump 2nd (17 months) | 3.27% |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | 2.91% | Harry S. Truman | 2.91% |
| Bill Clinton 1st | 2.84% | Bill Clinton 1st | 2.66% |
| Harry S. Truman | 2.47% | F. D. Roosevelt 1st | 2.60% |
| Bill Clinton 2nd | 2.35% | Donald Trump 1st | 2.54% |
| George W. Bush 1st | 2.34% | Bill Clinton 2nd | 2.49% |
| Eisenhower 2nd | 2.17% | George W. Bush 1st | 2.48% |
| Donald Trump 1st | 1.90% | George W. Bush 2nd | 2.38% |
| Barack H. Obama 1st | 1.62% | William Howard Taft | 2.14% |
| McKinley/Roosevelt | 1.47% | Barack H. Obama 1st | 2.08% |
| William Howard Taft | 1.32% | Eisenhower 2nd | 1.54% |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 1.17% | Kennedy/Johnson | 1.34% |
| Barack H. Obama 2nd | 1.12% | Eisenhower 1st | 1.28% |
| Theodore Roosevelt | 0.83% | Barack H. Obama 2nd | 1.28% |
| Eisenhower 1st | 0.59% | McKinley/Roosevelt | 0.87% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 1st | 0.36% | Theodore Roosevelt | 0.84% |
| F. D. Roosevelt 2nd | 0.31% | F. D. Roosevelt 2nd | 0.64% |
| Calvin Coolidge | 0.04% | Harding/Coolidge | -0.52% |
| Harding/Coolidge | -3.89% | Calvin Coolidge | -0.58% |
| Herbert Hoover | -5.50% | Herbert Hoover | -6.74% |
The Misery Index is one of the most ubiquitous measures found in political discussions of the economy. It is defined as the sum of the unemployment and the inflation rates, two of the most easily observed economic variables that measure “economic hardship.” Graphs of it can be found everywhere, as this one at FRED. There is also a website called the US Misery Index that presents all the ways the construction of the index can be viewed.
This index was invented by Arthur Okun, who as the chair of the Council of Economic Advisers for President Johnson, wanted to give the president an easy measure of economic discomfort. In a sense, it is a measure of how well we are achieving the goals of the Employment Act of 1946. Those goals were to promote maximum employment, production, and purchasing power.
We present in Table 15 the Misery Index of the first and last month of each president’s term. The thought is that if the index is rising during the term of a president who is running for reelection, he is regarded as a failure and will lose. If the index is falling during the term while he is running for reelection, he should win. Of the twenty elections between 1948 and 2024, ten had an incumbent running. Seven won and three lost. We do not count 2024, when President Biden withdrew and Vice President Harris ran in his place.
Table 16 presents the performance of the incumbents in those elections. The Misery Index did increase for all three who lost reelection: Carter, G. H. W. Bush, and Trump in his first term. However, four of the seven winners also saw the Misery Index increase: Eisenhower, Nixon, G. W. Bush and Obama. So, we would not say that the Misery Index is the best index to predict election outcomes. What we do show is that, with one exception, an increase of real personal consumption over ten percent during a term predicts a win for the incumbent. That exception was Obama, who came to office at the start of the Great Recession.
Table 15 -- The Misery Index by Presidential Terms for 1948 to 2026
| President | Years in Office | Index in First Month of Office | Index in Last Month in Office of that Term | Increase or Decrease During the Term | Increase in Real Personal Consumption Expenditure |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harry S. Truman | 1949 to 1952 | 5.57 | 3.45 | -2.12 | 17.13% |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 1st | 1953 to 1956 | 3.28 | 7.19 | 3.91 | 14.40% |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 2nd | 1957 to 1960 | 7.19 | 7.96 | 0.77 | 10.37% |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 1961 to 1964 | 8.31 | 5.97 | -2.34 | 19.80% |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | 1965 to 1968 | 5.87 | 8.12 | 2.25 | 19.82% |
| Richard M. Nixon | 1969 to 1972 | 7.80 | 8.61 | 0.81 | 17.23% |
| Nixon /Ford | 1973 to 1976 | 8.55 | 12.66 | 4.11 | 8.98% |
| Jimmy Carter | 1977 to 1980 | 12.72 | 19.72 | 7.00 | 8.93% |
| Ronald Reagan 1st | 1981 to 1984 | 19.33 | 11.25 | -8.08 | 14.83% |
| Ronald Reagan 2nd | 1985 to 1988 | 10.83 | 9.72 | -1.11 | 14.70% |
| George Bush | 1989 to 1992 | 10.07 | 10.30 | 0.23 | 8.67% |
| Bill Clinton 1st | 1993 to 1996 | 10.56 | 8.72 | -1.84 | 13.58% |
| Bill Clinton 2nd | 1997 to 2000 | 8.34 | 7.29 | -1.05 | 19.93% |
| George W. Bush 1st | 2001 to 2004 | 7.93 | 8.66 | 0.73 | 12.31% |
| George W. Bush 2nd | 2005 to 2008 | 8.27 | 7.39 | -0.88 | 5.86% |
| Barack H. Obama 1st | 2009 to 2012 | 7.83 | 9.64 | 1.81 | 5.46% |
| Barack H. Obama 2nd | 2013 to 2016 | 9.59 | 6.77 | -2.82 | 10.54% |
| Donald Trump 1st | 2017 to 2020 | 7.20 | 8.06 | 0.86 | 6.39% |
| Joseph Biden | 2021 to 2024 | 7.80 | 6.99 | -0.81 | 13.57% |
| Donald Trump 2nd (17 months) | 2025 to | 7.00 | 7.66 | 0.66 | 3.04% |
Table 15b -- Misery Index in the First Month in Office
| President | Years in Office | Inflation Reported in First Month in Office | Unemployment in First Month in Office | Index in First Month of Office |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harry S. Truman | 1949 to 1952 | 1.27% | 4.3% | 5.57 |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 1st | 1953 to 1956 | 0.38% | 2.9% | 3.28 |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 2nd | 1957 to 1960 | 2.99% | 4.2% | 7.19 |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 1961 to 1964 | 1.71% | 6.6% | 8.31 |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | 1965 to 1968 | 0.97% | 4.9% | 5.87 |
| Richard M. Nixon | 1969 to 1972 | 4.40% | 3.4% | 7.80 |
| Nixon /Ford | 1973 to 1976 | 3.65% | 4.9% | 8.55 |
| Jimmy Carter | 1977 to 1980 | 5.22% | 7.5% | 12.72 |
| Ronald Reagan 1st | 1981 to 1984 | 11.83% | 7.5% | 19.33 |
| Ronald Reagan 2nd | 1985 to 1988 | 3.53% | 7.3% | 10.83 |
| George Bush | 1989 to 1992 | 4.67% | 5.4% | 10.07 |
| Bill Clinton 1st | 1993 to 1996 | 3.26% | 7.3% | 10.56 |
| Bill Clinton 2nd | 1997 to 2000 | 3.04% | 5.3% | 8.34 |
| George W. Bush 1st | 2001 to 2004 | 3.73% | 4.2% | 7.93 |
| George W. Bush 2nd | 2005 to 2008 | 2.97% | 5.3% | 8.27 |
| Barack H. Obama 1st | 2009 to 2012 | 0.03% | 7.8% | 7.83 |
| Barack H. Obama 2nd | 2013 to 2016 | 1.59% | 8.0% | 9.59 |
| Donald Trump 1st | 2017 to 2020 | 2.50% | 4.7% | 7.20 |
| Joseph Biden | 2021 to 2024 | 1.40% | 6.4% | 7.80 |
| Donald Trump 2nd (17 months) | 2025 to | 3.00% | 4.0% | 7.00 |
Table 15c -- Misery Index in the Last Month in Office
| President | Years in Office | Inflation Reported in Last Month in Office | Unemployment in the Last Month in Office | Index in Last Month of Office |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Harry S. Truman | 1949 to 1952 | 0.75% | 2.7% | 3.45 |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 1st | 1953 to 1956 | 2.99% | 4.2% | 7.19 |
| Dwight D. Eisenhower 2nd | 1957 to 1960 | 1.36% | 6.6% | 7.96 |
| Kennedy/Johnson | 1961 to 1964 | 0.97% | 5.0% | 5.97 |
| Lyndon B. Johnson | 1965 to 1968 | 4.72% | 3.4% | 8.12 |
| Richard M. Nixon | 1969 to 1972 | 3.41% | 5.2% | 8.61 |
| Nixon /Ford | 1973 to 1976 | 4.86% | 7.8% | 12.66 |
| Jimmy Carter | 1977 to 1980 | 12.52% | 7.2% | 19.72 |
| Ronald Reagan 1st | 1981 to 1984 | 3.95% | 7.3% | 11.25 |
| Ronald Reagan 2nd | 1985 to 1988 | 4.42% | 5.3% | 9.72 |
| George Bush | 1989 to 1992 | 2.90% | 7.4% | 10.30 |
| Bill Clinton 1st | 1993 to 1996 | 3.32% | 5.4% | 8.72 |
| Bill Clinton 2nd | 1997 to 2000 | 3.39% | 3.9% | 7.29 |
| George W. Bush 1st | 2001 to 2004 | 3.26% | 5.4% | 8.66 |
| George W. Bush 2nd | 2005 to 2008 | 0.09% | 7.3% | 7.39 |
| Barack H. Obama 1st | 2009 to 2012 | 1.74% | 7.9% | 9.64 |
| Barack H. Obama 2nd | 2013 to 2016 | 2.07% | 4.7% | 6.77 |
| Donald Trump 1st | 2017 to 2020 | 1.36% | 6.7% | 8.06 |
| Joseph Biden | 2021 to 2024 | 2.89% | 4.1% | 6.99 |
| Donald Trump 2nd (17 months) | 2025 to | 3.46% | 4.2% | 7.66 |
Table 16 -- The Misery Index at Election Time of ten Incumbents running for re-election
| Year of Election | Incumbent Running | Outcome | Change in Misery Index (Four Years) | Misery Index on Election Day | Increase in Real Personal Consumption (Previous 4 Years) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1948 | |||||
| 1952 | |||||
| 1956 | Dwight D. Eisenhower | wins | increase of 2.59 | 6.53 | 14.40% |
| 1960 | |||||
| 1964 | Lyndon B. Johnson | wins | decrease of 1.36 | 6.10 | 19.80% |
| 1968 | |||||
| 1972 | Richard M. Nixon | wins | increase of 0.84 | 8.97 | 17.23% |
| 1976 | |||||
| 1980 | Jimmy Carter | loses | increase of 7.47 | 20.15 | 8.93% |
| 1984 | Ronald Reagan | wins | decrease of 8.90 | 11.25 | 14.83% |
| 1988 | |||||
| 1992 | George H. W. Bush | loses | increase of 0.90 | 10.45 | 8.67% |
| 1996 | Bill Clinton | wins | decrease of 1.79 | 8.66 | 13.58% |
| 2000 | |||||
| 2004 | George W. Bush | wins | increase of 1.57 | 8.92 | 12.31% |
| 2008 | |||||
| 2012 | Barack H. Obama | wins | increase of 1.59 | 9.46 | 5.46% |
| 2016 | |||||
| 2020 | Donald Trump 1st | loses | increase of 1.58 | 7.87 | 6.39% |
| 2024 |
Conclusion
We started this essay by pointing out that the performance of the economy during a president’s term, good or bad, is the result of events that occurred both before and during his term of office and that were often beyond his control.24
This can make it difficult to determine how much to credit or blame the president for what occurred. But it is done all the time, particularly during election times, so we hope these data provide a more accurate way to make such evaluations: by measuring every president’s record the same way, by setting each record beside those of the others, and by showing how much of it was shaped by events beyond the president’s control.
The best measure of the aggregate health of an economy is the growth in per capita GDP. Growth has been better under some presidents than others. Table 2 shows that growth has been better a little more often under Democratic Presidents. Using the data in Tables 1 and 13, we have demonstrated that historically for 126 years, inflation has not been a determinant of this real growth.
Table 3 removes government expenditures from GDP, which gives us a ranking of the growth in the private sector. In this century private growth was slower under G. W. Bush and the first Trump administration and higher during the Obama and Biden administrations.
Table 4 shows that both parties have cut tax rates, though Republicans have done so more often, and the size of the drop under Reagan was substantially more than the rest. Of the eight increases, three were Republicans, G. H. W. Bush, Hoover and Harding/Coolidge. For most of the period interest rates have been determined by the FED, and it is a tradition that their actions are independent of the President.
Tables 5, 6 and 7 show the trends in employment by sectors. During the Carter administration, the number employed in manufacturing peaked at 18.5 million, while private services employed 49.9 million. Since then, manufacturing employment has fallen 31% and private services employment has increased 130%.
In our discussion of deficits with Table 8, it is clear that concern for the size of our debt is “not what it used to be.” G. H. W. Bush could well have lost his chance to be reelected because he raised taxes to reduce the deficit, after promising, “Read my lips: no new taxes.” That has rarely been suggested this century.
The stock market is driven by expectations. Tables 9 and 10 tell you how those changed over the 126 years. It is interesting that for some the impact is when they are elected and others when they are inaugurated.
Tables 11 and 12 present the story of the growth in the value of the home, the largest asset for many of the 65 percent of American households who own one. Higher home prices add to owners’ wealth, but they also raise the cost of housing, for owners as well as for the other 35%. We show that there have been significant variations in relevant home prices. In discussions of what happened in a president’s term, these changes should be discussed.
Tables 13 and 14 discuss inflation. This seems to be a number one concern of voters today and why the FED does what it does. We will not get into those issues. The result we show here is that over the 126-year period of our data, there is no correlation between inflation and the growth of real GDP per capita, which is our favored measure of the economy’s performance.
Tables 15 and 16 present information about the Misery Index of the presidential terms from 1948 to the present. We show that it is not a great predictor of election outcomes.
It is likely that most economists might think that it would be more insightful to use economic performance to rate the chairs of the Federal Reserve Board.
______________________________________________________
*The authors are grateful for the editorial comments from Louis Cain.
1
FRED (Federal Reserve Economic Data) is a database maintained by the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis. The government sources include the Bureau of Economic Analysis, the Bureau of Labor Statistics, and the Treasury Department.
Back to text
2
We do not separate the first term of Theodore Roosevelt when he took over after the death of William McKinley.
Back to text
3
We could have used the year after he was elected to the year his successor takes over. The theory in doing it that way is that it takes a year for a president’s policies to have an impact. As a check, we also construct the tables that way and while it did result in a few minor changes in some rankings, it was not significant.
Back to text
4
From 1937 to the present, that is the month of the inauguration. Before that, the date was March 4th.
Back to text
5
The values posted are the measures of this flow in a quarter or a year. This flow is not constant during the period. There are more goods and services produced at 3 pm on a Tuesday afternoon than at 3am on a Sunday morning. A year can start in a boom and be in depression by July. Thus, annual observations will not reflect changes within a year. Quarterly observations do a better job of measuring changes, but they still cannot date precise turning points. To measure GDP takes hundreds of national income accountants working year-round. There are three versions presented during the year.
Back to text
6
Another aggregate price index is the GDP Deflator. This is an index used to measure the changes in the value of GDP due to price changes.
Back to text
7
These total outputs do not include transfer payments such as the payments in the stimulus package.
Back to text
8
From 1932 to 1968, gold was held by central banks and Americans were not allowed to own it.
Back to text
9
Truman took over less than three months into Roosevelt’s fourth term when FDR died in office.
Back to text
10
Transfer payments such as Social Security, Medicare and unemployment benefits are not payments for production and are not part of GDP.
Back to text
11
The first Trump administration had a measurable increase in the defense budget as well.
Back to text
12
In this table we do not separate the two administrations where a vice president from the same party took over.
Back to text
13
A marginal rate is the rate paid on the last dollar of income. The maximum marginal rate applies only to income above the top bracket threshold, so most taxpayers, even in the top bracket, pay a lower average rate.
Back to text
14
This is the total public debt, which includes the debt held by other government agencies such as the Social Security Trust Fund. The smaller measure, the debt held by the public, excludes those holdings.
Back to text
15
On that day, the per capita debt was $1,600, today it is about $115,000.
Back to text
16
Remember that these data are in nominal terms, so the inflation of this period has an impact on this ratio.
Back to text
17
A lower tax rate times a larger income will generate more or less revenue. For the Kennedy/Johnson administration, revenues went up. It was a relatively small cut and Federal expenditures were also cut.
Back to text
18
There was a recession and a large tax cut during the eight years of his administration that caused the rapid increase in the debt.
Back to text
19
The most fundamental function in macroeconomics is the consumption function that was introduced by John Maynard Keynes in the 1930s and states there is a stable relationship between consumption and income at a proportion called the marginal propensity to consume (å) C = åY. In the 1960s several economists felt that a better specification of the consumption function would also consider the impact of wealth, so the function would look like this. C = åY + ßW
Back to text
20
The fact that the Federal Reserve Board (FED) kept short term interest rates high to reduce inflation is not to be ignored, but it is not exactly germane to the discussion here. As Table 4 shows, the rate has since come down to 3.63%.
Back to text
21
In 1900, the money supply was based on gold reserves; four years earlier, William Jennings Bryan had attacked the gold standard in his “Cross of Gold” speech. Since then, the ways our money is “created” have evolved. The central bank we call the Federal Reserve was created in 1913. The Depression created new ways banks were regulated, and in 1971 we finally stopped the convertibility of the dollars into gold for its last purpose, international currency exchanges. We now have a central banking system with a Board of Governors appointed by the president.
Back to text
22
This is more than the FED’s current goal of 2%.
Back to text
23
Economists say this phenomenon is that prices are homogeneous of degree zero in all prices.
Back to text
24
No one would say that a pandemic that has had large effects on the economy was the cause of a president’s actions, but COVID had a measurable impact on the economy during both the first Trump and the Biden administrations.
Back to text
Citation
Samuel H. Williamson, "The Relative Performance of the Economy under the Presidents of the United States from 1900 to 2026," MeasuringWorth, 2026.
URL: www.measuringworth.com/Presidents.php
Please let us know if and how this discussion has assisted you in using our calculators.