That’s what adherents of the so-called Super Bowl Indicator[1]
would likely conclude, after all. It’s a “theory” that when a team from
the old National Football League wins the Super Bowl, the S&P 500
will rise, and when a team from the old American Football League
prevails, stock prices will fall.
It’s a “theory” that has been found to be correct nearly 80% of the
time—for 41 of the 57 Super Bowls, in fact. Not that it hasn’t been
tackled short of the goal line.
Portfolio Prognostications
One needs to look back no further than last year’s victory by the
(original AFL) Kansas City Chiefs that, according to the Indicator,
should have predicted a portfolio predicament for the S&P 500—but
wound up with a 25% gain for the year. Or the year before that when the
victory by the Los Angeles Rams “should” have been a portent of good
times, only to see the S&P 500 slump more than 19% for its biggest
loss since 2008.
And while the previous year’s victory by the NFC’s Tampa Bay
Buccaneers bolstered the premise behind the “theory,” the year before
that the win by these same Kansas City Chiefs—who have become something
of a regular in the big contest—over the then-NFC champion San Francisco
49ers undermined its track record (or did your 401(k) miss that 18.4%
rise in the S&P 500?). Or how about the year before THAT
when the AFC’s New England Patriots (who once upon a time were the
AFL’s Boston Patriots) bested the NFC champion Los Angeles Rams—but the
S&P 500 was up more than 30% that year (2019).
Or, looking the other way, the year before that a win by the NFC
champion Philadelphia Eagles against the AFC champion Patriots turned
out to be a loser, marketwise, with the S&P 500 down more than 6%
(though for most of the year it was quite a different story). Ditto the
year before, when the epic comeback by those same AFC champion Patriots
against the then-NFC champion Atlanta Falcons failed to forestall a 2017
market surge.
Now, one might think that the real “spoiler” to this market “theory”
is the New England Patriots (who not so long ago were perennial Super
Bowl participants)—but the year before that, the AFC’s (and original
AFL) Broncos’ 24-10 victory over the Carolina Panthers, who represented
the NFC, also proved to be an “exception.”
Market Makings
Indeed, one might well wonder why, in view of that consistent string
of “exceptions” that we’re still talking about this “theory”—but, as it
turns out, that’s an unusual (albeit consistent) break in the streak
that was sustained in 2015 following Super Bowl XLIX, when the AFC’s New
England Patriots (yes, they show up a lot) bested the Seattle Seahawks
28-24 to earn their fourth Super Bowl title.
It also “worked” in 2014, when the Seahawks bumped off the legacy AFL
Denver Broncos, and in 2013, when a dramatic fourth-quarter comeback
rescued a victory by the Baltimore Ravens—who, though representing the
AFC, are technically a legacy NFL team via their Cleveland Browns roots.
This is where things start to get confusing, as the Ravens, who were
the Browns moved to Baltimore in 1995 (though the NFL still views them
as an expansion team) filling the hole left by the then-Baltimore Colts’
1984 “dead of night” move to Indianapolis.
Admittedly, the fact that the markets fared well in 2013 was hardly a
true test of the Super Bowl Theory since, as it turned out, both teams
in Super Bowl XLVII—those Ravens and the San Francisco 49ers—were,
technically, NFL legacy teams.
However, consider that in 2012 a team from the old NFL (the New York
Giants) took on—and took down—one from the old AFL (the New England
Patriots—yes, those New England Patriots… again). And, in fact, 2012 was
a pretty good year for stocks.
Steel ‘Curtains’?
On the other hand, the year before that, the Pittsburgh Steelers
(representing the American Football Conference) took on the National
Football Conference’s Green Bay Packers—two teams that had some of the
oldest, deepest and, yes, most “storied” NFL roots, with the Steelers
formed in 1933 (as the Pittsburgh Pirates) and the Packers founded in
1919. According to the Super Bowl Theory, 2011 should have been a good
year for stocks (because, regardless of who won, a legacy NFL team would
prevail).
But, as some may recall, while the Dow gained ground for the year, the S&P 500 was, well, flat (dare we say “deflated”?).
And then there was the string of Super Bowls where the contests were
all between legacy NFL teams (thus, no matter who won, the markets
should have risen):
- 2006, when the Steelers bested the Seattle Seahawks;
- 2007, when the Indianapolis Colts (those old Baltimore Colts) beat the Chicago Bears 29-17;
- 2009, when the Pittsburgh Steelers took on the Arizona Cardinals (who had once been the NFL’s St. Louis Cardinals); and
- 2010, when the New Orleans Saints bested the Indianapolis Colts,
who, as we’ve already remarked, had roots dating back to the NFL legacy
Baltimore Colts.
Sure enough, the markets were higher in each of those years.
As for 2008? Well, that was the year that the NFC’s New York Giants
upended the hopes of the AFL-legacy Patriots (yes, those Patriots) for a
perfect season, but it didn’t do any favors for the stock market. In
fact, that was the last time that the Super Bowl Theory didn’t “work”
(well, until last year, the year before last—oh, and the year before
that—and the year before…).
Patriot Gains
Times were better for Patriots fans in 2005, when they bested the
NFC’s Philadelphia Eagles 24-21. Indeed, according to the Super Bowl
Theory, the markets should have been down that year—but the S&P 500
rose 2.55%.
Of course, Super Bowl Theory proponents would tell you that the 2002
win by the New England Patriots accurately foretold the continuation of
the bear market into a third year (at the time, the first accurate
result in five years). But the Patriots’ 2004 Super Bowl win against the
Carolina Panthers (the one that probably nobody except Patriots fans
and disappointed Panthers advocates remember because it was overshadowed
by the infamous “wardrobe malfunction”) failed to anticipate a fall
rally that helped push the S&P 500 to a near 9% gain that year,
sacking the indicator for another loss (couldn’t resist).
Bronco ‘Busters’
Consider also that, despite victories by the AFL-legacy Denver
Broncos in 1998 and 1999, the S&P 500 continued its winning ways,
while victories by the NFL-legacy St. Louis (by way of Los Angeles) Rams
(that have since returned to the City of Angels) and the Baltimore
Ravens (those former “Browns”) did nothing to dispel the bear markets of
2000 and 2001, respectively.
In fact, the Super Bowl Theory “worked” 28 times between 1967 and
1997, then went 0-4 between 1998 and 2001, only to get back on track
from 2002 on (though “purists” still dispute how to interpret Tampa
Bay’s 2003 victory, since the Buccaneers spent their first NFL season in
the AFC before moving to the NFC).
Indeed, the Buccaneers’ move to the NFC was part of a swap with the
Seattle Seahawks, who did, in fact, enter the NFL as an NFC team in 1976
but shuttled quickly over to the AFC (where they remained through 2001)
before returning to the NFC.[2]
And, not having entered the league until 1976, regardless of when they
began, can the Seahawks truly be considered a “legacy” NFL squad?
Bear in mind as well, that in 2006, when the Seahawks made their
first Super Bowl appearance—and lost—the S&P 500 gained nearly 16%.
Some fun facts to share about the game:
The 2023 game drew between 113 million and 115.1 million viewers—making it the most-watched U.S. telecast of all time.
The 49ers are 5-2 in previous Super Bowl appearances. The Chiefs are
3-2. The two teams have met in the Super Bowl before—in 2020, when the
Chiefs came from behind to beat the 49ers in Super Bowl LIV. Early odds
have the 49ers a slight favorite, by about 2.5 points.
This happens to be the first Super Bowl ever played in the state of
Nevada (11 states have hosted—knew you’d want to know), and while
everyone is saying Las Vegas, it’s actually (technically) taking place
in Paradise, Nevada.
The Chiefs have been designated the home team for the game—and will
be wearing red. The team wearing white jerseys in the Super Bowl has won
16 of the last 19 Super Bowls, including the Chiefs in 2023 (though the
last time Kansas City won before that they were wearing red).
Among other things (whether Taylor Swift will make it to the game on
time), you can (even) bet on the color of the Gatorade that will be
dumped on the winning team's coach.
All in all, and particularly in view of the exciting playoff games
that have led up to it, it looks like it should be a good game.
And that—whether you are a proponent of the Super Bowl Theory or
not—would be one in which regardless of which team wins, we all do!
- Nevin E. Adams, JD
[1]
An alternate theory linking the Super Bowl to stock market performance
in reverse fashion postulates that Wall Street’s results can be used to
predict the outcome of the game. According to this theory, if the Dow
rises from the end of November until Super Bowl game day, the team whose
full name appears later in the alphabet will win. Some people have too
much time on their hands…
[2]
Note: Seattle is the only team to have played in both the AFC and NFC
Championship Games, having relocated from the AFC to the NFC during
league realignment prior to the 2002 season. The Seahawks are the only
NFL team to switch conferences twice in the post-merger era. The
franchise began play in 1976 in the NFC West division but switched
conferences with the Buccaneers after one season and joined the AFC
West.