Yes, that’s what adherents of the so-called Super Bowl Indicator[i] would have you believe — based on 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 roughly three-quarters of the 59 Super Bowls to date.
Not that it hasn’t been tackled short of the “goal” line…particularly in recent years.
Portfolio Prognostications
One need to look back no further than last year’s victory by the NFC/original NFL Philadelphia Eagles commanding victory over the AFC/original AFL Kansas City Chiefs to see a testament to this theory — as the S&P 500 closed up nearly 17% in 2025.
That said, you might recall the previous year’s victory by the (original AFL) Kansas City Chiefs — which, according to the Indicator, should have predicted a portfolio predicament for the S&P 500 — but wound up with a 23% gain for the year. Or the year before that when those (same) Kansas City Chiefs prevailed over the (original NFL) 49ers — but the S&P 500 still rose 25%.
On the other hand, the year before that the victory by the (old NFL) Los Angeles Rams (over the old AFL) Cincinnati Bengals “should” have been a portent of good times, only to see the S&P 500 slump more than 19% — dare I say “sacked” for its biggest loss since 2008.
And while the previous year’s blow-out victory by the NFC’s Tampa Bay Buccaneers[ii] (over those same AFL Kansas City Chiefs) bolstered the premise behind the “theory,” the year before that the win by these same Kansas City Chiefs (who, despite a rough 2025, have become something of a regular in the big contest in recent years) 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).
And then there was the year before that when a win by the (old NFL and) 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 — and are, of course, back this year, albeit under new “management”) — 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 DO show up a lot — though it’s been a while) bested the Seattle Seahawks[iii] 28-24 to earn their (at the time) fourth Super Bowl title. Yes, those same Seattle Seahawks that will face those (same) New England Patriots on Sunday.
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 (yes, they show up a lot also — they just miss Joe Montana) — 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 (and people who like to see the Patriots lose in dramatic fashion).
Steel ‘Curtains’?
On the other hand, the year before that, the Pittsburgh Steelers (representing the American Football Conference, but an old NFL team) 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 (yes, they’ve been here more than you might appreciate — unless you’re a Seahawks fan, anyway).
- 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, and yes, those New York Giants) 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 – albeit just 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.
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 (what did I tell you?) made their first Super Bowl appearance — and lost — the S&P 500 gained nearly 16%.
Some Fun Facts to Share About the Game
This is the first time the Super Bowl has ever been played on February 8. It’s a rematch of Super Bowl XLIX. Super Bowl rematches are uncommon — this will be the 10th such pairing where the same two teams have met in the big game before. Historically, rematch teams have won back-to-back about two-thirds of the time.
The New England Patriots have chosen to wear all-white uniforms — white jerseys and white pants — for the game. They had the choice as the designated home team and opted for the white combo, in which they’re undefeated this season. The Seattle Seahawks will wear their navy-blue jerseys and navy-blue pants, continuing the look they wore in their playoff wins. Which means this matchup will feature an especially striking all-white vs. all-navy contrast — something rare in Super Bowl history and highly visual for TV broadcasts.
Through the first 59 Super Bowls (up to SB LIX), the white-jersey team has won roughly ~65–70% of the time. Notwithstanding that trend, the Seahawks are (currently) favored to win.
Overall, 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
[i] 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…
[ii] “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.
[iii] As an interesting side 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.
