by Gary Alexander
February 18, 2026
The last seven-days delivered no fewer than seven-holidays, averaging one per-day. First came Lincoln’s Birthday (February 12), which was a distinct holiday in my youth, before the birth of “President’s Day” (February 16 this year). Valentine’s Day came last Saturday, then a pair of special Tuesday celebrations, Mardi Gras in New Orleans, and the Chinese New Year. Today is a downer – as February 18th is “Ash Wednesday,” the start of a 40-day Lent, on the same day the 30-day fasts of Ramadan begin.
In 1968, the “Uniform Monday Holiday Act” created a new Monday holiday on the Monday between Lincoln’s and Washington’s birthday (February 22), arguably our two most consequential Presidents, as “President’s Day,” but there are actually four Presidents born in February – not just Lincoln and Washington. Perhaps the two most consequential 20th Century Presidents were also born in mid-winter: Franklin Roosevelt was born just before February, on January 30, 1882, and Ronald Reagan was born on February 6, 1911. This quartet could become our modified winter version of a new Mount Rushmore:
One other President was born in February, William Henry Harrison, born February 9, 1773. He gave a 2-hour Inauguration talk, sans coat, in freezing weather and died a month later – our shortest-term leader,
President Washington’s greatest act was perhaps to resign to his farm and not become King George I. He was also elected unanimously and refused to start (or join) a political party. After him, the partisan wars began, first with Adams vs. Jefferson, then the Whigs (like Harrison) vs. Republicans and Democrats.
The first Democratic National Convention was held in 1832, making the Democrats the oldest political party in the world. (Britain’s Conservative Party, the Tories, are the second oldest, founded in 1834).
The Republican Party, founded in 1854, is the #3 longest-living Party, but Washington loathed partisans.
Which Party (or President) is Best for the Stock Market?
Turning to the stock market, pundits have long argued over whether Republicans (who dominated the White House from 1860 to 1932), are better for business than the Democrats (who dominated from 1932 to 1980 and recently, 2008 to 2024). Several charts show stock markets performing better under our Democratic leaders – ignoring the composition of Congress. I have long argued – and shown here in charts – gridlock (one-party controlling Congress, the other controlling the White House) is the best mix for market performance, because it provides checks and balances against too much federal mischief.
However, transition times in election years are hard to score, like the 2000 dot-com bubble, the 2008 financial crisis, and a 2020 COVID attack coming at the end of one presidency and launch of another.
Most long-term investors ride out any crashes, but if you want to measure a president’s market impact you have to decide starting and ending points. Do you measure from: (1) election day, or (2) the start of the calendar year, or (3) inauguration day, or even (4) long before election day, when markets tend to anticipate the next president’s victory in advance? I’m sorry if this turns a clear debate into a complex study, but here are a few caveats for measuring presidencies, parties or market performance in their term:
- VOLATILITY is a big deal, as big crashes can cause some investors to sell prematurely.
- The content of CONGRESS at the time is also a big deal, as in the Clinton years, for instance.
- How much the President cooperates with Congress also makes a big difference.
- Most importantly, you also must account for inflation, which most charts don’t do.
So, all the historical charts of market performance based on Presidents and Parties are basically either woefully incomplete or worthless. It’s far better, in my view, to look at the policies passed in Congress during a President’s years in office: To measure presidential performance more accurately, we should:
- Examine the Economic POLICIES passed by a President and Congress together. For instance, President Clinton and the Gingrich Republicans passed capital gains tax cuts and created balanced budgets, 1997-2001. Which Party – or both, or neither – should get credit for those surpluses.
- Adjust all returns for inflation and volatility. Then combine these forces to rate presidential eras.
Here are three-examples of how tax cuts created market strength under each Party since the 1960s:
Example 1: 1963-68: Tax Cuts under a Democratic President and Congress (Kennedy-Johnson)
In “Taxes Have Consequences: An Income Tax History of the United States” (2022), Art Laffer and two other PhD economists (Jeanne Carnes Sinquefield and Brian Domatrovic) focused on the 110-years since the birth of the Fed and income taxes in 1913. Here is the first-example, of Democratic tax-cuts:
From 1952 to 1963, the top income tax rate was 91%, resulting in slow growth under President Eisenhower, including three-recessions (charted below), but Democratic President John Kennedy proposed a cut in top tax-rates from 91% to 70% plus a cut in corporate taxes and trade tariffs. He was assassinated before his ideas passed, but Lyndon Johnson passed the “Kennedy-Johnson tax-cuts,” and the nation prospered for the rest of the 1960s, creating the longest, strongest postwar recovery so far.
Graphs are for illustrative and discussion purposes only. Please read important disclosures at the end of this commentary.
Example 2: Late 1990s: Tax-Cuts under a Democratic President and Republican Congress (1994-2000)
When the Republicans took over the House for the first time in 40-years (in 1994), President Bill Clinton changed his policy directives. He made dramatic statements, such as “The era of big government is over” and “This is the end of welfare as we know it,” and he meant it. He also cut capital gains taxes from 28% to 20% at the start of his second-term, creating a growth spurt, not to mention five-straight years of 20% or greater growth in the S&P 500, from 1995 to 1999. The end result was four-straight balanced budgets in the federal fiscal years ending 1998 through 2001, but then debt returned with a vengeance after 2001.
Example #3: 2019-2025: Higher Revenues Helped a Democrat (Biden) after a Republican Tax-Cut
The Trump tax cuts passed in late 2017 and took effect in 2018. Trump’s final “normal” fiscal year was 2019, before COVID changed our world. Since President Biden did not repeal or change the Trump tax-cuts, we now have what amounts to seven years of prosperity under Trump’s tax-cuts interrupted by one-year of COVID-shutdowns in 2020. Who gets credit for rising tax revenues and stock prices, Biden or Trump? Since 2019, annual revenues are up 51%, but federal spending is up even more, +57.6% in those same six-years, with cumulative deficits of $12.6-trillion, 2020-25, averaging $2.1-trillion per year.
It is understandable to see spending rise 50% in 2020, the COVID year, but why did spending stay well over $6-trillion every year thereafter? The Consumer Price Index (CPI) rose 26.5% from September 30, 2019 – the last day of fiscal year 2019 – to September 30, 2025 (the last day of fiscal year 2025), while federal spending more than doubled the CPI rate, at +57.6%. Spending is the problem, not tax revenue.
And now we have the 2025 tax-cuts starting to reward most households in the form of lower withholding taxes, greater tax refunds and the repeal of taxes on tips, overtime and some Social Security benefits. We don’t know yet how growth will follow but Louis Navellier and others now see 5% GDP growth in 2026.
All content above represents the opinion of Gary Alexander of Navellier & Associates, Inc.
Also In This Issue
A Look Ahead by Louis Navellier
A New Era at the Fed is About to Begin
Income Mail by Bryan Perry
Energy Infrastructure Stocks are in Rally Mode
Growth Mail by Gary Alexander
A President’s Day Retrospective on How Politics Impact Markets
Global Mail by Ivan Martchev
The NASDAQ 100’s Gravitational Pull
Sector Spotlight by Jason Bodner
Major Market Indexes Have Defied Expectations – So Far in 2026
View Full Archive
Read Past Issues Here
About The Author
Gary Alexander
SENIOR EDITOR
Gary Alexander has been Senior Writer at Navellier since 2009. He edits Navellier’s weekly Marketmail and writes a weekly Growth Mail column, in which he uses market history to support the case for growth stocks. For the previous 20-years before joining Navellier, he was Senior Executive Editor at InvestorPlace Media (formerly Phillips Publishing), where he worked with several leading investment analysts, including Louis Navellier (since 1997), helping launch Louis Navellier’s Blue Chip Growth and Global Growth newsletters.
Prior to that, Gary edited Wealth Magazine and Gold Newsletter and wrote various investment research reports for Jefferson Financial in New Orleans in the 1980s. He began his financial newsletter career with KCI Communications in 1980, where he served as consulting editor for Personal Finance newsletter while serving as general manager of KCI’s Alexandria House book division. Before that, he covered the economics beat for news magazines. All content of “Growth Mail” represents the opinion of Gary Alexander
Important Disclosures:
Although information in these reports has been obtained from and is based upon sources that Navellier believes to be reliable, Navellier does not guarantee its accuracy and it may be incomplete or condensed. All opinions and estimates constitute Navellier’s judgment as of the date the report was created and are subject to change without notice. These reports are for informational purposes only and are not a solicitation for the purchase or sale of a security. Any decision to purchase securities mentioned in these reports must take into account existing public information on such securities or any registered prospectus.To the extent permitted by law, neither Navellier & Associates, Inc., nor any of its affiliates, agents, or service providers assumes any liability or responsibility nor owes any duty of care for any consequences of any person acting or refraining to act in reliance on the information contained in this communication or for any decision based on it.
Past performance is no indication of future results. Investment in securities involves significant risk and has the potential for partial or complete loss of funds invested. It should not be assumed that any securities recommendations made by Navellier. in the future will be profitable or equal the performance of securities made in this report. Dividend payments are not guaranteed. The amount of a dividend payment, if any, can vary over time and issuers may reduce dividends paid on securities in the event of a recession or adverse event affecting a specific industry or issuer.
None of the stock information, data, and company information presented herein constitutes a recommendation by Navellier or a solicitation to buy or sell any securities. Any specific securities identified and described do not represent all of the securities purchased, sold, or recommended for advisory clients. The holdings identified do not represent all of the securities purchased, sold, or recommended for advisory clients and the reader should not assume that investments in the securities identified and discussed were or will be profitable.
Information presented is general information that does not take into account your individual circumstances, financial situation, or needs, nor does it present a personalized recommendation to you. Individual stocks presented may not be suitable for every investor. Investment in securities involves significant risk and has the potential for partial or complete loss of funds invested. Investment in fixed income securities has the potential for the investment return and principal value of an investment to fluctuate so that an investor’s holdings, when redeemed, may be worth less than their original cost.
One cannot invest directly in an index. Index is unmanaged and index performance does not reflect deduction of fees, expenses, or taxes. Presentation of Index data does not reflect a belief by Navellier that any stock index constitutes an investment alternative to any Navellier equity strategy or is necessarily comparable to such strategies. Among the most important differences between the Indices and Navellier strategies are that the Navellier equity strategies may (1) incur material management fees, (2) concentrate its investments in relatively few stocks, industries, or sectors, (3) have significantly greater trading activity and related costs, and (4) be significantly more or less volatile than the Indices.
ETF Risk: We may invest in exchange traded funds (“ETFs”) and some of our investment strategies are generally fully invested in ETFs. Like traditional mutual funds, ETFs charge asset-based fees, but they generally do not charge initial sales charges or redemption fees and investors typically pay only customary brokerage fees to buy and sell ETF shares. The fees and costs charged by ETFs held in client accounts will not be deducted from the compensation the client pays Navellier. ETF prices can fluctuate up or down, and a client account could lose money investing in an ETF if the prices of the securities owned by the ETF go down. ETFs are subject to additional risks:
- ETF shares may trade above or below their net asset value;
- An active trading market for an ETF’s shares may not develop or be maintained;
- The value of an ETF may be more volatile than the underlying portfolio of securities the ETF is designed to track;
- The cost of owning shares of the ETF may exceed those a client would incur by directly investing in the underlying securities; and
- Trading of an ETF’s shares may be halted if the listing exchange’s officials deem it appropriate, the shares are delisted from the exchange, or the activation of market-wide “circuit breakers” (which are tied to large decreases in stock prices) halts stock trading generally.
Grader Disclosures: Investment in equity strategies involves substantial risk and has the potential for partial or complete loss of funds invested. The sample portfolio and any accompanying charts are for informational purposes only and are not to be construed as a solicitation to buy or sell any financial instrument and should not be relied upon as the sole factor in an investment making decision. As a matter of normal and important disclosures to you, as a potential investor, please consider the following: The performance presented is not based on any actual securities trading, portfolio, or accounts, and the reported performance of the A, B, C, D, and F portfolios (collectively the “model portfolios”) should be considered mere “paper” or pro forma performance results based on Navellier’s research.
Investors evaluating any of Navellier & Associates, Inc.’s, (or its affiliates’) Investment Products must not use any information presented here, including the performance figures of the model portfolios, in their evaluation of any Navellier Investment Products. Navellier Investment Products include the firm’s mutual funds and managed accounts. The model portfolios, charts, and other information presented do not represent actual funded trades and are not actual funded portfolios. There are material differences between Navellier Investment Products’ portfolios and the model portfolios, research, and performance figures presented here. The model portfolios and the research results (1) may contain stocks or ETFs that are illiquid and difficult to trade; (2) may contain stock or ETF holdings materially different from actual funded Navellier Investment Product portfolios; (3) include the reinvestment of all dividends and other earnings, estimated trading costs, commissions, or management fees; and, (4) may not reflect prices obtained in an actual funded Navellier Investment Product portfolio. For these and other reasons, the reported performances of model portfolios do not reflect the performance results of Navellier’s actually funded and traded Investment Products. In most cases, Navellier’s Investment Products have materially lower performance results than the performances of the model portfolios presented.
This report contains statements that are, or may be considered to be, forward-looking statements. All statements that are not historical facts, including statements about our beliefs or expectations, are “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of The U.S. Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. These statements may be identified by such forward-looking terminology as “expect,” “estimate,” “plan,” “intend,” “believe,” “anticipate,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “could,” “continue,” “project,” or similar statements or variations of such terms. Our forward-looking statements are based on a series of expectations, assumptions, and projections, are not guarantees of future results or performance, and involve substantial risks and uncertainty as described in Form ADV Part 2A of our filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which is available at www.adviserinfo.sec.gov or by requesting a copy by emailing info@navellier.com. All of our forward-looking statements are as of the date of this report only. We can give no assurance that such expectations or forward-looking statements will prove to be correct. Actual results may differ materially. You are urged to carefully consider all such factors.
FEDERAL TAX ADVICE DISCLAIMER: As required by U.S. Treasury Regulations, you are informed that, to the extent this presentation includes any federal tax advice, the presentation is not written by Navellier to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of avoiding federal tax penalties. Navellier does not advise on any income tax requirements or issues. Use of any information presented by Navellier is for general information only and does not represent tax advice either express or implied. You are encouraged to seek professional tax advice for income tax questions and assistance.
IMPORTANT NEWSLETTER DISCLOSURE:The hypothetical performance results for investment newsletters that are authored or edited by Louis Navellier, including Louis Navellier’s Growth Investor, Louis Navellier’s Breakthrough Stocks, Louis Navellier’s Accelerated Profits, and Louis Navellier’s Platinum Club, are not based on any actual securities trading, portfolio, or accounts, and the newsletters’ reported hypothetical performances should be considered mere “paper” or proforma hypothetical performance results and are not actual performance of real world trades. Navellier & Associates, Inc. does not have any relation to or affiliation with the owner of these newsletters. There are material differences between Navellier Investment Products’ portfolios and the InvestorPlace Media, LLC newsletter portfolios authored by Louis Navellier. The InvestorPlace Media, LLC newsletters contain hypothetical performance that do not include transaction costs, advisory fees, or other fees a client might incur if actual investments and trades were being made by an investor. As a result, newsletter performance should not be used to evaluate Navellier Investment services which are separate and different from the newsletters. The owner of the newsletters is InvestorPlace Media, LLC and any questions concerning the newsletters, including any newsletter advertising or hypothetical Newsletter performance claims, (which are calculated solely by Investor Place Media and not Navellier) should be referred to InvestorPlace Media, LLC at (800) 718-8289.
Please note that Navellier & Associates and the Navellier Private Client Group are managed completely independent of the newsletters owned and published by InvestorPlace Media, LLC and written and edited by Louis Navellier, and investment performance of the newsletters should in no way be considered indicative of potential future investment performance for any Navellier & Associates separately managed account portfolio. Potential investors should consult with their financial advisor before investing in any Navellier Investment Product.
Navellier claims compliance with Global Investment Performance Standards (GIPS). To receive a complete list and descriptions of Navellier’s composites and/or a presentation that adheres to the GIPS standards, please contact Navellier or click here. It should not be assumed that any securities recommendations made by Navellier & Associates, Inc. in the future will be profitable or equal the performance of securities made in this report.
FactSet Disclosure: Navellier does not independently calculate the statistical information included in the attached report. The calculation and the information are provided by FactSet, a company not related to Navellier. Although information contained in the report has been obtained from FactSet and is based on sources Navellier believes to be reliable, Navellier does not guarantee its accuracy, and it may be incomplete or condensed. The report and the related FactSet sourced information are provided on an “as is” basis. The user assumes the entire risk of any use made of this information. Investors should consider the report as only a single factor in making their investment decision. The report is for informational purposes only and is not intended as an offer or solicitation for the purchase or sale of a security. FactSet sourced information is the exclusive property of FactSet. Without prior written permission of FactSet, this information may not be reproduced, disseminated or used to create any financial products. All indices are unmanaged and performance of the indices include reinvestment of dividends and interest income, unless otherwise noted, are not illustrative of any particular investment and an investment cannot be made in any index. Past performance is no guarantee of future results.