1,864 months of data · 1871–2026 · nominal & inflation-adjusted

Historical Drawdown Explorer

Every major peak-to-trough decline for seven stock/bond mixes — 100/0 to 0/100 — measured on one consistent monthly dataset from 1871 to June 2026: how deep, how long down, and how long back, before and after inflation.

The 2008 answer first: on this dataset — Shiller S&P composite total returns plus constant-maturity 10-year Treasuries, rebalanced monthly — a 60/40 portfolio fell 27.1% peak-to-trough in the financial crisis: 17 months down from October 2007 to March 2009, then 19 months back, regaining the prior peak by October 2010. Adjusted for inflation: 28.4%, recovered July 2011. (Daily-price measurements with a blended bond benchmark run deeper — roughly 34%, the figure used in our 2008 stress-test article; the methodology section explains exactly why the conventions differ.)

The context most pages skip: 2007–09 was only the second-deepest nominal 60/40 drawdown since 1871 — 1929–32 reached 61.0% — and in purchasing-power terms it ranks sixth. The 1973–74 episode was 25.1% nominal but 37.1% real, and took until February 1985 to recover its purchasing power. Every number on this page comes from the published dataset.

Every 60/40 drawdown of 15% or more since 1871 — nominal

Peak-to-trough declines in dollar terms for a 60% stock / 40% bond portfolio, monthly rebalanced, dividends and coupons reinvested. "Months back" counts from the trough to the month the prior peak was regained, with no withdrawals along the way.

PeakTroughDepthMonths downRecoveredMonths backPeak to peak
Sep 1929Jun 1932-61.0%33Jul 19364982
Oct 2007Mar 2009-27.1%17Oct 20101936
Mar 1937Apr 1938-25.7%13Mar 19435972
Jan 1973Sep 1974-25.1%20Jan 19761636
Sep 1906Nov 1907-20.9%14Nov 19081226
Mar 1876Jun 1877-19.0%15Sep 18781530
Dec 2021Oct 2022-18.6%10Feb 20241626
Aug 2000Feb 2003-18.2%30Feb 20041242
Nov 1968May 1970-17.0%18Jan 1971826
Nov 1916Dec 1917-17.0%13Mar 19191528
Aug 1987Dec 1987-15.6%4Feb 19891418
Sep 1902Oct 1903-15.3%13Oct 19041225

The 2007–09 episode sits second — well behind 1929–32 — and the 2021–22 decline (18.6%, recovered February 2024) ranks close to the long-run median for depth despite being driven by the bond side as much as the stock side, the only entry in the table for which that is true.

The same portfolio after inflation

The identical 60/40 series deflated by CPI. Inflation reshuffles the ranking: deflationary episodes (1929–32) get milder, inflationary ones (1915–20, 1973–74, 1946–48, 2021–22) get deeper and much longer. This is the version that matters for spending power in retirement.

PeakTroughDepthMonths downRecoveredMonths backPeak to peak
Sep 1929Jun 1932-50.4%33Aug 19353871
Dec 1915Jun 1920-43.7%54Aug 192450104
Jan 1973Dec 1974-37.1%23Feb 1985122145
Feb 1937May 1942-30.9%63Feb 19453396
Apr 1946Feb 1948-29.2%22Aug 19514264
Oct 2007Mar 2009-28.4%17Jul 20112845
Sep 1906Oct 1907-25.0%13Jan 19091528
Nov 1968Jun 1970-24.1%19Mar 19722140
Dec 2021Oct 2022-23.8%10Dec 20242636
Aug 2000Feb 2003-22.8%30Oct 20064474
Jun 1876May 1877-17.7%11Nov 1877617
Jun 1901Oct 1903-16.9%28Jan 19051543
Aug 1987Dec 1987-16.3%4Jun 19891822

Two episodes deserve special attention. The 1973–74 decline took 145 months peak-to-peak in real terms — a retiree who hit that window spent over a decade underwater. And 2007–09, famous as it is, ranks sixth here: inflation was low, which made the real recovery only 28 months from the trough.

How allocation changed each major decline

Worst-ever drawdown and the two most recent major episodes for each mix. The 2007–09 column shows why bonds earned their reputation as ballast — and the 2021–24 column shows the limit of that reputation: in an inflation shock the bond side stops helping, so the column barely improves as stocks are dialed down.

Allocation (stocks/bonds)Worst ever — nominalWorst ever — real2007–09 (nominal)2021–24 (nominal)Declines ≥15% since 1871
100/0 (all stocks)-81.8% (Jun 1932)-76.8% (Jun 1932)-49.0%-19.3%22
80/20-73.1% (Jun 1932)-65.8% (Jun 1932)-38.9%-18.9%17
70/30-67.5% (Jun 1932)-58.7% (Jun 1932)-33.2%-18.7%14
60/40 (traditional)-61.0% (Jun 1932)-50.4% (Jun 1932)-27.1%-18.6%12
50/50-53.3% (Jun 1932)-43.7% (Jun 1920)-20.7%-18.4%8
40/60 (conservative)-44.3% (Jun 1932)-43.8% (Jun 1920)-14.6%-18.3%4
0/100 (all bonds)-25.0% (Oct 2023)-59.5% (Sep 1981)-9.2%-25.0%1

Worst-ever columns show depth and trough date. 2007–09 and 2021–24 columns are the deepest drawdown reached inside those windows (2007–2012 and mid-2021–2025), whether or not it exceeded 15%. Episode counts use the nominal series.

An all-bond portfolio shows a single 15%+ nominal decline in 155 years — and it is the current one: 25.0% by Oct 2023, the deepest nominal bond drawdown in the sample, not yet recovered as of June 2026. In real terms bonds are no refuge at all: a 59.5% loss of purchasing power from 1941 to 1981, with the 1941 peak not regained until November 1989.

Explore: any mix, any era, before or after inflation

Drawdown from running peak, 1871–2026

Percent below the highest value the portfolio had reached up to each month. 0% means at an all-time high.

2007 to today: stocks vs 60/40 vs bonds

Same measure as selected above. The 2007–09 episode is a stock event the bonds cushioned; 2021–24 is the only major episode in the sample where the bond side was the event.

All declines of 15%+ for the selected series

"—" in the Recovered column means the prior peak had not been regained by June 2026 (the end of the data).

History shows the range — your plan sets the stakes. Run your own balances and spending through 10,000 simulated futures, including crisis-correlation scenarios, and find the exact decline your plan survives. Free, in your browser.

Find your breaking point →

How to read a drawdown table

Depth is not the cost — time is

Depth and duration are separate risks. For a 60/40 mix, 1973–74 was about nine points deeper than 2007–09 in real terms (37.1% vs 28.4%) — but its real recovery took more than four times as long: 122 months back from the trough versus 28. For anyone withdrawing from the portfolio, the long version is far more expensive: every month underwater is a month of selling depressed assets. That mechanism — not the headline percentage — is sequence-of-returns risk.

Nominal vs real is not a technicality

Before inflation, 1929–32 is the catastrophic outlier and everything since looks moderate. After inflation, the chart redistributes: 1915–20 and 1973–74 join the top tier, 1946–48 appears almost from nowhere, and 2021–22 deepens from 18.6% to 23.8%. Retirement spending is real, so the second table is the one that prices the risk.

Bonds are an allocation decision, not a safety switch

The 2007–09 column of the allocation table rewards every step toward bonds, because Treasuries returned +19.1% in calendar 2008 while stocks lost 39.2%. The 2021–24 column barely moves as stocks are dialed down — both assets fell together. Which regime shows up next is not knowable in advance; the regime monitor tracks where the data says we are now.

Methodology

Related: what 2008 did to a 60/40 retirement plan (Monte Carlo, with withdrawals and crisis correlations), the Withdrawal Strategy Lab (five spending rules on identical simulated paths), and sequence-of-returns risk explained.

FAQ

What was the maximum drawdown of a 60/40 portfolio in 2008?

On this page's 155-year monthly dataset: 27.1% peak-to-trough, October 2007 to March 2009, recovered by October 2010. On daily prices with a blended bond benchmark that includes corporate bonds, the same episode measures roughly 34% — the conventions, not the history, account for the difference.

What is the worst drawdown a 60/40 portfolio has ever experienced?

1929–32: 61.0% nominal (50.4% after the deflation of the early 1930s). The financial crisis, at 27.1%, ranks second nominal and only sixth in purchasing-power terms.

How long did a 60/40 portfolio take to recover from 2008?

17 months down, 19 months back — 36 months peak to peak in nominal terms, until July 2011 in real terms, assuming no withdrawals. With withdrawals the recovery stretches further; the 2008 stress-test article works that case through.

Are portfolio drawdowns worse after inflation?

Inflationary episodes, much worse: 1973–74 deepens from 25.1% to 37.1% and the recovery stretches to 145 months peak-to-peak. Deflationary ones, milder: 1929–32 softens from 61.0% to 50.4%. For bonds the real picture is dominant — 59.5% of purchasing power lost between 1941 and 1981.

Do bonds protect a portfolio during a market decline?

In deflationary declines, strongly (2008: Treasuries +19.1%, stocks 39.2%). In inflationary ones, little or not at all — 2021–24 produced the deepest nominal bond drawdown in the sample (25.0%), and a 40/60 mix fell nearly as far as an 80/20 in that window. The protection is regime-dependent, which is why the stress tester models crisis correlations explicitly.

Why do published 2008 drawdown figures differ?

Price sampling (monthly averages vs daily closes), bond benchmark (Treasuries vs broad indexes with corporates), and rebalancing frequency. This page holds one convention constant across 155 years so that eras are comparable with each other; daily-convention numbers for 2007–09 are deeper. Both are correct under their stated assumptions.

Get new research like this by email

Occasional deep dives — drawdown history, withdrawal strategies, regime models, simulation methodology. No more than monthly. Free.