Lehman Brothers, the fourth largest investment bank on Wall Street, declared bankruptcy on the 15th of September 2008, becoming the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history. The investment house, which was founded in the mid-19th century, had become heavily involved in the U.S. housing bubble in the early 2000s, with its large holdings of toxic mortgage-backed securities (MBS) ultimately causing the bank's downfall. The bank had expanded rapidly following the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act in 1999, which meant that investment banks could also engage in commercial banking activities. Lehman vertically integrated their mortgage business, buying smaller commercial enterprises that originated housing loans, which allowed the bank to expand its MBS holdings. The downfall of Lehman and the crash of '08 As the U.S. housing market began to slow down in 2006, the default rate on housing loans began to spike, triggering losses for Lehman from their MBS portfolio. Lehman's main competitor in mortgage financing, Bear Stearns, was bought by J.P. Morgan Chase in order to prevent bankruptcy in March 2008, leading investors and lenders to become increasingly concerned about the bank's financial health. As the bank relied on short-term funding on money markets in order to meet its obligations, the news of its huge losses in the third-quarter of 2008 further prevented it from funding itself on financial markets. By September, it was clear that without external assistance, the bank would fail. As its losses from credit default swaps mounted due to the deepening crash in the housing market, Lehman was forced to declare bankruptcy on September 15, as no buyer could be found to save the bank. The collapse of Lehman triggered panic in global financial markets, forcing the U.S. government to step in and bail-out the insurance giant AIG the next day on September 16. The effects of this financial crisis hit the non-financial economy hard, causing a global recession in 2009.

This paper utilizes data on subjective probabilities to study the impact of the stock market crash of 2008 on households' expectations about the returns on the stock market index. We use data from the Health and Retirement Study that was fielded in February 2008 through February 2009. The effect of the crash is identified from the date of the interview, which is shown to be exogenous to previous stock market expectations. We estimate the effect of the crash on the population average of expected returns, the population average of the uncertainty about returns (subjective standard deviation), and the cross-sectional heterogeneity in expected returns (disagreement). We show estimates from simple reduced-form regressions on probability answers as well as from a more structural model that focuses on the parameters of interest and separates survey noise from relevant heterogeneity. We find a temporary increase in the population average of expectations and uncertainty right after the crash. The effect on cross-sectional heterogeneity is more significant and longer lasting, which implies substantial long-term increase in disagreement. The increase in disagreement is larger among the stockholders, the more informed, and those with higher cognitive capacity, and disagreement co-moves with trading volume and volatility in the market.

This is not going to be an article or Op-Ed about Michael Jordan. Since 2009 we've been in the longest bull-market in history, that's 11 years and counting. However a few metrics like the stock market P/E, the call to put ratio and of course the Shiller P/E suggest a great crash is coming in-between the levels of 1929 and the dot.com bubble. Mean reversion historically is inevitable and the Fed's printing money experiment could end in disaster for the stock market in late 2021 or 2022. You can read Jeremy Grantham's Last Dance article here. You are likely well aware of Michael Burry's predicament as well. It's easier for you just to skim through two related videos on this topic of a stock market crash. Michael Burry's Warning see this YouTube. Jeremy Grantham's Warning See this YouTube. Typically when there is a major event in the world, there is a crash and then a bear market and a recovery that takes many many months. In March, 2020 that's not what we saw since the Fed did some astonishing things that means a liquidity sloth and the risk of a major inflation event. The pandemic represented the quickest decline of at least 30% in the history of the benchmark S&P 500, but the recovery was not correlated to anything but Fed intervention. Since the pandemic clearly isn't disappearing and many sectors such as travel, business travel, tourism and supply chain disruptions appear significantly disrupted - the so-called economic recovery isn't so great. And there's this little problem at the heart of global capitalism today, the stock market just keeps going up. Crashes and corrections typically occur frequently in a normal market. But the Fed liquidity and irresponsible printing of money is creating a scenario where normal behavior isn't occurring on the markets. According to data provided by market analytics firm Yardeni Research, the benchmark index has undergone 38 declines of at least 10% since the beginning of 1950. Since March, 2020 we've barely seen a down month. September, 2020 was flat-ish. The S&P 500 has more than doubled since those lows. Look at the angle of the curve: The S&P 500 was 735 at the low in 2009, so in this bull market alone it has gone up 6x in valuation. That's not a normal cycle and it could mean we are due for an epic correction. I have to agree with the analysts who claim that the long, long bull market since 2009 has finally matured into a fully-fledged epic bubble. There is a complacency, buy-the dip frenzy and general meme environment to what BigTech can do in such an environment. The weight of Apple, Amazon, Alphabet, Microsoft, Facebook, Nvidia and Tesla together in the S&P and Nasdaq is approach a ridiculous weighting. When these stocks are seen both as growth, value and companies with unbeatable moats the entire dynamics of the stock market begin to break down. Check out FANG during the pandemic. BigTech is Seen as Bullet-Proof me valuations and a hysterical speculative behavior leads to even higher highs, even as 2020 offered many younger people an on-ramp into investing for the first time. Some analysts at JP Morgan are even saying that until retail investors stop charging into stocks, markets probably don’t have too much to worry about. Hedge funds with payment for order flows can predict exactly how these retail investors are behaving and monetize them. PFOF might even have to be banned by the SEC. The risk-on market theoretically just keeps going up until the Fed raises interest rates, which could be in 2023! For some context, we're more than 1.4 years removed from the bear-market bottom of the coronavirus crash and haven't had even a 5% correction in nine months. This is the most over-priced the market has likely ever been. At the night of the dot-com bubble the S&P 500 was only 1,400. Today it is 4,500, not so many years after. Clearly something is not quite right if you look at history and the P/E ratios. A market pumped with liquidity produces higher earnings with historically low interest rates, it's an environment where dangerous things can occur. In late 1997, as the S&P 500 passed its previous 1929 peak of 21x earnings, that seemed like a lot, but nothing compared to today. For some context, the S&P 500 Shiller P/E closed last week at 38.58, which is nearly a two-decade high. It's also well over double the average Shiller P/E of 16.84, dating back 151 years. So the stock market is likely around 2x over-valued. Try to think rationally about what this means for valuations today and your favorite stock prices, what should they be in historical terms? The S&P 500 is up 31% in the past year. It will likely hit 5,000 before a correction given the amount of added liquidity to the system and the QE the Fed is using that's like a huge abuse of MMT, or Modern Monetary Theory. This has also lent to bubbles in the housing market, crypto and even commodities like Gold with long-term global GDP meeting many headwinds in the years ahead due to a...

Interactive chart of the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) stock market index for the last 100 years. Historical data is inflation-adjusted using the headline CPI and each data point represents the month-end closing value. The current month is updated on an hourly basis with today's latest value.

From the Summer of 2007 until the end of 2009 (at least), the world was gripped by a series of economic crises commonly known as the Global Financial Crisis (2007-2008) and the Great Recession (2008-2009). The financial crisis was triggered by the collapse of the U.S. housing market, which caused panic on Wall Street, the center of global finance in New York. Due to the outsized nature of the U.S. economy compared to other countries and particularly the centrality of U.S. finance for the world economy, the crisis spread quickly to other countries, affecting most regions across the globe. By 2009, global GDP growth was in negative territory, with international credit markets frozen, international trade contracting, and tens of millions of workers being made unemployed.

Global similarities, global differences

Since the 1980s, the world economy had entered a period of integration and globalization. This process particularly accelerated after the collapse of the Soviet Union ended the Cold War (1947-1991). This was the period of the 'Washington Consensus', whereby the U.S. and international institutions such as the World Bank and IMF promoted policies of economic liberalization across the globe. This increasing interdependence and openness to the global economy meant that when the crisis hit in 2007, many countries experienced the same issues. This is particularly evident in the synchronization of the recessions in the most advanced economies of the G7. Nevertheless, the aggregate global GDP number masks the important regional differences which occurred during the recession. While the more advanced economies of North America, Western Europe, and Japan were all hit hard, along with countries who are reliant on them for trade or finance, large emerging economies such as India and China bucked this trend. In particular, China's huge fiscal stimulus in 2008-2009 likely did much to prevent the global economy from sliding further into a depression. In 2009, while the United States' GDP sank to -2.6 percent, China's GDP, as reported by national authorities, was almost 10 percent.

Traditional measures of dependence in time series are based on correlations or periodograms. These are adequate in many circumstances but, in others, especially when trying to assess market linkages and tail risk during abnormal times (e.g., financial contagion), they might be inappropriate. In particular, popular tail dependence measures based on exceedance correlations and marginal expected shortfall (MES) have large variances and also contain limited information on tail risk. Motivated by these limitations, we introduce the (tail-restricted) integrated regression function, and we show how it characterizes conditional dependence and persistence. We propose simple estimates for these measures and establish their asymptotic properties. We employ the proposed methods to analyze the dependence structure of some of the major international stock market indices before, during, and after the 2007–2009 financial crisis. Monte Carlo simulations and the application show that our new measures are more reliable and accurate than competing methods based on MES or exceedance correlations for testing tail dependence. Supplementary materials for this article are available online.

This paper looks at the relationship between negative news and stock markets in times of global crisis, such as the 2008/2009 period. We analysed one year of front page banner headlines of three financial newspapers, the Wall Street Journal, Financial Times, and Il Sole24ore to examine the influence of bad news both on stock market volatility and dynamic correlation. Our results show that the press and markets influenced each other in generating market volatility and in particular, that the Wall Street Journal had a crucial effect both on the volatility and correlation between the US and foreign markets. We also found significant differences between newspapers in their interpretation of the crisis, with the Financial Times being significantly pessimistic even in phases of low market volatility. Our results confirm the reflexive nature of stock markets. When the situation is uncertain and unpredictable, market behaviour may even reflect qualitative, big picture, and subjective information such as streamers in a newspaper, whose economic and informative value is questionable.

Interactive chart of the S&P 500 stock market index since 1927. Historical data is inflation-adjusted using the headline CPI and each data point represents the month-end closing value. The current month is updated on an hourly basis with today's latest value.

With the collapse of the U.S. housing market and the subsequent financial crisis on Wall Street in 2007 and 2008, economies across the globe began to enter into deep recessions. What had started out as a crisis centered on the United States quickly became global in nature, as it became apparent that not only had the economies of other advanced countries (grouped together as the G7) become intimately tied to the U.S. financial system, but that many of them had experienced housing and asset price bubbles similar to that in the U.S.. The United Kingdom had experienced a huge inflation of housing prices since the 1990s, while Eurozone members (such as Germany, France and Italy) had financial sectors which had become involved in reckless lending to economies on the periphery of the EU, such as Greece, Ireland and Portugal. Other countries, such as Japan, were hit heavily due their export-led growth models which suffered from the decline in international trade. Unemployment during the Great Recession As business and consumer confidence crashed, credit markets froze, and international trade contracted, the unemployment rate in the most advanced economies shot up. While four to five percent is generally considered to be a healthy unemployment rate, nearing full employment in the economy (when any remaining unemployment is not related to a lack of consumer demand), many of these countries experienced rates at least double that, with unemployment in the United States peaking at almost 10 percent in 2010. In large countries, unemployment rates of this level meant millions or tens of millions of people being out of work, which led to political pressures to stimulate economies and create jobs. By 2012, many of these countries were seeing declining unemployment rates, however, in France and Italy rates of joblessness continued to increase as the Euro crisis took hold. These countries suffered from having a monetary policy which was too tight for their economies (due to the ECB controlling interest rates) and fiscal policy which was constrained by EU debt rules. Left with the option of deregulating their labor markets and pursuing austerity policies, their unemployment rates remained over 10 percent well into the 2010s. Differences in labor markets The differences in unemployment rates at the peak of the crisis (2009-2010) reflect not only the differences in how economies were affected by the downturn, but also the differing labor market institutions and programs in the various countries. Countries with more 'liberalized' labor markets, such as the United States and United Kingdom experienced sharp jumps in their unemployment rate due to the ease at which employers can lay off workers in these countries. When the crisis subsided in these countries, however, their unemployment rates quickly began to drop below those of the other countries, due to their more dynamic labor markets which make it easier to hire workers when the economy is doing well. On the other hand, countries with more 'coordinated' labor market institutions, such as Germany and Japan, experiences lower rates of unemployment during the crisis, as programs such as short-time work, job sharing, and wage restraint agreements were used to keep workers in their jobs. While these countries are less likely to experience spikes in unemployment during crises, the highly regulated nature of their labor markets mean that they are slower to add jobs during periods of economic prosperity.

The Great Recession was a period of economic contraction which came in the wake of the Global Financial Crisis of 2007-2008. The recession was triggered by the collapse of the U.S. housing market and subsequent bankruptcies among Wall Street financial institutions, the most significant of which being the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers in September 2008, the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history. These economic convulsions caused consumer confidence, measured by the Consumer Confidence Index (CCI), to drop sharply in 2007 and the beginning of 2008. How does the Consumer Confidence Index work? The CCI measures household's expectation of their future economic situation and, consequently, their likely future spending and savings decisions. A score of 100 in the index would indicate a neutral economic outlook, with consumers neither being optimistic nor pessimistic about the near future. Scores below 100 are then more pessimistic, while scores above 100 indicate optimism about the economy. Consumer confidence can have a self-fulfilling effect on the economy, as when consumers are pessimistic about the economy, they tend to save and postpone spending, contracting aggregate demand and causing the economy to slow down. Conversely, when consumers are optimistic and willing to spend, this can have a reinforcing effect as wages and employment may rise when consumers spend more. CCI and the Great Recession As the reality of the trouble which the U.S. financial sector was in set in over 2007, consumer confidence dropped sharply from being slightly positive, to being deeply pessimistic by the Summer of 2008. While confidence began to slowly rebound up until September 2008, with the panic caused by Lehman's bankruptcy and the freezing of new credit creation, the CCI plummeted once more, reaching its lowest point during the recession in February 2008. The U.S. government stepped in to prevent the bankruptcy of AIG in 2008, promising to do the same for any future possible failures in the financial system. This 'backstopping' policy, whereby the government assured that the economy would not be allowed to fall further into crisis, along with the Federal Reserve's unconventional monetary policies used to restart the economy, contributed to a rebound in consumer confidence in 2009 and 2010. In spite of this, consumers still remained pessimistic about the economy.

Interactive historical chart showing the daily level of the CBOE VIX Volatility Index back to 1990. The VIX index measures the expectation of stock market volatility over the next 30 days implied by S&P 500 index options.

The latest closing stock price for Microsoft as of June 18, 2025 is 480.24. An investor who bought $1,000 worth of Microsoft stock at the IPO in 1986 would have $8,056,718 today, roughly 8,057 times their original investment - a 25.94% compound annual growth rate over 39 years. The all-time high Microsoft stock closing price was 480.24 on June 18, 2025. The Microsoft 52-week high stock price is 481.00, which is 0.2% above the current share price. The Microsoft 52-week low stock price is 344.79, which is 28.2% below the current share price. The average Microsoft stock price for the last 52 weeks is 422.77. For more information on how our historical price data is adjusted see the Stock Price Adjustment Guide.

Mehrstufig geschichtete Zufallsauswahl nach dem Random-Route-Verfahren

On October 29, 1929, the U.S. experienced the most devastating stock market crash in it's history. The Wall Street Crash of 1929 set in motion the Great Depression, which lasted for twelve years and affected virtually all industrialized countries. In the United States, GDP fell to it's lowest recorded level of just 57 billion U.S dollars in 1933, before rising again shortly before the Second World War. After the war, GDP fluctuated, but it increased gradually until the Great Recession in 2008. Real GDP Real GDP allows us to compare GDP over time, by adjusting all figures for inflation. In this case, all numbers have been adjusted to the value of the US dollar in FY2012. While GDP rose every year between 1946 and 2008, when this is adjusted for inflation it can see that the real GDP dropped at least once in every decade except the 1960s and 2010s. The Great Recession Apart from the Great Depression, and immediately after WWII, there have been two times where both GDP and real GDP dropped together. The first was during the Great Recession, which lasted from December 2007 until June 2009 in the US, although its impact was felt for years after this. After the collapse of the financial sector in the US, the government famously bailed out some of the country's largest banking and lending institutions. Since recovery began in late 2009, US GDP has grown year-on-year, and reached 21.4 trillion dollars in 2019. The coronavirus pandemic and the associated lockdowns then saw GDP fall again, for the first time in a decade. As economic recovery from the pandemic has been compounded by supply chain issues, inflation, and rising global geopolitical instability, it remains to be seen what the future holds for the U.S. economy.

From the onset of the Global Financial Crisis in the Summer of 2007, the world economy experienced an almost unprecedented period of turmoil in which millions of people were made unemployed, businesses declared bankruptcy en masse, and structurally critical financial institutions failed. The crisis was triggered by the collapse of the U.S. housing market and subsequent losses by investment banks such as Bear Stearns, Lehman Brothers, and Merrill Lynch. These institutions, which had become over-leveraged with complex financial securities known as derivatives, were tied to each other through a web of financial contracts, meaning that the collapse of one investment bank could trigger the collapse of several others. As Lehman Brothers failed on September 15. 2008, becoming the largest bankruptcy in U.S. history, shockwaves were felt throughout the global financial system. The sudden stop of flows of credit worldwide caused a financial panic and sent most of the world's largest economies into a deep recession, later known as the Great Recession. The World Economy in recession
More than any other period in history, the world economy had become highly interconnected and interdependent over the period from the 1970s to 2007. As governments liberalized financial flows, banks and other financial institutions could take money in one country and invest it in another part of the globe. Financial institutions and other non-financial companies became multinational, meaning that they had subsidiaries and partners in many regions. All this meant that when Wall Street, the center of global finance in New York City, was shaken by bankruptcies and credit freezes in late 2007, other advanced economies did not need to wait long to feel the tremors. All of the G7 countries, the seven most economically advanced western-aligned countries, entered recession in 2008, before experiencing an even deeper trough in 2009. While all returned to growth by 2010, this was less stable in the countries of the Eurozone (Germany, France, Italy) over the following years due to the Eurozone crisis, as well as in Japan, which has had issues with low growth since the mid-1990s.

As of January 2025, the largest all-time bankruptcy in the United States remained Lehman Brothers. The New York-based investment bank had assets worth 691 billion U.S. dollars when it filed for bankruptcy on September 15, 2008. This event was one of the major points in the timeline of the Great Recession, as it was the first time a bank of its size had failed and had a domino effect on the global banking sector, as well as wiping almost five percent of the S&P 500 in one day. Bank failures in the U.S. In March 2023, for the first time since 2021, two banks collapsed in the United States. Both bank failures made the list of largest bankruptcies in terms of total assets lost: The failure of Silicon Valley Bank amounted to roughly 209 billion U.S. dollars worth of assets lost, while Signature Bank had approximately 110.4 billion U.S. dollars when it collapsed. These failures mark the second- and the third-largest bank failures in the U.S. since 2001. Unprofitable banks in the U.S. The collapse of Silicon Valley Bank and Signature Bank painted an alarming picture of the U.S. banking industry. In reality, however, the state of the industry was much better in 2022 than in earlier periods of economic downturns. The share of unprofitable banks, for instance, was 3.4 percent in 2022, which was an increase compared to 2021, but remained well below the share of unprofitable banks in 2020, let alone during the global financial crisis in 2008. The share of unprofitable banks in the U.S. peaked in 2009, when almost 30 percent of all FDIC-insured commercial banks and savings institutions were unprofitable.

The foreclosure rate in the United States has experienced significant fluctuations over the past two decades, reaching its peak in 2010 at **** percent following the financial crisis. Since then, the rate has steadily declined, with a notable drop to **** percent in 2021 due to government interventions during the COVID-19 pandemic. In 2024, the rate stood slightly higher at **** percent but remained well below historical averages, indicating a relatively stable housing market. Impact of economic conditions on foreclosures The foreclosure rate is closely tied to broader economic trends and housing market conditions. During the aftermath of the 2008 financial crisis, the share of non-performing mortgage loans climbed significantly, with loans 90 to 180 days past due reaching *** percent. Since then, the share of seriously delinquent loans has dropped notably, demonstrating a substantial improvement in mortgage performance. Among other things, the improved mortgage performance has to do with changes in the mortgage approval process. Homebuyers are subject to much stricter lending standards, such as higher credit score requirements. These changes ensure that borrowers can meet their payment obligations and are at a lower risk of defaulting and losing their home. Challenges for potential homebuyers Despite the low foreclosure rates, potential homebuyers face significant challenges in the current market. Homebuyer sentiment worsened substantially in 2021 and remained low across all age groups through 2024, with the 45 to 64 age group expressing the most negative outlook. Factors contributing to this sentiment include high housing costs and various financial obligations. For instance, in 2023, ** percent of non-homeowners reported that student loan expenses hindered their ability to save for a down payment.

In 2021, due to the coronavirus pandemic, the global airline industry is estimated to suffer another 42.1 billion U.S. dollars in net losses, after reporting 137.7 billion U.S. dollars in net losses in 2020.

Recent changes in worldwide aviation since 2000s

Growth of middle-class and global interconnectedness facilitated the expansion of aviation market throughout recent decades. From 2006 to 2019, global air traffic passenger demand increased continuously, except for 2009 because of the global financial crisis in 2008. Expansion of the aviation market transformed the aviation economy gradually. For instance, there is a market power shift between full service and other carriers (FSOCs) and low-cost carriers (LCCs) globally. Since LCCs offer almost the same main service for a comparatively cheaper price, LCCs operated flights are on high demand by customers. LCCs’ market share in Europe was roughly 45 percent of the total aviation market in 2020. The net profit of commercial airlines worldwide from 2006 to 2019 increased somewhat continuously, reaching 26.4 billion U.S. dollars in 2019. The continuity of growth was disturbed during and after the 2008 global financial crisis. From 2008 to 2009, commercial airlines incurred a net loss because of the economic shock.

COVID-19 and the aviation industry

While contemplating the potential occurrence of next economic shocks, the global economy and society got hit by an immensely strong health shock, the coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak. Since the possibility of a global health shock was neglected by the political authorities, most countries were not ready to absorb health and economic shocks simultaneously. Therefore, COVID-19 hit the global economy and society profoundly. The loss for the North American aviation reached roughly 35.1 billion U.S. dollars in 2020. Nonetheless, before the COVID-19 outbreak over 16 billion U.S. dollars of market profit was forecasted for the North American commercial aviation for 2020. As a result of COVID-19 lockdowns, passenger load factor (PLF) declined between January 2020 to April 2020 remarkably, down to 27.5 percent from 81.1 percent on international routes. Although the COVID-19 pandemic is not over yet, many countries started to take it under control through sufficiently strong efforts and policies. Therefore, the weekly flight frequency continues to improve slightly globally since the end of April 2020.