📈 Analysis

get alerts
Rising stock-index chart behind the finding that the median member of Congress underperforms the S&P 500

Public record · House STOCK Act disclosures

Everyone “knows” Congress beats the market. We checked all 19,670 trades.

The headlines are real. What they leave out is that you are not Nancy Pelosi — and the politician you’d actually copy loses to an index fund.

How we measured it

Enter the day you could — not the day they did

Every tracker shows the trade date. But a member discloses up to 45 days later, so that price was never available to you. The only honest test buys on the disclosure date — the first moment the trade is public — holds twelve months, and scores against the S&P 500. Buys only.

Disclosed buys
19,670
House members
207
Span
2013–26
Hold
12 months

Result 1 · Copy everyone

Do exactly what the pitch says, and you trail the market

Buy every disclosed purchase the day it goes public. Here is the median outcome — and how many members actually clear the bar the whole strategy is sold on.

−3.6%
median 12-month return vs the S&P of copying every disclosed buy. On the cleaner post-2022 window it’s −6.7%.
69% trail the S&P31% beat it
lose to the indexbeat it· 111 members, ≥10 tracked buys

The median member of Congress returns −2.6% against the market on the typical trade. Fewer than a third beat a fund you can buy for three basis points.

Result 2 · The surprise

It isn’t the 45-day delay

The obvious explanation is staleness — you’re a month-and-a-half late. But that’s not it. Entering on the disclosure date instead of the trade date costs almost nothing over a year:

0.35pp
average difference between buying when they traded and buying when it was disclosed. The lag is nearly free.

Which means the problem isn’t timing. The trades simply don’t carry a signal. Most congressional buying is ordinary portfolio churn — index funds, bonds, broad tech — not secret conviction. Waiting 45 days barely changes a return that was never there.

Result 3 · “But Pelosi!”

She’s real. She’s also not you.

The counterargument has a name, and the numbers behind it are genuine — even measured our conservative way, Nancy Pelosi’s disclosed buys beat the market. The question is why, and whether it’s anything you could repeat.

The headline you’ve seen

+70.9% in 2024, against the S&P’s +24.9%. Her Nvidia call options returned +273%; Palo Alto calls +93%. Over the decade, +838% versus the index’s +256%.

That number is real — and it’s a leveraged number. Paul Pelosi buys long-dated call options on big tech after dips, not shares. Strip the leverage and score her actual buys the same way we scored everyone else, and here is what’s left — all four bars are the same thing: median 12-month return versus a benchmark.

Median 12-mo return vs benchmark← trails · beats →
Pelosivs S&P 500
+9.1%
Pelosivs Nasdaq-100 (tech)
+6.8%
Median memberthe politician you’d copy
−2.6%
Copy everyoneevery disclosed buy
−3.6%
−8%−4%0+4%+8%

Two things fall out. Her raw buys return +22% a year — but so did big tech; benchmark her against the tech index and a quarter of the “genius” is just being long Nvidia and friends through the biggest tech run in history. What survives — about +7% over even the Nasdaq, with a 62% win rate — is real residual skill, or the one bet in a hundred that had to land somewhere. Because here’s the frame the headline never shows you:

Pelosi is one of the roughly 31% who beat the market. The typical member is on the other side of that line — and that’s who “follow Congress” actually buys you.

The verdict

The averages lie; the median tells the truth

Median 12-month return vs S&P · enter at disclosure · buys only
StrategyMedian αWin rateWhat it really is
Copy every member−3.6%44%index churn
The median member−2.6%31%*underperforms
Pelosi vs S&P+9.1%62%leverage + tech + selection
Pelosi vs tech index+6.8%57%thin residual edge

* share of members beating the S&P, not a per-trade win rate.

The Pelosi headline and “Congress can’t beat an index fund” are not in conflict. They’re the same fact seen from two ends: a distribution with a heavy losing middle and a few leveraged, tech-heavy winners the press writes about precisely because they won. Copy the feed and you get the middle. You don’t get Pelosi — Pelosi got Pelosi.

What this is and isn’t

What’s next

← all analysis