There is a terrific Dow Jones Chart (1900-2004) for sale at the gallery.

Its along the same concept of a chart we did back in 2003 — only this one includes P/E ratios, which is a very instructive addition to the graph:

click for an enormous chart:

“Officially licensed and designed by Minyanville’s own Kevin Tuttle,
follow the critters through the historical ups and downs and sideways
trails of the Dow Jones Industrial Average from its humble beginnings
of the last century up to the present day ‘Ville.”

I may have to get me one for my office wall!

Minyanville Dow Jones Chart (1900-2004)

Category: Investing, Markets

Please use the comments to demonstrate your own ignorance, unfamiliarity with empirical data and lack of respect for scientific knowledge. Be sure to create straw men and argue against things I have neither said nor implied. If you could repeat previously discredited memes or steer the conversation into irrelevant, off topic discussions, it would be appreciated. Lastly, kindly forgo all civility in your discourse . . . you are, after all, anonymous.

13 Responses to “Dow Jones Chart (1900-2004)”

  1. Steve says:

    Take a look at this larger version of the chart.

    Now I have a question. Take a look at the P/E ratio portion of the chart on the bottom. According to the chart, the most recent P/E ratio is still ABOVE 22 for 2004.
    BUT if you look at the current Dow Jones ETF (DIA) The current P/E ratio is only roughly 15.

    The Diamond trust series ETF is an excellent proxy for the Dow Jones average.
    Is there a problem with his numbers for this chart or am I missing something.
    Why is his chart showing a current P/E ratio of 22, while the Diamond Trust series ETF which is composed of Dow Industrial companies to mirror the Average showing a p/e ratio of 15. (It was roughly the same for 2004 I remember)

  2. The P/E is based on the S&P500

  3. Jack says:

    I wonder why they did not use a log scale. With over 100 years spanned, I would think that would give the viewer a more accurate representation.

  4. Jack says:

    Oh, my mistake. Just took a look a the bigger image, and I guess I never realized how much volatility there was in the early 1900s.

  5. Steve says:

    OK, that was an obvious mistake, but when I look at the S&P 500 P/E Ratio its 15 too!

    Here is the S&P 500 Spider fund which is weighted to the S&P

    The P/E Ratio for the S&P 500 is 15.81

    I have my doubts about the accuracy of the chart – I wouldnt post it on my wall :)

  6. royce says:

    Could the P/E be a holdover from 12/04?

  7. spencer says:

    This pe is based on reported earnings.

    If you use trailing operating earnings the s&p pe was 17.5 last month.

  8. Uncle Jack says:

    wonder why they did not use a log scale. With over 100 years spanned, I would think that would give the viewer a more accurate representation.

    They did use log, just not what you’re used to seeing. Look on the left side, each major step increases 100%, from 100, 200, 400, 800, 1600, 3200, 6400, 12800

  9. P/E on a chart is actual;

    P/E when referring to many individual stocks and/or indices is forward looking — a best guess — and subjetc to revision / reality . . .

  10. Patrick says:

    Chart ends with data as of Mar or April 2004, when P/E’s were higher, so that might explain the 22 at the hard right edge of the chart – they should update it now – great chart but almost a year and a half has gone by

  11. Steve says:

    Arent all P/E ratios based on past earnings?

    When I check this definition it says “earnings per share for the PE ratio are determined by dividing past 12 months earnings”

    BUT when I check THIS definition in the same glossary it says “trailing OR EXPECTED earnings per share”

    Earnings confuse me. Its that FUZZY MATH there

  12. none says:

    chart is too small, and too confusing

  13. Hans Isern says:

    “Standard” PEs use 12-month trailing earnings. Forward PE’s use the current price and estimated earnings for the future.

    The discrepancy between the DIA and the chart is due to using old PE data. Both the DIA and the SPY have a multiple of roughly 15.