The first 100 days of a presidency often set the tone for an administration, both politically and economically. For markets, those early days can either reaffirm investor confidence or sow seeds of doubt. In the case of former President Donald Trump, the initial period following his 2017 inauguration marked a stunning reversal in market fortunes—culminating in the worst first 100-day stock performance under a new administration in more than 50 years.
During the 100 calendar days following Trump’s swearing-in on January 20, 2017—a period encompassing 69 official trading sessions—the S&P 500 fell over 7%. That steep drop represented the most significant post-inauguration decline since President Gerald Ford assumed office in August 1974, amid the chaos of President Richard Nixon’s resignation and a spiraling stagflation crisis. At the time, Ford’s first months saw the S&P 500 tumble more than 11%.
While a president’s influence on the broader economy and markets typically takes time to materialize—if it ever does—Trump’s first months in office were marked by rapid and unrelenting upheaval, shaking investor confidence on a global scale.
From Market Optimism to Chaos
Trump entered the White House on a wave of market enthusiasm. Stocks had rallied significantly in the weeks following his election in November 2016, driven by investor expectations of sweeping corporate tax cuts, aggressive deregulation, and a pro-business agenda. On Wall Street, early hopes were pinned on an administration that would prioritize shareholders, energize corporate profits, and stimulate economic growth.
Initially, those expectations seemed validated. Major indices, including the Dow Jones Industrial Average and the S&P 500, hit record highs in the weeks following Trump’s inauguration. Optimism was widespread among traders, business leaders, and executives. However, it didn’t take long for that optimism to give way to unease.
Rather than focusing on predictable economic policy, Trump’s early presidency was characterized by erratic decision-making, sharp rhetoric, and aggressive actions on trade. Chief among those was a dramatic escalation in U.S. tariffs. In his first few months, Trump moved to raise tariffs to their highest levels in nearly a century, reigniting global trade tensions and inviting retaliatory measures from some of the nation’s largest economic partners.
The uncertainty triggered by these moves rippled through financial markets. Volatility surged. Investor confidence wavered. Foreign investment slowed. And domestic companies began warning shareholders about the negative impacts of rising input costs and trade barriers.
Consumer Confidence Falters
As the administration ramped up trade hostilities—most notably with China—consumer sentiment began to slide. Americans, uncertain about future price increases, job security, and economic stability, pulled back on spending. Consumer confidence indices, which had been climbing in anticipation of Trump’s tax reform promises, reversed course.
Retailers and small businesses felt the pinch. Major companies reported declining sales growth, citing lower demand and rising costs. The threat of a full-scale trade war loomed large over every sector—from agriculture to manufacturing to technology.
Even more destabilizing was Trump’s persistent public criticism of the Federal Reserve. Presidents traditionally avoid direct commentary on the Fed to protect the institution’s independence and shield markets from political interference. Trump broke with this norm, lambasting the central bank over interest rate policy and suggesting it should adopt a more accommodative stance. The result: further volatility and confusion in financial markets, as investors attempted to decode an unpredictable relationship between fiscal and monetary policy.
Uncertainty Becomes the New Normal
By mid-2017, Wall Street had begun to come to terms with a sobering reality: the Trump administration would be defined more by disruption than predictability. Markets, which traditionally prize stability and clarity, were left to navigate an increasingly foggy and erratic economic landscape.
The president’s policy agenda shifted rapidly and often contradicted itself. One day, the White House would signal a commitment to pro-growth measures. The next, it would launch a trade war or threaten to dismantle international alliances. This cycle of announcement, backlash, and revision made long-term planning nearly impossible for investors and business leaders alike.
Though there were intermittent rallies—some fueled by tax reform, others by corporate earnings—these were often quickly undercut by geopolitical flare-ups, Twitter threats, or trade-related headlines. The market’s rollercoaster ride became a defining feature of Trump’s presidency.
Dissonance Among Trump’s Supporters
Perhaps most striking was the disillusionment among many of Trump’s earliest supporters in the business community. In 2016, Trump had campaigned on promises of tax relief, deregulation, and infrastructure investment. Many executives and Wall Street donors welcomed his election, viewing him as a businessman president who would put corporate America first.
Initially, these expectations seemed validated by the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, which slashed corporate taxes from 35% to 21% and temporarily boosted business investment. But as the president doubled down on protectionist trade measures and unpredictable policymaking, enthusiasm waned.
Major trade associations and Fortune 500 CEOs began speaking out. Industries reliant on global supply chains—including automotive, technology, and agriculture—warned of long-term damage from tariffs. Small business optimism, which had surged in early 2017, began to fade by late that year. Many small firms struggled with higher import costs and disrupted supplier relationships.
On social media, even some of Trump’s most prominent financial supporters began criticizing the administration, calling for more stability and restraint.
The Bigger Picture: Presidents and Markets
It’s important to note that presidents—while influential—are not the sole drivers of market performance. Countless variables influence market direction, including interest rates, inflation, global demand, geopolitical events, and corporate earnings.
Still, the symbolism of the “first 100 days” carries weight. Investors often view this window as a litmus test of a president’s priorities, style, and ability to govern effectively. In Trump’s case, those first 100 days signaled a radical departure from conventional economic policy—and markets reacted accordingly.
His confrontational approach to international trade, along with political infighting and an unpredictable communications style, created an environment of sustained uncertainty. For investors who prize consistency, this was a recipe for fear.
A Legacy of Volatility
Though the markets eventually recovered from the early declines of 2017, the volatility established during those first months became a lasting feature of Trump’s tenure. The S&P 500 experienced some of its sharpest declines and largest single-day gains in history during his time in office. By the end of Trump’s presidency in January 2021, the stock market had experienced both unprecedented highs and historic plunges.
The COVID-19 pandemic added another layer of complexity, sending markets into freefall in early 2020 before an aggressive recovery fueled by stimulus and low interest rates. While Trump’s defenders credited him for strong market performance pre-COVID, critics pointed to the extreme instability and policy contradictions as evidence of a missed opportunity for more sustainable growth.
Frequently Asked Question
How did the stock market perform in Trump’s first 100 days?
The S&P 500 declined by over 7% during the first 100 calendar days (69 trading days) after Donald Trump’s inauguration on January 20, 2017—marking the worst performance for a new president since Gerald Ford in 1974.
Why is the “first 100 days” of a presidency important for markets?
While mostly symbolic, the first 100 days are often used to gauge a new president’s policy direction and potential economic impact. Investor reactions during this period can reflect confidence or concern about leadership and fiscal strategy.
What caused the market decline early in Trump’s presidency?
The drop was driven by rising U.S. tariffs, growing trade tensions (especially with China), threats to Federal Reserve independence, and broader economic uncertainty—all of which created fear and volatility in global markets.
Did Trump’s campaign promises contribute to initial market optimism?
Yes. Markets initially rallied after his election due to expectations of corporate tax cuts, deregulation, and pro-business policies. However, this optimism faded as trade wars and policy unpredictability took center stage.
How did business leaders respond to Trump’s early policies?
Many executives who initially supported Trump grew critical of his trade policies. Concerns about tariffs, supply chain disruptions, and erratic policy direction led to declining business confidence and public pushback from key industry voices.
Was the poor market performance entirely Trump’s fault?
Not entirely. While presidential policy has an influence, markets are shaped by a range of factors, including global events, interest rates, and investor sentiment. However, Trump’s style of governance introduced a level of unpredictability that markets generally react poorly to.
Did the markets recover later in Trump’s presidency?
Yes. Despite early volatility, markets experienced rallies during Trump’s term, especially following corporate tax cuts. However, these gains were offset at times by heightened trade tensions and, later, the global economic shock from the COVID-19 pandemic.
Conclusion
In hindsight, the first 100 days of the Trump administration were a warning shot—not just about market direction, but about the economic and political philosophy that would dominate the next four years. The sharp decline in the S&P 500 was more than just a statistical milestone; it was a reflection of deeper anxieties about policy, leadership, and America’s place in the global economy.
