Brazil's stock market, as measured by the inflation-corrected Bovespa index, has more than quadrupled in value since President Luis Inacio Lula da Silva's first election victory in October 2002, and is now at almost twice the peak achieved in 2000.
In comparison, the inflation-corrected Shanghai Composite only doubled during this period, while the US market, as measured by the inflation-corrected Standard and Poor's 500, increased only 50 percent. Indeed, the US has never experienced a fourfold increase in stock prices in less than five years, even during the late 1990s bubble.
Given that Lula is an avowed leftist who counts Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez and Cuban President Fidel Castro among his friends, Brazil's performance is all the more surprising.
How could he manage to preside over such a spectacular stock-market boom? Are Brazilians too exuberant? Might it be time for foreign investors to pull their money out?
Stock-market movements are certainly hard to explain, but there are reasons to believe that Brazilians might be rationally exuberant. Corporate earnings in Brazil have gone up roughly as fast as stock prices. With the price/earnings ratio remaining stable and moderate, the stock-market boom does not appear to reflect mere investor psychology.
On the contrary, the real question is why the increase in stock prices has not outpaced growth in corporate earnings. After all, in the 1990s, the US stock-market surge (as in many countries) was fueled by record-high price/earnings ratios.
In 1998, the price-earnings ratio in the US was 24, compared to a historical average of around 15. By contrast, the run-up in stock prices in Brazil started from a very different point, with the price-earnings ratio as low as six in 1998.
When a stock-market boom reaches historic proportions, a story always develops to rationalize it. The news media typically present reasons to justify the view that the economy has entered a "new era." Sometimes the stories are mere fabrications to validate market optimism, as with the 1990s boom. But, at other times, the stories seem more solid.
Lula has called this a "magic moment" for the Brazilian economy. While such words merit caution, economy fundamentals bear them out. The currency, the real, has been strengthening steadily, to nearly twice its value against the US dollar in October 2002, when Lula was first elected.
Inflation and interest rates are falling, the country is running with a trade surplus, foreign investment is flowing in at a high rate, and the government has more than paid off its debts to foreigners, becoming a net creditor to the rest of the world.
So stock investors seem to be recognizing Brazil's economic vitality, carefully watching corporate earnings rise, and running with them. After being lone believers through 2002, Brazilian stock market participants are now finding that investors from all over the world want to join the party.
Nevertheless, given corruption scandals involving prominent government figures that have come to light over the past few years, it is natural to wonder why the stock market has remained so strong.
Why haven't the stories of corruption caused a crisis, as similar scandals in South Korea and Malaysia did during the Asian financial crisis of 1997? Indeed, while the scandals have shaken the government, Lula was reelected last year, and investors continue to pour money into the stock market.
One reason is that the scandals have provided an opportunity for investors to see Brazilian freedom of speech and democracy in action. Newspapers and television commentators have been relentless in reporting the scandals, helping to prove to Brazilians and foreign investors alike that the political system is sufficiently stable to withstand open criticism.
Lula remains popular with Brazilians because his populist rhetoric shows real sympathy with the less affluent, and with foreign investors because he has always tempered his radicalism to accommodate economic reality.
He recently criticized Bolivian President Evo Morales' threats to seize foreign assets for his failure in this regard.
"Radicalism is incompatible with the common sense needed from someone who governs," Lulu said.
That combination of philosophical radicalism and economic pragmatism has proven to be a perfect formula for Brazil's progress.
Granted, the future is unknown; we have no crystal ball to predict the Bovespa's likely path. But, for me, the story is far more convincing than the one told during the 1990s stock-market boom.
Robert Shiller is professor of economics at Yale University.
Copyright: Project Syndicate
A foreign colleague of mine asked me recently, “What is a safe distance from potential People’s Liberation Army (PLA) Rocket Force’s (PLARF) Taiwan targets?” This article will answer this question and help people living in Taiwan have a deeper understanding of the threat. Why is it important to understand PLA/PLARF targeting strategy? According to RAND analysis, the PLA’s “systems destruction warfare” focuses on crippling an adversary’s operational system by targeting its networks, especially leadership, command and control (C2) nodes, sensors, and information hubs. Admiral Samuel Paparo, commander of US Indo-Pacific Command, noted in his 15 May 2025 Sedona Forum keynote speech that, as
Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) Chairman Eric Chu (朱立倫) last week announced that the KMT was launching “Operation Patriot” in response to an unprecedented massive campaign to recall 31 KMT legislators. However, his action has also raised questions and doubts: Are these so-called “patriots” pledging allegiance to the country or to the party? While all KMT-proposed campaigns to recall Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) lawmakers have failed, and a growing number of local KMT chapter personnel have been indicted for allegedly forging petition signatures, media reports said that at least 26 recall motions against KMT legislators have passed the second signature threshold
In a world increasingly defined by unpredictability, two actors stand out as islands of stability: Europe and Taiwan. One, a sprawling union of democracies, but under immense pressure, grappling with a geopolitical reality it was not originally designed for. The other, a vibrant, resilient democracy thriving as a technological global leader, but living under a growing existential threat. In response to rising uncertainties, they are both seeking resilience and learning to better position themselves. It is now time they recognize each other not just as partners of convenience, but as strategic and indispensable lifelines. The US, long seen as the anchor
The Central Election Commission (CEC) on Friday announced that recall motions targeting 24 Chinese Nationalist Party (KMT) lawmakers and Hsinchu Mayor Ann Kao (高虹安) have been approved, and that a recall vote would take place on July 26. Of the recall motions against 35 KMT legislators, 31 were reviewed by the CEC after they exceeded the second-phase signature thresholds. Twenty-four were approved, five were asked to submit additional signatures to make up for invalid ones and two are still being reviewed. The mass recall vote targeting so many lawmakers at once is unprecedented in Taiwan’s political history. If the KMT loses more