Ibbotson’s data says “Large Stocks” (i.e., the S&P 500) has returned 11%-plus over 70 years. So staying put with the hassle factor has its benefits.

What he should have done is annualize his results, i.e., if congress was in session half the time, his annualized in session return in 2006 would have been 4.5% plus a little compounding, while his annualized out of session would have been over 23.12% plus compounding.

The thing that complicates it, of course, is that he’s in cash on the days Congress is in session, and ignores the fact that he has to incur the transaction costs all year long of going in and out so frequently.

Nevertheless, the contrast between in-session and out-of-session results is stunning.

If the idea holds in other countries, the really slick thing to do would to move money around internationally so that you’re always invested in countries whose legislatures are out of session. The transaction costs would be worth it if you’ve got a lot of money and you’re continually generating 20%-plus returns.