Jump to content

Talk:2025 stock market crash

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Merge proposal

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was to merge 2025 Trump stock market decline into 2025 stock market crash Stockst (talk) 04:22, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to have 2025 Trump stock market decline merge with 2025 stock market crash. The two pages are talking about the same thing (the ongoing stock/economic turmoil happening at this moment) and it would be redundant to have two articles talking about the same event, especially when that event is both ongoing and has just begun. Hyraemous (talk) 19:52, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This article is more about the crash immediately after ‘liberation day’ and not the down turn from the start of the trump presidency. We should probably connect the two but I think a 5 trillion dollar sell of is worthy of an article of its own. Kind of like (obviously to a lesser extent) The article about the stock market crash of 1929 and a separate one for the Great Depression. 2605:B100:D0D:25BF:39A0:2EC8:3812:145C (talk) 21:30, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@2605:B100:D0D:25BF:39A0:2EC8:3812:145C i am the creator of the page "2025 Trump stock market decline" and I second this. At the time of writing the page the threshold criteria of "market crash" had not been definitively reached. Bear market was a better description at the time. A bear market and a market crash are not the same thing, but they can occur simultaniously or in short order. Humanity was a mistake (talk) 21:44, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Hyraemous The decline set in earlier. The crash is a related but distinct event. Humanity was a mistake (talk) 21:45, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Hyraemous We could change the title of the other article to "2025 recession" or something similar when the situation develops accordingly Humanity was a mistake (talk) 22:25, 4 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Humanity was a mistake I can agree for us to wait however a merge would still be a good idea. If this goes into a recession (and I have my opinions on such) it would be fair to have a separate article develop accordingly and have this exist relating only to the stock market crash that led to the recession. But that would be as a result of a large situation which is somewhat unknown to us at the moment.
Someone referenced, for example, the stock market crash of 1929 article and the Great Depression article, but the Great Depression was a drawn out event with multiple layers and consequences without explicit result of the intricencies of the stock market crash in question. Again, that was a result of a large situation and we'd be speculating at that point.
Until the situation worsens to where two articles, one talking about the specific "Liberation Day" related stock market crash, and the general stock market decline experienced a recession because of Trump, I think it would be appropiate to either merge (because right now as it is the 2025 Trump stock market decline article is referencing, once again, the same thing) or wait and see. Hyraemous (talk) 01:24, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Hyraemous I suppose we should wait and see. For now I think it best to keep the pages seperate. The main point remains that the article outlines the broader market trend, rather than the crash alone. There is reason to assume that this trend will not reverse in the short term. International markets are tanking everywhere. Humanity was a mistake (talk) 02:12, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Humanity was a mistake Fair enough. Hyraemous (talk) 02:35, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I see them as separate events -- a 2025 bear market versus a 2025 stock market crash -- but if the crash-down continues, the bear market will only be seen as a prelude to the real story, which will be the crash. Likewise, if there is immediate rebound from the crash, the bear market will be the story and the crash will be just a blip. So i suggest waiting a week or two before going to a formal vote on the merge proposal. Time will tell. Catherineyronwode (talk) 00:10, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait Based on everything we have so far, it's too early to tell and it would be reckless to merge until it's with certainty that the info in this article is different or not from the other. So it'd be best to give it time since wikipedia is not a CrystalBall. Mkdasher64 (talk) 01:03, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merge. There are so many related articles at this point that it would be overwhelming for any reader to even find, let alone read, all of them. Ultimately there are many 10% declines in the market and that alone is not notable; the crash title is sufficient for now. satkara❈talk 03:21, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support: After further reflection, I support the merge. They are interconnected, as they both are caused by Trump's economic policies and market fear over those policies. The downturn began when they were announced; the crash began when they were implemented. NDfan173 (talk) 22:39, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    • Previously: Wait I support waiting, because this is an ongoing development. There could be a page created that talks about the connections of both and other related topics (the trade wars, etc.). If anybody thinks about it, we should also be recording reactions of experts, commentators, other governments, etc. NDfan173 (talk) 05:25, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Title change I am the creator of this article and I think it should stay separate. Although there is no definition of a stock market crash it's generally accepted an "abrupt double-digit percentage drop in a stock index over the course of a few days" is a crash[1] (which both have happened). Also this is a really big crash, the last time the smp was at 5000 points was in April of 2024, meaning a year of progress has been wiped out in 48 hours. My personal stock portfolio dropped by 25%. But with that being said it might be better to change the title of the article to something like April 2025 stock market crash as there might be a bigger crash later. Napoleon583 (talk) 16:23, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The article title should change. I cannot find a reliable source describing it as a "crash". MB2437 17:18, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support merge to whatever happens below. These are the same subject, so whatever happens with this article should incorporate everything from 2025 Trump stock market decline. Mike Selinker (talk) 23:32, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Hyraemous Would this article make sense as a section under "2025 stock market decline? much of that article is related to the tarrifs and threats of tarrifs, and this is just one example of that Lovetheblahaj (talk) 00:12, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Lovetheblahaj In my opinion, yes. Hyraemous (talk) 14:44, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait. We should first see if this will be a decline or a crash. We don't know if it will rebound. Moonwalker316 (talk) 10:36, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom Personisinsterest (talk) 23:25, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support: The current situation has a direct correlation with Trump's introduction of global tariffs, increasing uncertainty in the US stock markets. The decline can be attributed to his tariffs on Canada, Mexico, and China, but the global tariffs is currently contributing to the sharp decrease in the US stock markets in the past few days, which can lead to an overall stock market crash. Zekromu88 (talk) 01:12, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support + speedy: This is a needless duplicate article. KyleSirTalksAlot (talk) 01:29, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support + speedy + SNOW close with title NPOV VIOs for the Trump article. Also, it's not just US but global: Japan and Taiwan and Singapore hit circuit breakers, every stock market is dying right now. WFUM🔥🌪️ (talk) 03:11, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support + speedy: duplicate article + "2025 Trump stock market decline" seems like a fairly POV title Windfarmer — talk 03:44, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/stock-market-crash.asp#:~:text=Although%20there%20is%20no%20specific,course%20of%20a%20few%20days.
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Requested move 5 April 2025

[edit]

2025 stock market crash → 2025 stock market decline – The suggested renaming is just a placeholder. I cannot find many reliable sources describing this as a "crash", at least not yet. A crash is generally considered to be a fall of >20%.[1] Most indices are bubbling around 9–10%; it is certainly contentious to label it a crash. MB2437 17:39, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'd wait: While I agree that the name at the moment might be contentious, the decline we observed over the last two days was particularly steep, and the outside cause for it is both easily observable and escalating. As it's the weekend right now and markets are closed so I think it's best to give it some time to assess it fully. Freakmenn (talk) 22:40, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
See where it is in 7 days. By the renaming process, this is going to take 7 days to be resolved. If the Dow is under 35,000 then, it'll be a legitimate crash. If not, then rename it as nominated. Mike Selinker (talk) 23:30, 5 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait: In two days many indices dropped 10%, ~5% every trading day. Many of the announced tariffs haven't even been implemented yet, so the current market response is pure fear and not based on any fiscal changes. I recommend re-visiting this issue a few days after the tariffs have been implemented to gauge if this is a crash or a mere decline. Confalt (talk) 14:57, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait – futures suggest this could plausibly reach a crash, but it's possible Trump reverses course. Zenomonoz (talk) 22:59, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Even if Trump reverses course, that wouldn't change the fact that a crash would've occurred. Confalt (talk) 05:01, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Assuming that these lines of reasoning are true, the current title "2025 stock market crash" implies that a crash has already occurred, not that it only would have happened. LightNightLights (talk • contribs) 14:13, 9 April 2025 (UTC) (edited LightNightLights (talk • contribs) 14:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC))[reply]
Oppose Fortune already describes this as a crash. NYT is comparing to 2008 and 1987. We'll get more people calling it a crash in retrospect. S&P 500 futures are almost -5% at the moment which would confirm a bear market. satkara❈talk 23:24, 6 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Bloomberg now calls it a crash too. satkara❈talk 14:33, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait Looks like a crash to me. Give it a week and I'm sure that RS will uniformly report that it's a crash. 00:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC) HadesTTW (he/him • talk) 00:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait - Regarding from the stock market is currently doing right now, it is best that we wait for more information regarding the tariffs and how it will affect the United States. MatthewPlayThrough (talk) 01:17, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait I think we may see more RS reporting this as early as tomorrow. No need to rush, but let's not put a pointless or arbitrary time limit on it. Let RS do the talking. Cheers. DN (talk) 02:10, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait - not looking good so far...... Might have to change it to oppose later, but that would be CRYSTAL to say right now.
WFUM🔥🌪️ (talk) 03:12, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: Investopedia describes stock market crash as : "Although there is no specific threshold for stock market crashes, they are generally considered as abrupt double-digit percentage drop in a stock index over the course of a few days." On April 3rd and April 4th major indexes like SP500, DOW dropped more than 10% and today, April 7th as of 4:10 AM EDT, futures and pre-market trading is hinting at another 3-4% drop. This isn't limited to US markets only either, SSE, NI225, and HSI dropped around 7%-13% band. This is for sure a market crash regardless if news outlets describe this as crash, decline or "sharp fall". Even if markets recover on April 7th its still a crash since crash refers to the speed and intensity of the drop, not how long it lasts. Romaindlq (talk) 08:26, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait It's very much looking like an ongoing crash right now, and already being described as such by a number of sources. Darwin Ahoy! 09:48, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please link reputable economic research indicating that this is a 'crash' and not a decline. 24.158.30.121 (talk) 14:17, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As said, there are a lot of reliable sources describing it as a crash: Fortune, Bloomberg, etc. See above. Darwin Ahoy! 22:21, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: The general criteria for a crash (at least 10% drop in just a few days) is already met for stock markets around the world. The OP has confused a crash with a bear market, the latter would be defined as a reduction of at least 20% that lasts at least two months (that clock, by the way, begins at the latest record close, not when the threshold is met). 9March2019 (talk) 11:04, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait: Markets are too volatile right now to tell the full impact, we'll only know for sure when the dust settles. That said, as pointed out by other users, it's already fallen >10% in a few days, which matches some definitions of a stock market crash.
Aveaoz (talk) 14:27, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait: It's far too early to assess the situation as the market is highly volatile, It'd be best to revisit this perhaps at the end of the month when the situation can show a clear trend & impact. ExiaMesa (talk) 14:52, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: It looks like a crash to me, and I've already seen a handful of commentators and news sources (although of varying reliability/quality) refer to it as such. With that said, I agree with the general sentiment expressed so far that we wait and see what happens. Boredintheevening (talk) 17:04, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, at least for now: meets the commonly-held definition of a stock market crash: a "significant" fall in a short period (ie days not months), and WP:RS are now also starting to call it a crash. — The Anome (talk) 17:27, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Also a lot of RS are using the word global "meltdown" which defn doesn't translate to decline. Theofunny (talk) 08:20, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I believe we should call it 2025 Liberation Market Crash\Decline 194.27.73.87 (talk) 17:59, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this is clearly a stock market crash. --Plumber (talk) 18:39, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Says who? MB2437 18:46, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait it's an ongoing event. it's perhaps more accurate to call it a decline at the moment as it's an ongoing event and the decline monday april 7 wasn't as steep as the premarket made it look, but we have no way of knowing what will happen in the coming months and it could be a genuine crash 2603:8001:A53E:F909:ABE4:DA48:C2FF:9807 (talk) 19:22, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Wait There is no point in moving this now - it could suddenly uptick if Trump decides to pause the tariffs, or it could spike downwards at tomorrow's global stock exchange opening bell. We can reevaluate once it becomes clear whether this is a temporary dip or a major downwards jump. FlipandFlopped ツ 20:01, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Wait: this is ongoing and the article was created when the markets were closed. Give it a bit, see where it is. WP:RS are starting to call it a crash, and that does hold some weight, but facts are that the market is volatile and this is ongoing. GeneralNuisance0 (talk) 23:23, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Oppose The entire rationale given for the move is wrong, Yahoo is not a reliable source not is The Motley Fool. The 20% decline definition is for a bear market not a "crash".1

[2]

This is evidently a quick crash not a "decline". Theofunny (talk) 07:40, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yahoo is a reliable source. The point is that the term "crash" is certainly up for debate here. We should be following what the majority of RS are describing it as. MB2437 11:54, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose/Wait. While it may be too soon to come to a conclusion, the conventional definition of a stock market crash - a sudden dramatic decline of stock prices - has been met worldwide. See also 2020 stock market crash for another brief, if longer thus far, crash. Frank(has DemoCracy DeprivaTion) 11:20, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Still have another five weeks to be as long as the 2020 crash. MB2437 11:56, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose OP just had to wait a few days to find a plethora of reliable sources referring to this stock market decline as a crash:
JasonMacker (talk) 17:35, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The Dow dropped 3,911 and the S&P 500 lost 596 points in 2 days. Reliable sources are describing it as a crash, as noted by JasonMacker & satkara. A lay person would call what happened on 2 April and 4 April a "crash". It's a crash.--The Navigators (talk) 19:34, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - RS are describing it as a crash per JasonMacker and Satkara. MiasmaEternal☎ 00:35, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose: From Wikipedia's own definition, "There is no numerically specific definition of a stock market crash but the term commonly applies to declines of over 10% in a stock market index over a period of several days. Crashes are often distinguished from bear markets... as crashes include panic selling and abrupt, dramatic price declines." This fits that definition, and has been described as such by numerous news outlets, as highlighted by others above. It's a crash, and if anything, it should be changed to the "Trump Crash" since his actions started this. NDfan173 (talk) 21:40, 8 April 2025 UTC


  • Oppose for now at least (essentially the same as a wait !vote), as other editors have demonstrated above that the term "crash" is being used in RS. No prejudice against revisiting the discussion at a later date when we can look at the event through a historical lense. To very briefly comment on the discussion above: I don't see any reason to suspect this was proposed in bad faith, and would appreciate if editors refrained from making comments like the one above this one.  Vanilla  Wizard 💙 14:29, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, Wikipedia should be based on secondary reporting, not the crossing of an arbitrary threshold, if the term sticks it should be the title. — jonas (talk) 15:57, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per sources provided by JasonMacker. —Locke Cole • t • c 16:04, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per prior comments. I also believe that a consensus has formed to oppose this move as of right now. Hyraemous (talk) 16:23, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Off-topic discussion

[edit]
If @R9tgokunks: would like to !vote without casting aspersions and assuming good faith, they're welcome to indicate such above; otherwise they should bring their concerns to a user talk page if they truly believe their statement or WP:AN/I
Challenge to Motive and Extremely Strong Oppose on reality grounds The person who requested the rename is clearly not living in reality and working from bias. Biased editors should not be on Wikipedia. I can't believe we have come to this and no one else has pointed this out. - R9tgokunks ⭕ 03:01, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
R9tgokunks, I think this request was sincere. The move requester is British, and though there may be a few British Trumpists trying to subtly influence Wikipedia, this editor was recently the editor of the week. Also, four days ago, it was perhaps a bit less certain that this was a crash. PrinceTortoise (he/him • poke) 04:58, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'd appreciate if you retracted your accusation. I put a ton of work into NPOV—one of my main focuses—across a range of BLPs. This has included work on U.S. politics, but also on a plethora of others.
This request was made when—as very clearly stated—there was one maybe two RS describing this as a "crash". The article in the merge request above was titled "decline", with several editors communicating their concern with this article's title, hence the request. MB2437 06:42, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
This is a clear violation of WP:AGF and probably WP:NPA and I suggest you replace your comment with something more policy-based. mwwv converse∫edits 12:21, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Adding information about other markets, other than the United States

[edit]

Most of this article, aside from the "Response" section, is focused mainly on the United States. Several other markets around the world are also experiencing a decrease, such as Asian markets and Japan markets, so it is clearly shown that the effect by Trump's tariffs is affecting other countries. So, I think that it is best that the 2025 stock market crash can focused on those markets. More markets, when the time comes, can be added into the article as well. MatthewPlayThrough (talk) 03:25, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get around to it eventually; I've already added a couple sentences. The impacts should become clear once the trading day ends in Asian and European markets (which haven't started yet); I'll be asleep when the Asian ones (Nikkei, SSE, etc) close. WFUM🔥🌪️ (talk) 04:44, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed, I also suggest, for whoever finds themselves capable, to make an image that demonstrates multiple international stocks at once rather than just American ones (I cannot find a good method to do this.) Freakmenn (talk) 05:17, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Orange Monday

[edit]

The events at 7.4.2025 are being referenced to as the Orange Monday by the media. For example here but it's easy to google many more references. This is obviously a reference to Black Monday (1987). I suggest this is added somewhere to the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.175.38.130 (talk) 13:57, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I would wait. Mangoflies (talk) 23:29, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Removed Bessent

[edit]

Just for now! To explain, Bessent was appointed primarily for stability and while he is an economic advisor, he's not the biggest supporter of tariffs. Peter Navarro, Jamieson Greer, and to a lesser extent Howard Lutnick are, with Navarro writing books about the idea for years (including his Project 2025 chapter) and Greer a mentee of Robert Lighthizer. Greer and Lutnick's teams were also principally responsible for designing the reciprocal tariffs.

this article describes all 4 and their roles and says "Bessent, 62, is thought to be the most reluctant of Trump’s senior advisers on the sweeping tariff plan". I think the best BLP and DUE is to describe all of them in an economic advisors section, but focusing on Bessent is misleading. satkara❈talk 14:54, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

All the Circuit Breakers

[edit]

As of this writing only the Tokyo Stock Exchange (TYO) has tripped a circuit breaker, and that for only fifteen minutes. Circuit breakers worldwide would be a good metric to keep track of, above and beyond the daily chaos and volatility... kencf0618 (talk) 17:31, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I believe Nikkei Futures and Topix Futures have hit it (source - https://www.hindustantimes.com/world-news/japan-nikkei-225-topix-futures-suspended-due-to-circuit-breaker-what-it-means-101743984853359.html), along with the Taiwanese and Korean market (source - https://www.newsweek.com/stock-market-circuit-breakers-trump-tariffs-2056388). WFUM🔥🌪️ (talk) 19:09, 7 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Should we add a "Analysis" section

[edit]

It is because that with the chances of being a recession or a full-on stock market crash within this year as well as many sources talking about those events (referring to the stock market crash and recession topic), I feel like that a "Analysis" section would work for this article. That is all I gotta say since I am not the best at my wording. To close this up, on the article's infobox, there is a mention of a "Increased forecast of recession". Yep. MatthewPlayThrough (talk) 23:25, 8 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support: An analysis is present in many of the references used, and the increased recession risk has been cited a major factor in the cause of the crash. NDfan173 (talk) 04:20, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Index Changes Table

[edit]

I believe that the Index Changes Table should change its layout. From the way it is now, everyday that the crash continues, the table is getting wider and wider; I believe that he table should flip its horizontal and vertical headings. i.e have the countries/ Indexes be on the top, and the days on the side going down. I also think that we should add VIX to the Index chart for the United States portion. Quinntinn (talk) 02:52, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Prediction markets called Market Crash before financial experts

[edit]

Hey everyone. I want to propose a forecasting angle to this article, something like:

On March 13, 2025, the prediction market platform Limitless Exchange explicitly labeled the economic situation a "market crash" and introduced a dashboard aggregating forecasts about essential economic metrics, notably predicting the severity of the impending downturn before mainstream financial analysts acknowledged the crisis. Horshkov (talk) 13:14, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose; it reads like an ad for limitless exchange. Most reliable sources acknowledged markets were plunging or declining even if they did not explicitly call it a crash. There's no specific definition for a crash and there's no additional value from calling it one. satkara❈talk 14:47, 9 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:2025_stock_market_crash&oldid=1284769190"