Learn
A little clarity for your next decision.
Loading your learning library…
Investor WorkspaceWelcome, there!Log Out
Investor WorkspaceA little clarity for your next decision.
By Jerry Baker
REIT bear markets show that owning real estate through shares does not prevent large losses, even when the properties keep operating. The credit crisis, the pandemic, and the 2022 rate shock stressed different parts of the business. Their useful lesson is to plan for cash needs, debt, and a long recovery before a decline arrives.
A bear market is a market label, not a legal finding that a business has failed. Investor.gov describes it as a period of declining prices and pessimism, generally involving a broad index decline of at least 20% over at least two months. Other discussions may use different timing conventions. [1]
A drawdown measures a decline from a previous peak. A calendar-year return measures one year from its starting point to its end. The largest drawdown can be much worse than that year’s final return if the market recovers before December.
Also separate price return from total return. Total return includes distributions under the stated method. A price chart alone can miss an important part of a REIT investor’s result.
This guide uses verified calendar-year total returns to compare several difficult periods. It does not claim that those figures are the exact maximum drawdowns, that each year fits every bear-market definition, or that they measure each investor’s personal loss.
The table uses the FTSE Nareit All Equity REITs Index. It concerns listed property-owning REITs, rather than the broader All REITs series that also includes mortgage REITs. The original Nareit return file separates those indexes and separates price from total return. [2]
| Calendar year | All Equity REITs total return |
|---|---|
| 2007 | −15.69% |
| 2008 | −37.73% |
| 2009 | 27.99% |
| 2010 | 27.95% |
| 2020 | −5.12% |
| 2021 | 41.30% |
| 2022 | −24.95% |
| 2023 | 11.36% |
| 2024 | 4.92% |
| 2025 | 2.27% |
Figures are rounded to two decimals and include distributions under the index method. They are not net returns for a particular fund or account. Taxes, fees, deposits, withdrawals, and trading decisions can change an investor’s experience.
Notice the large positive years after some declines. A rebound is real, but it begins from a smaller base. The next step is to compound the sequence, not assume one good year restores every prior loss.
The Federal Reserve’s history of the Great Recession describes how housing losses, strains in mortgage-related assets, and stress in financial markets spread into the wider economy. Credit conditions and business activity deteriorated together. [3]
That history helps explain a basic risk for a real estate company. A building’s long-term usefulness may not solve a loan coming due during a market panic. Lenders can demand more equity, buyers can step back, and issuing shares can become costly.
The equity REIT index lost about 15.69% in 2007 and 37.73% in 2008. Using the underlying annual return figures, the combined loss was about 47.50%. A hypothetical $100 at the start of 2007 became about $52.50 at the end of 2008, before investor costs and taxes. [2]
This is a calendar-period calculation, not an exact peak-to-trough measure. It is still enough to show why a property-backed investment should not be treated as a stable savings balance.
The same index gained about 27.99% in 2009 and 27.95% in 2010. Those were large gains. Yet compounding 2007 through 2010 leaves the hypothetical $100 at about $85.98 at the end of 2010. [2]
A headline about a strong recovery can therefore coexist with an investor still being below an earlier starting point. The entry date matters. So do distributions, reinvestment, and any cash removed along the way.
Do not translate this into a promise that a future decline will recover within a certain period. An index can recover through changing membership and weights while an individual company performs poorly or fails.
The planning question is whether you have enough time and outside resources to hold through an uncertain path. A historical average recovery period cannot pay a bill that is due next month.
In March 2020, the Federal Reserve described the coronavirus outbreak as disrupting economic activity and financial conditions. It lowered its target federal funds range and announced measures intended to support market functioning. [4]
The shock did not affect every property use in the same way. A hotel room, shopping trip, warehouse, and data center serve different needs. Their revenues and costs responded through different channels.
Nareit’s sector file shows 2020 calendar total returns of about negative 23.60% for lodging and resorts, negative 25.18% for retail, positive 12.17% for industrial, and positive 21.00% for data centers. These are sector index results, not every company’s result. [5]
The lesson is to inspect what the properties do and who pays them. A sector that held up during a public-health shock may face another risk in a credit crisis or a period of high borrowing costs.
The broad equity REIT index finished 2020 with a total return of about negative 5.12%. That figure alone does not describe the stress investors felt or the changes that occurred during the year.
Imagine a purely hypothetical index that starts at 100, falls to 65, and ends at 95. Its year-end loss is 5%, but its decline from the starting level to the low is 35%. An investor who sold at the low would not experience the later recovery.
This illustration is not the actual 2020 REIT path. It shows why a single annual figure cannot establish the maximum loss or how easy the investment was to hold.
When a presentation discusses a crisis, ask for the relevant price and total-return path, not only the year-end result. Confirm the source, dates, frequency, and whether the chart includes distributions.
By December 14, 2022, the Federal Reserve had raised its target federal funds range to 4.25%–4.50%. Its statement described elevated inflation and the cumulative tightening of monetary policy. This is a historical policy fact, not a statement of today’s rate. [6]
The equity REIT index’s 2022 total return was about negative 24.95%. A rate increase can affect financing and the return buyers demand, but that one number does not prove rates alone caused every company’s loss.
Property demand, supply, operating costs, company debt, and investor expectations also matter. Two companies with similar buildings can respond differently if one has fixed-rate debt due later and the other must refinance soon.
A useful review separates these channels. Ask whether higher costs hit current interest, future refinancing, development budgets, property values, or all four. The answer should come from the company’s contracts and financing, not only a broad market story.
After 2022, the equity REIT index posted positive total returns in 2023, 2024, and 2025. Yet compounding all four calendar years from the start of 2022 leaves a loss of about 10.32% through December 31, 2025. [2]
That calculation does not identify an eventual recovery date or say what happened after the cutoff. It simply keeps the starting point and ending point consistent.
An investor who began later would have a different result. So would an investor who added money, took distributions, or owned a particular fund. An index sequence provides context, not a personal account statement.
Be careful with the phrase “back to normal.” A company may return to normal occupancy while its shares remain below an earlier price. Income, valuation, debt, and investor returns each have their own recovery path.
A 20% loss takes $100 to $80. Returning to $100 requires a 25% gain on the remaining $80. A 50% loss takes $100 to $50, which requires a 100% gain to recover.
The formula is one divided by one minus the loss percentage, minus one. For a 30% loss, the required gain is about 42.9%. This assumes no cash flows, fees, or taxes.
The math is one reason the downside deserves attention before investing. A high expected return does not cancel the practical burden of a deep loss. The investor must still have the time and ability to stay with the plan.
It is also why averaging down needs a fresh review. Adding money lowers the average cost only in a mechanical sense. It increases the dollars exposed to the same business and does not ensure the business will recover.
Consider a hypothetical $100 million property funded with $60 million of debt and $40 million of equity. If the property falls to $80 million while the debt remains $60 million, equity falls to $20 million.
The property lost 20% of value, but the equity lost 50%, before selling costs or other claims. Debt did not create the property decline; it changed how that decline reached the owners.
A public REIT has a more complex balance sheet than this single asset. Still, the example explains why debt levels, maturity dates, covenants, and joint ventures matter during a downturn.
The OCC’s commercial real estate lending handbook discusses repayment capacity, collateral, market risk, and loan structure. These are useful review topics for equity investors too, although the handbook is written for bank supervision. [7]
A property might cover interest today but fail a new lender’s loan-size test at maturity. A lower appraisal, higher rate, or stricter coverage requirement can reduce the available loan.
Suppose a fictional company needs to repay $70 million next year. It expects $55 million from a new loan and has $8 million of usable cash. That still leaves a $7 million gap before transaction costs.
Ask whether planned asset sales or new equity are firm commitments or assumptions. A buyer’s expression of interest is not cash. A credit facility may have conditions that become harder to satisfy in a weak market.
Review the downside before the due date becomes urgent. A company with time has more options, but those options still have costs. Extending a loan may protect the business while reducing the cash available for distributions.
A distribution is part of an investor’s return, not protection against any size of price loss. If a share falls from $100 to $70 and pays $5 during the period, the simple result is still a 25% loss before taxes and fees.
A high quoted yield can also be the result of a falling share price. If the payment is later reduced, the displayed yield based on an old payment may not describe future cash.
Read the company’s cash-flow measures and their adjustments. Check the declaration date and payment terms before treating a past distribution as a future commitment. Examine interest, recurring capital work, and other uses of cash before assuming the payment can continue unchanged.
The SEC’s REIT guidance emphasizes that the business and market risks remain. Do not treat a share as equivalent to a fixed bank balance merely because it has a history of paying dividends. [8]
Listed shares display market prices frequently. Private or nontraded investments may report estimated values on a different schedule. That can make the visible path look smoother without removing property or financing risk.
A nontraded REIT may limit repurchases. The SEC explains that liquidity restrictions and valuation issues deserve careful review. The amount on a statement may not be the amount an investor can receive immediately. [9]
Compare the method as well as the number. A listed market price, an appraisal, an estimated net asset value, and a completed property sale are different observations. Mixing them can create a false impression of safety.
If you need cash during a market decline, the ability to transact matters. Less frequent valuation does not solve that need. A less visible loss is not necessarily a smaller economic risk.
Raising equity during stress can help a company repay debt or finish essential work. It can also change the claim held by each existing share. Review both the cash raised and the terms.
Suppose a fictional company has 10 million shares. It issues another 2 million shares to raise funds. An investor who owns 100,000 shares held 1% before the issue. With 12 million shares outstanding, the same holding represents about 0.83%.
That percentage change does not prove the financing was a mistake. The new cash may protect valuable properties or remove a larger risk. But an increase in total company income after the transaction does not automatically mean the same increase in income per share.
Ask what the company receives, how much the issue costs, and what it plans to do with the money. Compare the expected benefit with the new claims created. Include any preferred rights or conversion terms when they apply.
The same care is needed after an asset sale. Selling a building may reduce debt and risk while also reducing rent. A smaller company with a sounder balance sheet may be better positioned, yet its old dividend or earnings level may no longer be the right comparison.
Use per-share figures alongside total figures, with the same definitions and periods. A recovery story should explain how the business repairs reach the investor, not stop at the fact that the company survived.
Looking back at today’s strongest REITs can make the past seem easier than it was. Investors at the time did not know which firms would prosper, merge, restructure, or disappear.
An index follows its own membership rules. Its history is not the history of a fixed basket made from today’s holdings. A company chart and an index chart answer different questions.
When reviewing a manager’s record, ask whether it includes closed accounts, failed holdings, and the relevant fees. A few successful examples are not the same as a complete strategy history.
Also ask when the investment thesis was recorded. A clear explanation written after a recovery can benefit from hindsight. Dated records help show what was known, assumed, and uncertain when the decision was actually made.
List money needed for taxes, living costs, large purchases, and emergencies. Decide which funds must remain available without depending on a sale at a favorable price.
Then set an allocation that you could hold through a meaningful decline. Diversification can reduce some concentration risks, but it does not guarantee that different risky assets will avoid falling together. The SEC links allocation decisions to time horizon and risk tolerance. [10]
Write down what would cause a review: a failed refinancing, a large tenant loss, a change in strategy, or a material shift in your own needs. Separate those triggers from ordinary daily price changes.
This is not an instruction to hold every investment forever. A changed business may justify a changed decision. The purpose of the plan is to make that decision from evidence rather than fear or an old purchase price.
Suppose a household expects $40,000 of yearly investment income and can cover a $10,000 shortfall from other reliable sources. A 25% income cut uses that entire cushion. A larger cut or an unexpected expense would require another response.
Now pair the cut with a lower market value. Selling shares to replace lost income removes capital that would otherwise participate in a later rebound. The effect depends on the timing and size of sales.
Try a one-year and a three-year weak-income case. Include taxes, health costs, and other known commitments. Do not assume every asset in the household can be sold quickly at its last reported value.
These simple tests help define an appropriate allocation. They do not predict the next crisis. Their value is showing which conditions would force action so you can address those conditions while there is still time.
Yes. Listed equity REITs have experienced large declines. Property ownership does not prevent market losses, financing problems, dividend cuts, or losses at an individual company.
The FTSE Nareit All Equity REITs Index had a calendar-year total return of about negative 37.73% in 2008. That is not the exact maximum drawdown during the broader crisis. The measurement and dates matter. [2]
No. A $100 investment that loses 30% falls to $70. A 30% rebound then reaches $91. It takes about a 42.9% gain to return from $70 to $100, before any fees or taxes.
No. The selected calendar-year sector data includes positive industrial and data-center returns and negative retail and lodging returns. Individual companies and the path within the year differed. [5]
No automatic rule establishes that outcome. Rates can affect borrowing costs and valuation, but demand, costs, debt terms, and expectations also matter. Study the actual business and the reasons rates changed.
Not simply because their reported values move less often. Review valuation methods, leverage, liquidity, and repurchase limits. An estimate on a statement may not be immediately available in cash.
A lower price deserves analysis, not an automatic purchase. Review whether the business, debt, and expected cash flow changed. Adding money increases exposure and does not guarantee a recovery.
Keep enough financial flexibility to avoid a forced decision. Understand the company’s obligations, your own cash needs, and the loss you can withstand. History can inform that plan, but it cannot promise the timing of the next recovery.
Educational information, not an offer or a personal tax, legal, or investment recommendation. Examples are hypothetical and omit stated adjustments. Tax treatment depends on your facts and current law. Review your transaction with your CPA, attorney, and qualified intermediary. Real estate investments can lose value and may be illiquid.
Enter your approved email to explore investments, save your shortlist, and keep learning.