People commonly draw investment conclusions from events that have little to do with stock prices, if anything at all. Politics is a prime example. “If that scoundrel (or scoundrelle) gets elected, I’m selling all of my stocks.” There are plenty of reasons it matters who is president, but the stock market simply isn’t one of them. In the past 46 years, the stock market declined for an entire presidential term only once.

War tends to fall into the same category.

The true cost of war is measured in human lives; any other discussion is trivial by comparison. Of course, that doesn’t prevent people from speculating about its market implications. And just like I wouldn’t recommend changing your portfolio because of a president’s political party or the length of women’s hemlines, I wouldn’t recommend making broad changes in your 401(k) mix because of military conflict.

In the first trading day following the U.S. strikes in Iran, the U.S. markets declined in the morning but finished the day with a slight gain. In Israel, investor reaction wasn’t as mixed.  As Iranian missiles were falling across Israel this past Monday morning, the Tel Aviv stock index increased almost four percent.

There are plenty of studies of stock price returns around military actions. Analysts use different measurement periods and definitions for the beginning and ending dates but reach the same general conclusion: while the pattern isn’t perfect, more often than not, the investment implications of war begin with short-term hysteria, eventually giving way to long-term irrelevance. And the longer the measurement period, the less relevant the initial reactionary hysteria becomes.

I prefer looking at stock returns five years following the U.S. entry into armed conflict.

On the first trading day following the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, the Dow Jones Industrial Average (DJIA) dropped 3.5% – and finished the week with a 6.5% decline.

Five years later, however, the U.S. market had increased more than 50%.

Five years following the U.S. entry into WWI, the DJIA had increased 25%.

The pattern isn’t perfect, but it’s close.  The five-year U.S. stock market return was positive following the Korean War (1950), the Vietnam War (1965), Persian Gulf War (1991), U.S. airstrikes in Afghanistan (2001), and the Iraq War (2003). (The average five-year return was almost 70%.)

It is human nature to overreact to the bang, ignoring the echo. Economists and pundits peddling war-based trades often resemble meteorologists hyping a flurry that never arrives.

Of course, it’s easier for people to be emotional than logical. My column last week was about the Supreme Court’s tariff ruling noted that many people are so blinded by either their love or hatred for Donald Trump that they are unable to rationally view any action he takes. Based on my email this week, my observation was correct.

David Moon is president of Moon Capital Management. A version of this piece originally appeared in the USA TODAY NETWORK.