You simply don't get it. When he was talking about an actively managed fund, he was talking about you. You have your own actively managed fund. I'm glad you said you agree with him about an actively managed fund, because you are one.
Again, it's not an opinion. I've told you time and time again that. Didn't I show you earlier that you only got an average of 7% return. That's not impressive.
Second, the article was based on math. Hate to be the one to tell you but, no, math equations have not changed much since 1991. As the point of the article says, if you can add and subtract, you can get the point of the article.
You say you have beaten the market. Are you sure? How do you measure this?
Let's take a look at how you compare yourself to the market. You have to take each and every infusion of capital that was an investment as a SEPARATE
entity, find what's it worth now, and find the rate of return over the time period you've had it invested. Again, you have to adjust this for time.
So I'm sure you've taken each separate investment and found an annualized rate of return on it. I'm sure you've taken the time to do that.
Once you've done this FOR EACH separate investment, you have to take a
weighted average of ALL of your investments to get a combined rate of return.
How do you feel that two hours a night has given you a 7% return?
You simply don't get it. When he was talking about an actively managed fund, he was talking about you. You have your own actively managed fund. I'm glad you said you agree with him about an actively managed fund, because you are one.
Again, it's not an opinion. I've told you time and time again that. Didn't I show you earlier that you only got an average of 7% return. That's not impressive.
Second, the article was based on math. Hate to be the one to tell you but, no, math equations have not changed much since 1991. As the point of the article says, if you can add and subtract, you can get the point of the article.
You say you have beaten the market. Are you sure? How do you measure this?
Let's take a look at how you compare yourself to the market. You have to take each and every infusion of capital that was an investment as a SEPARATE entity, find what's it worth now, and find the rate of return over the time period you've had it invested. Again, you have to adjust this for time.
So I'm sure you've taken each separate investment and found an annualized rate of return on it. I'm sure you've taken the time to do that.
Once you've done this FOR EACH separate investment, you have to take a weighted average of ALL of your investments to get a combined rate of return.
How do you feel that two hours a night has given you a 7% return?
As I mentioned in a previous post and you conveniently ignored, his "math" only includes the universe of the S&P 500. I hope you and Dr. Sharpe realize that there is a whole other universe from which to invest from.
But, just to show you I don't duck. My annualized rate of return on my investments from 6/1/2010 to 6/1/2011 is 123.5% How does that compare with your buy and hold?
Now, I am sure you will just call bullshit, because you just can't fathom that anyone could beat the market because, well, you read an article.
Now you keep asking why I am talking about the last 10 years of return from the S&P and here is why. From 2000 to 2010 the average rate of return from the S&P 500 is 2.4% with a CAGR of 0.31%. Now if you adjust that for inflation, you get an average return of -0.11% and a CAGR of of -2.07%. Essentially you lost out in real terms.
But hey, I am sure Sharpe has offered to cover your losses if you blindly follow his 1991 article right?
PS
Yesterday was an awesome day for me. There were a handful of stocks that I have had my eye on, but were above my target price. They gave me a great entry point.
As I mentioned in a previous post and you conveniently ignored, his "math" only includes the universe of the S&P 500. I hope you and Dr. Sharpe realize that there is a whole other universe from which to invest from.
But, just to show you I don't duck. My annualized rate of return on my investments from 6/1/2010 to 6/1/2011 is 123.5% How does that compare with your buy and hold?
Now, I am sure you will just call bullshit, because you just can't fathom that anyone could beat the market because, well, you read an article.
Now you keep asking why I am talking about the last 10 years of return from the S&P and here is why. From 2000 to 2010 the average rate of return from the S&P 500 is 2.4% with a CAGR of 0.31%. Now if you adjust that for inflation, you get an average return of -0.11% and a CAGR of of -2.07%. Essentially you lost out in real terms.
But hey, I am sure Sharpe has offered to cover your losses if you blindly follow his 1991 article right?
PS
Yesterday was an awesome day for me. There were a handful of stocks that I have had my eye on, but were above my target price. They gave me a great entry point.
Without you having to look it up, I ask you this "what is your beta?"
If you don't know, you don't know how to compare yourself to the market.
You can't just compare yourself to the market. You have to compare yourself to the market of assets that have a very similar level of risk to the assets you are holding.
It didn't come from one article. It came from my finance MBA from a top tier program. I gave you the one article that I thought you'd be able to understand. About that, I was wrong.
Oh you are one of those "elite" types who thinks only you can understand high finance cuz you claim to come from a "top tier" progrqm. It was the dickheads from the top tier programs that brought us the financial crisis, so forgive me if I don't put too much stock in what you say.
Those "top tier" programs don't have much credibility these days. Didn't Bernie Madoff go to a top tier program?
Last point, all that money and time on your finance MBA from a so called "top tier" program and all you do is buy and hold the SPDR? Seems lke a complete waste of time and money to me. But as I keep saying, I wish you luck. You are going to need it considering the S&P 500 has lost you money over the last 10 years. Unless of course you can argue otherwise.
I noticed you can't answer the questions. You are really grasping at straws when you question the value of a degree compared to the one book you read followed by the 2am infomercial on the subject.
You wrote something as ridiculous as "I am curious to see who knows about investing and who does not." As if you had any incling about what you were talking about.
You posted this entire "quiz" thread based on the ridiculous premise that you were an authority particularly when people didn't answer your foolish question about ROIC the way you thought they should.
You even wrote something as stupid as---let's see--it was something to the
effect of "with 21 views without the correct response, let me explain it to you the correct way."
You presented yourself as an authority. And by the end you capitulate saying "you have your opinion and I have mine."
The most humourous part is where you thought so much of yourself that you dismissed the work of a Nobel prize winner.
Boom -- you are done.
I noticed you can't answer the questions. You are really grasping at straws when you question the value of a degree compared to the one book you read followed by the 2am infomercial on the subject.
You wrote something as ridiculous as "I am curious to see who knows about investing and who does not." As if you had any incling about what you were talking about.
You posted this entire "quiz" thread based on the ridiculous premise that you were an authority particularly when people didn't answer your foolish question about ROIC the way you thought they should.
You even wrote something as stupid as---let's see--it was something to the effect of "with 21 views without the correct response, let me explain it to you the correct way."
You presented yourself as an authority. And by the end you capitulate saying "you have your opinion and I have mine."
The most humourous part is where you thought so much of yourself that you dismissed the work of a Nobel prize winner.
Boom -- you are done.
Ouch! ILA is still stinging from that beat down.
I guess Mr. Buy and Hold just Up and Sold. He hasn't shown his face since I asked him to guarentee his buy and hold strategy.
The S&P has taken a beating lately. I predicted it would trade sideways and it has.
But, he would tell you to "hang in there" and "it will go back up".
But, why would you want to lose money when you can make it?
ILA, it's me, Mr. "Buy and Hold."
I've told you before--"Boom.....you are done."
That means, "Boom...you are done." In other words, I'm done with you. I've moved on.
I humbly accept your concession.
PS
It looks like a classic head and shoulders is forming in the S&P. It has also crossed its 200 day moving average and dropped below support of 1300.
Keep holding, I have already started to take some small short positions which have been up 5%. How has Sharpe and his buy and hold ten year negative return done for ya?
You have serious issues.
You have serious issues.
Wrong. She has one-- she's wacko.
You guys are funny anonypussies. You come here spouting buy and hold while the S&P is in the process of losing 7%. By watching the trends, i picked a spot to short the S&P and have been up 6% over that same time frame basically beating you by 13%. The trend line will tell me when it is going back uo and I will get back in long. You will be waiting to make up ground from the recent loss and I will be operating from a higher position.
Yet, you still think your way is best?
Like I said, good luck to ya. You can call bullshit if you want, but my predictions and he dates of them are here and on the Playground for all to see.
My guess is that by resorting to the childish insults, you have conceded that I am in fact correct.
You are either very stubborn, or are one of those mutual fund managers who profits from people buying and holding and are skeered if people taking matters into their own hands.
I humbly accept your concession
