Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Ha, I skimmed some of the pages on Amazon “Look Inside” and agree that this is a pitiful piece of literature. It’s obvious (to me, anyway) that the reviewers are probably all cronies of the author (maybe family members or relatives) and basically stuffed the ballot box. The content in this book is so bad, it’s laughable.sglondon wrote:
^^Lol. It was possible to make 1000% if you picked the right small caps…
Have you guys ever read this book? One of the dude’s comments were like “I’ve beaten the market conistently every year, average compound return is 70%” or something stupid like that.
Hands down worst book on investing i’ve ever read.
http://www.amazon.ca/Creating-Portfolio-like-Warren-Buffett/dp/1118182529
The SEC should get involved ASAP.sglondon wrote:
^^Lol. It was possible to make 1000% if you picked the right small caps…
Have you guys ever read this book? One of the dude’s comments were like “I’ve beaten the market conistently every year, average compound return is 70%” or something stupid like that.
Hands down worst book on investing i’ve ever read.
http://www.amazon.ca/Creating-Portfolio-like-Warren-Buffett/dp/1118182529
I plan to start this mutual fund, charge 1% per year - quite reasonable - and outperform the S&P.Destroyer of Worlds wrote:
I like this idea a lot. Set up a mutual fund, benchmark it to the S&P500, implement a small-cap bias, slightly outperform the S&P 500 for 3 years until you have established that arbitrary track record for other monkeys, er, consultants and fund selectors, and then sit back and watch the mandates roll in. After all, nobody really expects any excess return from domestic large cap stocks in the long run, do they? Small sustainable excess returns in LCD equity land is something special. Of course, do not shine any special light on the small cap bias to any consultants reviewing your fund.bchad wrote:
An interesting point is that monkeys throwing darts at a board should outperform something like the S&P 500 on average.
Why? Because their sample will be biased towards small-cap stocks (the S&P 500 has about 75% of the US market capitalization, but only 500 stocks, compared to the 1000s of stocks in the R1k, R3k, Wilshire 5000, etc), and the small cap universe tends to deliver higher returns on average.
So it may not be too hard to beat the market over the long term by a little, but it does seem to be pretty hard to beat it by a lot. One of the challenges is to figure out how much of the performance difference comes from buying high-beta stocks in an up market, versus finding stuff that outperforms an equivalently-levered index.
Respect. So you’re telling me there’s a chance!?edupristine wrote:
Making a return of 30-100% for the last few years is possible . Pls check the credentials and then believe in the seminars
For sure. You wouldn’t be the first person in finance to put something that already exists, with no modifications, in different packaging and charge for the packaging. It’s like selling bottled tap water.naren_ wrote:
I plan to start this mutual fund, charge 1% per year - quite reasonable - and outperform the S&P.Destroyer of Worlds wrote:
I like this idea a lot. Set up a mutual fund, benchmark it to the S&P500, implement a small-cap bias, slightly outperform the S&P 500 for 3 years until you have established that arbitrary track record for other monkeys, er, consultants and fund selectors, and then sit back and watch the mandates roll in. After all, nobody really expects any excess return from domestic large cap stocks in the long run, do they? Small sustainable excess returns in LCD equity land is something special. Of course, do not shine any special light on the small cap bias to any consultants reviewing your fund.bchad wrote:
An interesting point is that monkeys throwing darts at a board should outperform something like the S&P 500 on average.
Why? Because their sample will be biased towards small-cap stocks (the S&P 500 has about 75% of the US market capitalization, but only 500 stocks, compared to the 1000s of stocks in the R1k, R3k, Wilshire 5000, etc), and the small cap universe tends to deliver higher returns on average.
So it may not be too hard to beat the market over the long term by a little, but it does seem to be pretty hard to beat it by a lot. One of the challenges is to figure out how much of the performance difference comes from buying high-beta stocks in an up market, versus finding stuff that outperforms an equivalently-levered index.
Don’t tell anyone but all of the inflows will go into RSP (Guggenheim S&P 500 Equal Weight ETF).