***Off Topic***Computer Screening--Chuck, we all use computer screening to some degree, but on a practical basis, it's value is doubtful. That's why the index funds have been growing in popularity for many years. The index funds have been beating the returns of the 'managed' funds, because of lower trading costs (there might be other factors as well).
Value Line, before they got into the mutual fund business itself, used to show how much better an investor would do if he regularly bought their top-ranked stocks, and sold the lower-ranked stocks. Then, when Value Line started its own mutual fund, it turned out, historically, that the strategy didn't quite work out the way the computers and graphs showed it should have worked. The real world is different. The Value Line mutual fund (I'm talking very generally, because I read this many years ago) was an average performer, not a superstar like Fidelity's Magellan.
I'm not saying analysis and selection is useless. But they are worth far less than we want them to be worth. Part of the problem is trading costs (which include the commission, the spread, potential taxes, etc.) Part of the problem is you, as an individual, are competing with groups and individuals that have better access to company-specific and industry-specific data (brokerage companies, mutual funds, etc.).
But I still think the stock market (or a mutual fund) is a better bet than a bank savings account/CD/whatever for the bulk of your money.
Regards,
Larry
|
