Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : Rande Is . . . HOME -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frederick Langford who wrote (44859)	1/7/2001 9:55:38 PM
From: Kanetsu	Respond to of 57584

I sense your question is rhetorical... but Berkshire Hathaway was trading around 45000 3 years ago, now it is at 67000, Buffet's worst 3 year stretch. He is up over 20% in the last 52 weeks. His track record is over 30 years long and his average annual return is around 25%. He never falls victim to the latest investing craze, and hence missed out on the tech market spike, but has performed quite well as the craze ended. I remember thinking in March that Buffet was no longer relevant, wish I'd bought some Berkshire then. I'll be the first to admit there is no all-knowing investor, but you would be hard pressed to find one with a better long term track record than Buffet. In short, I stand by my belief that he is the quintessential smart money. As an aside, I am in the business of allocating money to derivative traders based on many factors. If all I did was pick traders with the best recent 3 year track record I would have very disappointing results. If I chose traders based on the best recent one year performance, my results would be disastrous. A 3 year investing track record is statistically insignificant.