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.

Politics : Formerly About Applied Materials -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: StanX Long who wrote (47619)	6/6/2001 12:16:14 AM
From: Gottfried	Read Replies (6) \| Respond to of 70976

Stan, suspicions confirmed - "Analyzing the Analysts" By James B. Stewart June 5, 2001 Total returns on analysts' stock picks and pans since January 1997 1. Credit Suisse First Boston 6.86% 2. A.G. Edwards 4.33% 3. Salomon Smith Barney 0.88% 4. Merrill Lynch -1.57% 5. Morgan Stanley -2.76% 6. UBS PaineWebber -4.87% 7. Prudential -5.47% 8. Goldman Sachs -6.03% 9. Bear Stearns -6.21% 10. Lehman Brothers -7.03% S&P 500 index 74.2% Data through June 5 Source: Investars.com WE NOW KNOW the truth about the performance of Wall Street analysts, and it's worse than I would have dared to think. Investars.com launched a new investment Web site last week with a fascinating analysis of Wall Street research recommendations. Hypothetically buying on every upgrade and selling on each downgrade since January 1997 to the present, Investars compiled returns for 19 firms covering the entire universe of stocks followed by research analysts, in itself a staggering exercise in data processing. Over the same period (through last week), the S&P 500 gained about 75%. The best of the Wall Street firms — Credit Suisse First Boston — managed a return of just 7.63%, a breathtaking level of underperformance that should have every client who follows such research flocking to an index fund.< [snip] from Smart Money yahoo.smartmoney.com G.