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 : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: BigShoulders who wrote (17482)	2/23/2003 12:51:35 PM
From: Math Junkie	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

The first issue is that I was looking at the latest results on Brinker's Web page, which gives data since inception of the current model in 1988 through 12/31/2002. By my calculations, Portfolio I increased the bottom line by about 34% over the S&P 500 total return (i.e., with dividends reinvested). The figure for Portfolio II comes out to about 12%. The trouble is, that's over a period of fifteen years, so the outperformance works out to about 2% and 0.7% respectively on an annualized basis, with wide fluctuations over periods of several years. The question in my mind is whether this is enough to make it worth the effort plus the risk of a stumble, and in taxable accounts there is an additional handicap to consider. The second issue is that I'm not convinced that the data on the model's performance since inception is sufficient to provide a statistically valid record for the purpose of proving its validity. For these reasons, if or when Brinker goes back to a fully invested position, I will be comparing it to advice from other sources, and my decision on how much of my portfolio to commit, if any, will be made after carefully examining the potential consequences of being wrong in light of the probability that we are in a secular bear.