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 : Value Investing -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jurgis Bekepuris who wrote (40653)	12/16/2010 11:17:10 AM
From: Dale Baker	Respond to of 78704

Without going into numbers, my performance over that time period and the 10-year average is considerably ahead of that model. I would only add that my approach to beating the indexes is to avoid most of the companies in them and find smaller, special-situation plays that I often hold for several years when they work. Lots of different ways to get there, however.

To: Jurgis Bekepuris who wrote (40653)	12/16/2010 11:53:41 AM
From: Madharry	Respond to of 78704

I think one could argue whether even a 10 year performance is relevent. be interesting to see it over 50 years with different starting points and 10 year periods from there. I dont think its fair to compare dale's portfolio to his in that his portfolio is sprinkled liberally with international names while the mf portfolio has been restricted to us names. one could also argue at least from my point that if someone could guaranty me a 14.5% cagr over 10 years, I would stop wasting my time actively managing my own portfolio to try for a couple of percent more with a lot more risk, and go to a fat farm/yoga center and try to improve my tennis game.

To: Jurgis Bekepuris who wrote (40653)	12/16/2010 12:20:29 PM
From: Paul Senior	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 78704

It looks like the actual results were from buys in May '09 just off the lows in '09. (not sure: the inception date and range dates are confusing,) And so a 45% gain, that's achievable by most people who bought a portfolio of almost anything at that time. Bond funds even have made 50% moves. Now the model portfolio, that's pretty impressive. That is, the gain is a move from 100K to 388K over 11 years. As stated, maybe about 14% compounded. Which to me also seems very impressive especially after you look and see that the average annual gain of the portfolio is 288% over 11 years: It's 26% per year. This percentage certainly beats my portfolios' performance over the past 11 years. Then again, in my defense to myself, I'm not and wasn't just somebody starting out with a relatively few bucks then. Risk/reward has played some role for me. It's my same knock against numbers put up by Tilson, Burry, others. You start off in your garage (Tilson) or apartment and push $10k or maybe less, to 20K in 18 months and incorporate that percentage gain for the next many years to show how successful you are. (And those early gains are not confirmed by any independent auditor.) Result: Everybody shows they can meet or beat Buffett on the percentage gain. Or here, where it's a "model". Seems to work great. Just isn't so easy (at least for me) when big dollars are involved. Jmo. I try to keep competitiveness out of investing (but I get caught up in it). If people were to just invest and keep doing it for decades and just get "average" results, they'd do okay or well. Again jmo.