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.

Technology Stocks : Apple Inc. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: MGV who wrote (169836)	5/27/2014 2:48:49 PM
From: Ryan Bartholomew	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 213173

The point is that it would not be true for many stocks that did not present the risk adjusted return opportunity that Apple did. Again, you're using your opinion that Apple is a lower-risk stock as the basis for adjusting your return to make it appear better. I could just as gratuitously use my opinion that Apple is a higher-risk stock to make it look worse. A better approach would be to use more objective measures such as beta, Apple's cash balance (albeit it carries tax consequences to free up, doesn't guarantee that Apple wouldn't spend it rather than return to investors, etc.), Apple's reliance upon one product for most of its profits, etc. Those are hard facts, real numbers. How they'll contribute to the generation of future profits, stability, risk are opinions. Luck had little to do with it.. Nonsense. To suggest that anyone knows in advance what market-timed accumulations of an equity will result in better performance than merely holding onto it is describing luck. Dollar-cost-averaging does not change expected return - it impacts volatility only.