cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board  

Go Back   cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board > non-Sports > Finances

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 08-04-2008, 07:52 PM   #11
Flystripper
Senior Member
 
Flystripper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Valencia CA
Posts: 1,384
Flystripper is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jay santos View Post
Nah, I'd say someone in finance who actually would say that to a client is the true arrogant asshole and/or dipshit.
There have been managers that have beaten the S&P over pretty long periods. The pertinent question is always for how much risk. I know what you are saying Jay and it is true that many managers or people that try to pass themselves off as managers won't consistently give you returns above the S&P for equal risk. However, to say that beating the S&P is impossible is discounting the results of managers with documented long-term track records and is just giving too much weight to efficient markets theory. Just my opinion.

Last edited by Flystripper; 08-04-2008 at 08:00 PM.
Flystripper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 07:57 PM   #12
BYU71
Senior Member
 
BYU71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,084
BYU71 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flystripper View Post
There have been managers that have beaten the S&P over pretty long periods. The pertinent question is always for how much risk. I know what you are saying Jay and it is true that many managers or people that try to pass themselves off as managers won't consistently give you returns above the S&P for equal risk. However, to say that beating the S&P is impossible is discounting the results of managers with documented long-term track records and giving too much weight to efficient markets theory. Just my opinion.

My point is you can't say "any" investment advisor. If you want to say most or the majority, that is a debatable question, which I wouldn't argue with. "Any" means all. There are investment advisors who have track records that beat the S&P by 2-3%.
BYU71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 08:09 PM   #13
jay santos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,177
jay santos is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BYU71 View Post
There are investment advisors who have track records that beat the S&P by 2-3%.
How many investment advisors have track records of beating the S&P by 2-3%, including costs, which can not be attributed to pure random luck and therefore can be expected to endure into the future?

"Investment advisors" are the biggest group of con-men in America still yet to be exposed.
jay santos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 08:12 PM   #14
BYU71
Senior Member
 
BYU71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,084
BYU71 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jay santos View Post
How many investment advisors have track records of beating the S&P by 2-3%, including costs, which can not be attributed to pure random luck and therefore can be expected to endure into the future?

"Investment advisors" are the biggest group of con-men in America still yet to be exposed.

So are you standing by your claim "any" investment advisor................

By the way, the recommendation you gave, what are the 5 years returns on the core equity portfolios. I would also like the 10 year, but you seem to be having difficulty with the 5 year so lets start there.
BYU71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 08:17 PM   #15
jay santos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,177
jay santos is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BYU71 View Post
So are you standing by your claim "any" investment advisor................

By the way, the recommendation you gave, what are the 5 years returns on the core equity portfolios. I would also like the 10 year, but you seem to be having difficulty with the 5 year so lets start there.
We're not speaking the same language, so it doesn't do any good to argue.
jay santos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 08:33 PM   #16
BYU71
Senior Member
 
BYU71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,084
BYU71 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jay santos View Post
We're not speaking the same language, so it doesn't do any good to argue.

I agree why argue. Here is one investment advisors track record over the last 5 years. 10.53 vs the S&P of 7.58 net of fees, through June 30th of this year. Therefor no argument, this an investment advisor who can make the 2-3% claim.

Oh, the 10 yr is 9.4% vs 2.88% and the fifteen year is 12.5 vs 9.22%. I don't think that someone can be that dumb lucky over that long a time period.

If you have a grudge against "some" or even "most" so called investment advisors, you might be justified. However, just because you don't know any good honest ones, you shouldn't be painting them all with such a broad brush, IMHO.
BYU71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 09:08 PM   #17
pelagius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,431
pelagius is on a distinguished road
Default

I'm afraid this is getting silly:

BYU71: ex post outperformance

JAY: ex ante outperformance

Jay, unfortunately didn't make that distinction clear at the beginning but the by the middle of the thread he is clearly is making an argument about ex ante performance and not ex post. A charitable reading of Jay's argument requires that you respond in terms of the ex ante probability of overpeformance.
pelagius is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 09:14 PM   #18
BYU71
Senior Member
 
BYU71's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 5,084
BYU71 is an unknown quantity at this point
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pelagius View Post
I'm afraid this is getting silly:

BYU71: ex post outperformance

JAY: ex ante outperformance

Jay, unfortunately didn't make that distinction clear at the beginning but the by the middle of the thread he is clearly is making an argument about ex ante performance and not ex post. A charitable reading of Jay's argument requires that you respond in terms of the ex ante probability of overpeformance.
Does ex post mean the advisor said what he has done and ex ante means the advisor is saying what he will do?
BYU71 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 09:16 PM   #19
jay santos
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 6,177
jay santos is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BYU71 View Post
I agree why argue. Here is one investment advisors track record over the last 5 years. 10.53 vs the S&P of 7.58 net of fees, through June 30th of this year. Therefor no argument, this an investment advisor who can make the 2-3% claim.

Oh, the 10 yr is 9.4% vs 2.88% and the fifteen year is 12.5 vs 9.22%. I don't think that someone can be that dumb lucky over that long a time period.

If you have a grudge against "some" or even "most" so called investment advisors, you might be justified. However, just because you don't know any good honest ones, you shouldn't be painting them all with such a broad brush, IMHO.
Instead of S&P I should have said a portfolio managed through modern portfolio theory--using index funds for each category--something as simple as:

50% Domestic (break out by large value, large growth, small value, small growth if you have enough to make it worth it)
30% International (ditto)
10% Real Estate/Commodities
10% Bonds

And I don't believe it's possible to beat it long term after costs. Long term = 30 - 50 years since that's the investment horizon for most on this board (should be time to death not time to retirement which is a big mistake some make).

I should say it's probably possible to beat this strategy long term after costs

BUT

the risk and probability of choosing the wrong portfolio manager is far greater than the reward you'll get above the index fund approach.

P.S. Five year returns mean ABSOLUTELY nothing to me. And ten year returns don't mean much to me at all.
jay santos is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-04-2008, 09:19 PM   #20
pelagius
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,431
pelagius is on a distinguished road
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BYU71 View Post
Does ex post mean the advisor said what he has done and ex ante means the advisor is saying what he will do?
Basically
pelagius is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:59 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.