Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
We need someone to publish the results for the past 50 years. $100 became $11 from 1929 to 1932. From that point on needed 800% return to get back to $100.
I'm all for Technical ANALysis, but over such long periods of time they are off little practical significance. To me it is about making decisions about the PRESENT and the longer the duration one uses to sensationalize returns on the upside or downside, the more one has the benefit of hindsight and the more impossible anyone can remotely begin to replicate that returnr.
As Aaron Levinstein of NYT once stated:
Statistics are like a bikini. What they reveal is interesting, but what they conceal is vital.
Simply quoting results of ONE time period is pointless. Mr. Ritholtz will do himself and everyone else a favor if he puts in little more effort with the means at his disposal to chart Dow Theory Performance over multiple time periods.
Comments
I'm all for Technical ANALysis, but over such long periods of time they are off little practical significance. To me it is about making decisions about the PRESENT and the longer the duration one uses to sensationalize returns on the upside or downside, the more one has the benefit of hindsight and the more impossible anyone can remotely begin to replicate that returnr.
As Aaron Levinstein of NYT once stated:
Statistics are like a bikini. What they reveal is interesting, but what they conceal is vital.
Simply quoting results of ONE time period is pointless. Mr. Ritholtz will do himself and everyone else a favor if he puts in little more effort with the means at his disposal to chart Dow Theory Performance over multiple time periods.