|
A week and change into the new year and I finally get around to tabulating
the performance results for 2008. They were quite impressive, until December,
when the market rally forced me to disgorge a significant amount of my unhedged
profits. I made a conscious decision not to take full profits in late November
when I knew the market was going to go into its oversold/overbought momentum
game. Alas, I did not take profits and my proprietary numbers took a hit. The
bright side to this is that both my blog's static research model (+106.3%)
and my proprietary results (+335%) are the best that I know of.
Barry Ritholz's Fusion Analytics posted positive results for the year (between
8% and 20%, depending on your perspective), which is damn good compared to
most other services. It's not nearly as good as the BoomBust, but hey, I am
the one of the cutest investors around - it's hard to compete .
For those interested in his work or the difference between his service and
mine, see his research site and blog.
I don't know him personally, but he is often on CNBC, and is one of the most
grounded pundits that they have. I have received permission to release his
results and have made them available for download here:
fusion_analytics_recommendations_2008
09/01/2009,11:49 67.60 Kb.
Now, let's walk through my results for the year in detail. I'll start by comparing
my results to that of the big name brands, just to illustrate where the real
performance is to be found. For those in the press and the mainstream media
(MSM),
take note of this - you guys are interviewing the wrong people! As you peruse
this year end report, be sure to conceptualize what would happen if all of
the talking heads on TV were to have their performance results streamed across
the bottom of the screen as they spoke! Below is what I believe to be the most
comprehensive year end performance report of any blog or publicly available
investment site, not to mention one of the most impressive.
BoomBustBlog vs Wall Street Brokers
I had my team choose the most prominent brokers, bankers and sell side research
houses to compare with my results, and the final verdict for all of 2008 is...

| Stock |
Return of Blog's
forensic /drill
down analysis |
Brokers (Holding period return) |
| Citi |
GS |
JPM |
MS |
For
2008 |
| len |
113.3% |
0.0% |
50.8% |
-95.3% |
|
|
| hov |
155.0% |
-77.7% |
|
-75.9% |
|
|
| phm |
47.5% |
-1.0% |
-15.6% |
-15.0% |
|
|
| ctx |
108.5% |
-17.2% |
-52.6% |
49.9% |
|
|
| dhom |
140.4% |
|
No coverage |
|
|
|
| bzh |
165.6% |
|
-81.6% |
87.4% |
|
|
| rdn |
146.0% |
|
No coverage |
|
|
|
| mtg |
164.6% |
|
|
-44.6% |
|
|
| dhi |
87.5% |
215.7% |
-38.6% |
-45.0% |
|
|
| tol |
-5.5% |
5.1% |
6.7% |
3.9% |
|
|
| bsc |
181.0% |
|
No coverage |
|
|
181.0% |
| cfc |
150.4% |
|
No coverage |
|
|
150.4% |
| mbi |
175.1% |
|
14.7% |
-83.0% |
|
175.1% |
| abk |
188.6% |
-28.0% |
|
-89.9% |
|
188.6% |
| wm |
193.0% |
|
99.5% |
|
|
193.0% |
| ryl |
27.7% |
-7.8% |
-10.1% |
-44.9% |
|
27.7% |
| ms |
119.3% |
-71.9% |
-70.9% |
-71.3% |
|
119.3% |
| ggp |
182.6% |
58.4% |
-95.9% |
-95.3% |
|
182.6% |
| bac |
125.9% |
-72.3% |
-58.5% |
-73.3% |
-36.2% |
125.9% |
| kbh |
72.1% |
-17.7% |
-41.9% |
-67.5% |
|
|
| lehmq |
195.2% |
|
-99.9% |
|
|
195.2% |
| ago |
79.8% |
0.0% |
-47.2% |
-32.4% |
|
79.8% |
| key |
125.6% |
-76.0% |
-67.9% |
|
17.8% |
125.6% |
| ffhs |
|
|
No coverage |
|
|
|
| ms |
112.6% |
-71.9% |
-70.9% |
-71.3% |
|
112.6% |
| c |
137.9% |
|
19.1% |
-80.1% |
-49.3% |
137.9% |
| wfc |
33.4% |
-14.0% |
|
-30.4% |
-25.6% |
33.4% |
| gs |
99.4% |
-58.2% |
|
-56.2% |
-51.2% |
99.4% |
| mer |
|
-81.6% |
-78.6% |
-84.3% |
-63.3% |
|
| wb |
163.8% |
|
No coverage |
|
|
163.8% |
| bsc |
183.7% |
|
|
|
|
183.7% |
| kfn |
157.2% |
-85.1% |
|
-78.9% |
|
157.2% |
| jef |
|
|
-35.5% |
|
|
0.0% |
| pnc |
55.5% |
-24.5% |
-23.2% |
|
-35.3% |
55.5% |
| bpop |
|
|
No coverage |
|
|
|
| sti |
97.6% |
-45.3% |
-57.9% |
-63.3% |
-61.2% |
97.6% |
| snv |
|
-42.6% |
|
-45.1% |
36.6% |
|
| mi |
|
-47.5% |
47.7% |
68.7% |
-47.5% |
|
| asbc |
|
|
|
|
-43.6% |
|
| fctr |
|
|
No coverage |
|
|
|
| mtb |
86.9% |
-30.1% |
-9.0% |
-12.8% |
-41.0% |
|
| hban |
44.5% |
21.7% |
43.8% |
|
-64.4% |
|
| bbt |
|
-14.0% |
-30.7% |
-43.4% |
-51.9% |
|
| jpm |
|
-41.7% |
-36.1% |
|
-42.1% |
|
| usb |
|
30.4% |
-31.9% |
-32.9% |
-35.7% |
|
| cof |
70.1% |
|
-34.8% |
|
|
70.1% |
| nara |
|
|
No coverage |
|
|
|
| sasr |
|
|
No coverage |
|
|
|
| hnbc |
|
|
No coverage |
|
|
|
| cvbf |
|
|
No coverage |
|
|
|
| gbci |
|
|
No coverage |
|
|
|
| fhn |
|
-54.4% |
46.1% |
-43.6% |
44.3% |
|
| ncc |
|
-88.1% |
-83.5% |
-89.5% |
-53.9% |
|
| WAMUQ |
195.5% |
|
52.2% |
|
|
195.5% |
| cfc |
15.4% |
|
No coverage |
|
|
15.4% |
| rf |
|
-40.2% |
-67.1% |
-67.4% |
0.0% |
|
| zion |
|
-32.0% |
-66.5% |
-69.1% |
-51.3% |
|
| tcbk |
|
|
No coverage |
|
|
|
| fitb |
|
-73.1% |
-42.4% |
76.9% |
13.8% |
|
| sov |
|
-71.1% |
|
|
|
|
| ge |
85.6% |
-58.7% |
-61.4% |
-61.4% |
|
85.6% |
| axp |
91.1% |
|
-54.6% |
-56.8% |
|
91.1% |
| hbc |
80.4% |
|
|
45.9% |
|
80.4% |
| nav |
82.5% |
|
|
-41.8% |
|
82.5% |
| wire |
-1.5% |
|
No coverage |
|
|
-1.5% |
| sfd |
66.0% |
|
|
-44.1% |
-12.4% |
66.0% |
| hig |
69.9% |
|
|
|
|
69.9% |
| mac |
107.7% |
|
|
|
|
107.7% |
Reggie's
Returns |
110.5% |
-28.9% |
-29.3% |
-41.4% |
-29.7% |
106.3% |
For a detailed addendum that show the supporting data for these calculations,
see
Blog
vs. Broker Analysis - supplementary material (1.09 MB 2008-10-24 14:43:34).
The individual posts behind each ticker can be found here: "In
the Actionable Research post". Here you can find the first post made regarding
every ticker in this table above. Plenty of reading for those who are interested.
The last report has inadvertently been excluded from this analysis (FRO).
PFG was not included as well, but was also not a full blown analysis, thus
did not belong in the 2008 results column. I will be following up on PFG for
there may be further opportunity there (I have already included addenda on
FRO). Both of these tickers would show underwater, but would have a minimum
effect on the return numbers posted here.
To be as fair as possible, I included unlevered returns below in order to
compare with raw brokerage recommendations. Since nearly all of my research
resulted in bearish opinions, shorts and puts were the order of the day (umm,
year?!). Most cannot go short in a cash account, so leverage must be calculated,
but to compare on an apples to apples basis, we created a watered down cash
index of my recommendations in order to compare directly with the brokerage
firms. The results are the pretty much the same.
| Stock |
BoomBustBlog's
Holding period
return (with leverage) |
BoomBustBlog's HPR without
margin and commissions |
1
month |
3
months |
Since
invested |
Return of Blog's
forensic/
drill down
analysis |
| len |
113.3% |
-42.6% |
16.7% |
60.0% |
113.3% |
| hov |
155.0% |
44.5% |
68.9% |
80.9% |
155.0% |
| phm |
47.5% |
-18.2% |
16.6% |
27.1% |
47.5% |
| ctx |
108.5% |
-2.9% |
25.3% |
57.6% |
108.5% |
| dhom |
140.4% |
16.7% |
16.7% |
73.6% |
140.4% |
| bzh |
165.6% |
50.0% |
79.5% |
86.2% |
165.6% |
| rdn |
146.0% |
-20.2% |
13.7% |
76.4% |
146.0% |
| mtg |
164.6% |
-7.7% |
55.7% |
85.7% |
164.6% |
| dhi |
87.5% |
-22.0% |
36.8% |
47.1% |
87.5% |
| tol |
-5.5% |
3.7% |
12.5% |
0.6% |
-5.5% |
| bsc |
181.0% |
3.3% |
30.4% |
93.9% |
181.0% |
| cfc |
150.4% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
78.5% |
150.4% |
| mbi |
175.1% |
38.3% |
65.8% |
90.9% |
175.1% |
| abk |
188.6% |
50.6% |
82.4% |
97.6% |
188.6% |
| wm |
193.0% |
22.5% |
98.9% |
99.9% |
193.0% |
| ryl |
27.7% |
-10.8% |
18.7% |
17.0% |
27.7% |
| ms |
119.3% |
-4.6% |
55.4% |
62.4% |
119.3% |
| ggp |
182.6% |
44.0% |
92.2% |
93.8% |
182.6% |
| bac |
125.9% |
42.7% |
58.9% |
65.5% |
125.9% |
| kbh |
72.1% |
10.0% |
31.7% |
38.4% |
72.1% |
| lehmq |
195.2% |
21.9% |
99.7% |
99.9% |
195.2% |
| ago |
79.8% |
-18.8% |
31.4% |
42.2% |
79.8% |
| key |
125.6% |
37.1% |
36.8% |
65.1% |
125.6% |
| ffhs |
62.9% |
6.7% |
30.8% |
33.6% |
|
| ms |
112.6% |
-4.6% |
55.4% |
58.4% |
112.6% |
| c |
137.9% |
48.8% |
63.5% |
71.1% |
137.9% |
| wfc |
33.4% |
23.9% |
17.1% |
18.8% |
33.4% |
| gs |
99.4% |
4.1% |
49.0% |
51.8% |
99.4% |
| mer |
153.0% |
38.5% |
58.9% |
78.6% |
|
| wb |
163.8% |
13.4% |
67.8% |
84.0% |
163.8% |
| bsc |
183.7% |
NA |
NA |
48.4% |
183.7% |
| kfn |
157.2% |
39.1% |
57.7% |
80.5% |
157.2% |
| jef |
25.4% |
8.0% |
18.7% |
14.6% |
|
| pnc |
55.5% |
28.4% |
7.8% |
29.5% |
55.5% |
| bpop |
100.9% |
24.2% |
16.0% |
52.2% |
|
| sti |
97.6% |
32.5% |
10.5% |
50.5% |
97.6% |
| snv |
84.3% |
34.3% |
-6.9% |
43.8% |
|
| mi |
93.4% |
32.4% |
-11.0% |
48.4% |
|
| asbc |
66.9% |
19.8% |
-21.6% |
35.2% |
|
| fctr |
-2.2% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
0.6% |
|
| mtb |
86.9% |
39.9% |
-11.3% |
45.2% |
86.9% |
| hban |
44.5% |
27.1% |
-19.0% |
23.9% |
44.5% |
| bbt |
56.0% |
33.8% |
-13.9% |
29.7% |
|
| jpm |
70.1% |
33.2% |
-2.6% |
36.8% |
|
| usb |
57.2% |
23.6% |
8.0% |
30.3% |
|
| cof |
70.1% |
21.9% |
13.2% |
36.8% |
70.1% |
| nara |
64.4% |
25.8% |
1.3% |
33.9% |
|
| sasr |
31.6% |
-0.6% |
-15.7% |
17.5% |
|
| hnbc |
-13.0% |
-1.5% |
6.6% |
-4.8% |
|
| cvbf |
-15.5% |
12.7% |
-12.2% |
-6.0% |
|
| gbci |
33.0% |
18.3% |
7.6% |
18.2% |
|
| fhn |
-30.2% |
11.9% |
-4.5% |
-13.4% |
|
| ncc |
134.3% |
28.5% |
50.2% |
68.8% |
|
| WAMUQ |
195.5% |
22.5% |
98.5% |
99.5% |
195.5% |
| cfc |
15.4% |
0.0% |
0.0% |
9.4% |
15.4% |
| rf |
115.2% |
33.8% |
-7.0% |
59.3% |
|
| zion |
94.5% |
45.9% |
-33.6% |
48.9% |
|
| tcbk |
-80.8% |
4.3% |
-27.4% |
-38.7% |
|
| fitb |
115.5% |
29.9% |
29.9% |
59.5% |
|
| sov |
127.6% |
-7.1% |
71.0% |
65.5% |
|
| ge |
85.6% |
16.4% |
32.4% |
44.3% |
85.6% |
| axp |
91.1% |
29.2% |
30.8% |
46.6% |
91.1% |
| hbc |
80.4% |
20.6% |
22.5% |
41.3% |
80.4% |
| nav |
82.5% |
-3.5% |
43.0% |
42.4% |
82.5% |
| wire |
-1.5% |
4.3% |
-7.4% |
0.1% |
-1.5% |
| sfd |
66.0% |
-28.8% |
46.1% |
33.9% |
66.0% |
| hig |
69.9% |
-13.5% |
74.7% |
35.6% |
69.9% |
| mac |
107.7% |
32.4% |
57.0% |
54.5% |
107.7% |
Reggie's
Returns |
92.9% |
15.6% |
28.3% |
47.9% |
110.5% |
Speaking of CNBC, James Cramer is probably one of the most renown TV and cable
investment pundits. He's an entertainer, for sure, but he still bites the BoomBust!
To see the entire study comparing this blog to his flagship "Action Alerts
Plus" service (which ain't cheap), see Reggie
Middleton on James Cramer: Marked to Market!. Don't get me wrong, I like
Cramer, and in small doses he really makes me laugh. I don't want to disparage
him in any way, but like I said earlier... Let's put it this way, his performance
was better than JP Morgan's, and he did a little worse than the S&P, that
is until you factor in expenses and taxes. Then you would have been better
off simply watching him for entertainment rather than following his advice.

BoomBustBlog vs Cramer
| James Cramer's Action Alert Plus Performance |
|
| |
| Average holding period in months |
6.23 |
| Cramer's average holding period return |
-15.07% |
| Cramer's return 01/01/2008-Present |
-39.48% |
| Cramer's average yearly return since 01/01/2002 |
-15.29% |
| |
| Broad Market Indices |
|
| S&P 500 |
|
| S&P 500 01/01/2008-Present |
-29.90% |
| S&P 500 average yearly return since 07/01/2007 |
-33.60% |
| |
| Reggie Middleton's BoomBustblog.com |
|
| |
| Average holding period in months |
10.09 |
| S&P 500 01/01/2008-Present |
-29.90% |
| S&P 500 average yearly return since 07/01/2007 |
-33.60% |
| Cramer's average holding period return |
-15.07% |
| Cramer's return 01/01/2008-Present |
-39.48% |
| Cramer's average yearly return since 01/01/2002 |
-15.29% |
| BoomBustBlog research average holding period return |
110.55% |
| BoomBustBlog research average yearly return since 01/01/2007 |
106.3% |
The slight differences in performance are due to the calculation variations
made to create an "apples to apples" comparison, ex. holding period, etc.
Reggie Middleton's Proprietary Trading Account
These are the results for my personal trading. I have decided to disclose some of
my trading strategies with the institutional level subscribers starting next
week, when I release the global macro research featuring a Spanish bank. Be
aware that this is not necessarily for beginners.

The proprietary trading account differs from the static blog research model
in that it is actively traded and managed (although I do very, very little
trading and exhibit bare minimum churn) while the blog research model is static
- assuming the reader simply attains a position when the research is released
and closes the position at or around the valuation band indicated in the research
or follows the direction of continuing opinion. This is in essence, a passive/static
model, although it has outperformed practically every this year and last year.
The result of the difference between the two is that what I perceive to be
the more profitable opportunities are concentrated, and profits are active
taken while losses are actively cut. In addition, I do some tax management
as well, which tends to skew the pre-tax performance numbers, often to the
downside.
Below are the raw, absolute returns for my proprietary account. These returns
are calculated by calculating the difference between my starting point and
ending point, and is the number that I use for comparison (since it is the
number that shows how much money I actually made).
| |
Reggie's gross
avg. return |
S&P return |
| For all 2007 (6 months) |
42.93% |
-8.23% |
| For Q1 2008 |
50.03% |
0.68% |
| For Q2 2008 |
53.46% |
-8.66% |
| For Q3 2008 |
32.40% |
-8.30% |
| For all 2008 |
196.11% |
-8.69% |
| Since inception |
481.04% |
-35.72% |
| 2008 absolute return |
335.42% |
|
| |
| Correlation to S&P 500 |
-61.02% |
|
| Correlated Beta |
-2.26 |
|
The numbers below are average monthly numbers. They are posted for the sake
of uniform comparison.

As can be plainly seen, we have absolutely trounced all of the hedge fund
indices, both for the year and since inception.


Analysis:
• Reggie Middleton Proprietary Account has outperformed the S&P 500
- 19 month Outperformance: 273.06%
• Reggie Middleton Proprietary Account has outperformed the Barclay Hedge
Fund Index - 19 month Outperformance: 245.82%
• Reggie Middleton Proprietary Account has outperformed the Barclay Event
Driven Index - 19 month Outperformance: 243.7%
• Reggie Middleton Proprietary Account has outperformed the Barclay Equity
Long Bias Index - 19 month Outperformance: 258.52%
• Reggie Middleton Proprietary Account has outperformed the Barclay Equity
Long/Short Index - 19 month Outperformance: 238.81%
• Reggie Middleton Proprietary Account has outperformed the Barclay Market
Neutral Index - 19 month Outperformance: 226.52%
• Reggie Middleton Proprietary Account has outperformed the Barclay Equity
Short Bias Index - 19 month Outperformance: 166.37%
• Reggie Middleton Proprietary Account has outperformed the Barclay Fund
of Funds Index - 19 month Outperformance: 244.79%
• Reggie Middleton Proprietary Account has outperformed the Barclay Global
Macro Index - 19 month Outperformance: 218.61%
• Reggie Middleton Proprietary Account has outperformed the Barclay Multi-Strategy
Index - 19 month Outperformance: 243.33%
What about Risk???
Most year end performance tabulations fail to take risk into consideration,
even the year end reports from the multi-billion dollar hedge funds that take
22% of you money and basically act as an overpriced levered mutual fund. Don't
get me wrong, I'm all for the hedge fund business, but as the Bernie Madoff
fiasco illustrates, sometimes you have to look past name brands, fancy literature
and the "I know a guy, who..." type of relationships. Hey, listen up. I am
a blogger, and if my disclosure, research and transparency is greater than
the money management and brokerage guys that you give your money to, let that
be considered the writing on the wall (street)! You've been forewarned (again),
and as we all now know after the (BoomBustBlog
forewarned) failure of the big investment banks, monolines, mortgage insurers,
commercial banks and thrifts, etc. - The Revolution will not be televised!
It will probably be BLOGGED though!

Trusting a money manager, broker, bank or custodian that posts reward without
posting the risks taken to obtain the reward is akin to buying up a lot of
items on a shopping spree without bothering to ask the prices of the items.
Risk IS the price of reward, period! Trust me, many of you are probably overpaying.


Notice the correlation numbers. This is why everybody is leaving, these are
just pricey mutual funds with barely better performance and 14 times the price.


For those of you who have something better to do than study archaic finance
terms, I have provided a handy dandy glossary of terms used in this article.
My next article (other than updating the oil shipper research) will address
the significance of the significant drop in wealth amongst the upper and upper
middle classes in this country, Europe, Asia and the middle east, and what
that social mobility means. Of course, those that read this blog should have
actually moved up a notch in absolute terms, which probably means they moved
up about 1.4 notches in relative terms. Blog on, my loyal readers and have
a happy new year!
Definitions
| n |
20 |
Monthly periods in the sample set, annualized. |
| arithmetic mean |
0.115 |
Simple average of Reggie Middleton Returns, net of fees |
| standard deviation |
0.234 |
Standard deviation is applied to the annual rate of return of an investment
to measure the investment's volatility. Standard deviation is also known
as historical volatility and is used by investors as a gauge for the amount
of expected volatility. For example, a volatile stock will have a high
standard deviation while the deviation of a stable blue chip stock will
be lower. A large dispersion tells us how much the return on the fund is
deviating from the expected normal returns. |
| skewness |
0.324 |
Skewness is extremely important to finance and investing. Most sets of
data, including stock prices and asset returns, have either positive or
negative skew rather than following the balanced normal distribution (which
has a skewness of zero). By knowing which way data is skewed, one can better
estimate whether a given (or future) data point will be more or less than
the mean. Most advanced economic analysis models study data for skewness
and incorporate this into their calculations. Skewness risk is the risk
that a model assumes a normal distribution of data when in fact data is
skewed to the left or right of the mean. |
| kurtosis |
-0.684 |
Used generally in the statistical field, kurtosis describes trends in
charts. A high kurtosis portrays a chart with fat tails and a low, even
distribution, whereas a low kurtosis portrays a chart with skinny tails
and a distribution concentrated toward the mean. Higher kurtosis means
more of the variance is due to infrequent extreme deviations, as opposed
to frequent modestly-sized deviations. |
| beta |
-2.255 |
The Beta coefficient, in terms of finance and investing, is a measure
of volatility of a stock or portfolio in relation to the rest of the financial
market. An asset with a beta of 0 means that its price is not at all correlated
with the market; that asset is independent. A positive beta means that
the asset generally follows the market. A negative beta shows that the
asset inversely follows the market; the asset generally decreases in value
if the market goes up. Correlations are evident between companies within
the same industry, or even within the same asset class (such as equities),
as was demonstrated in the Wall Street crash of 1929. This correlated risk,
measured by Beta, creates almost all of the risk in a diversified portfolio.
The beta coefficient is a key parameter in the capital asset pricing model
(CAPM). It measures the part of the asset's statistical variance that cannot
be mitigated by the diversification provided by the portfolio of many risky
assets, because it is correlated with the return of the other assets that
are in the portfolio. Beta is calculated for individual companies using
regression analysis. |
| Sharpe ratio |
0.488 |
A ratio developed by Nobel laureate William F. Sharpe to measure risk-adjusted
performance. The Sharpe ratio is calculated by subtracting the risk-free
rate - such as that of the 10-year U.S. Treasury bond - from the rate of
return for a portfolio and dividing the result by the standard deviation
of the portfolio returns. The Sharpe ratio tells us whether a portfolio's
returns are due to smart investment decisions or a result of excess risk.
This measurement is very useful because although one portfolio or fund
can reap higher returns than its peers, it is only a good investment if
those higher returns do not come with too much additional risk. The greater
a portfolio's Sharpe ratio, the better its risk-adjusted performance has
been. A variation of the Sharpe ratio is the Sortino ratio, which removes
the effects of upward price movements on standard deviation to measure
only return against downward price volatility. |
| Sortino ratio |
1.240 |
The Sortino ratio measures the risk-adjusted return of an investment
asset, portfolio or strategy. It is a modification of the Sharpe ratio
but penalizes only those returns falling below a user-specified target,
or required rate of return, while the Sharpe ratio penalizes both upside
and downside volatility equally. It is thus a measure of risk-adjusted
returns that some people find to be more relevant than the Sharpe. Thus,
the ratio is the actual rate of return in excess of the investor's target
rate of return, per unit of downside risk. |
| Omega |
3.576 |
A risk-adjusted performance measures that attempts to mitigate the difficulty
in calculating risk adjusted returns for short intervals - based on the
Sharpe ratio methodology. |
| maximum drawdown |
25.17% |
The measure of the decline from the historical peak in the cumulative
profit of the financial trading strategy. |
| Information ratio |
49.61% |
The Information Ratio measures the excess return of an investment manager
divided by the amount of risk the manager takes relative to a benchmark.
It is used in the analysis of performance of mutual funds, hedge funds,
etc. Specifically, the information ratio is defined as excess return divided
by tracking error. Excess return is the amount of performance over or under
a given benchmark index. Thus, excess return can be positive or negative.
Tracking error is the standard deviation of the excess return. An alternative
calculation of Information ratio is alpha divided by tracking error, although
it is preferable to use pure excess return in the calculation. The ratio
compares the annualized returns of the Fund in question with those of a
selected benchmark (e.g, 3 month Treasuries). Since this ratio considers
the annualized standard deviation of both series (as measures of risks
inherent in owning either the fund or the benchmark), the ratio shows the
risk-adjusted excess return of the Fund over the benchmark. The higher
the Information Ratio, the higher the excess return of the Fund, given
the amount of risk involved, and the better a Fund manager. The Information
ratio is similar to the Sharpe Ratio, but there is a major difference.
The Sharpe Ratio compares the return of an asset against the return of
Treasury bills, but the Information Ratio compares excess return to the
most relevant equity (or debt) benchmark index. |
| Stutzer index |
6.142 |
The possibility of an investment outperforming a benchmark over a given
time horizon, with an equivalent unit of risk. |
| Upside potential ratio |
176.65% |
A measure of a return of an investment asset relative to the minimal
acceptable return. The measurement allows a firm or individual to choose
strategies with growth that is as stable as possible for a given minimum
return. |
| Calmar ratio |
45.76% |
The absolute value of the ratio of the annual compounded return divided
by the largest drawdown incurred to date. It is also quite commonly referred
to the MAR ratio. Calmar or MAR ratio's of 1 are very rare in real world
trading for an extended period of time. From this we can infer that if
we are striving for a compounded annual return of 20% than we can expect
our largest drawdown to be at least -20%. |
|
Reggie
Middleton
Reggie Middleton, LLC
Perpetual Interests, LLCTM
http://boombustblog.com/
Who
am I?
Well, I fancy myself the personification of the free thinking
maverick, the ultimate non-conformist as it applies to investment and analysis.
I am definitively outside the box - not your typical or stereotypical Wall
Street investor. I work out of my home, not a Manhattan office. I build my
own technology and perform my own research - in lieu of buying it or following
the crowd. I create and follow my own macro strategies and am by definition,
a contrarian to the nth degree.
Since I use my research as a tool for my own investing
to actually put food on my table, I can stand behind it as doing what it is
supposed too - educate, illustrate and elucidate. I do not sell advice, I am
not a reporter hence do not sell stories, and I do not sell research. I am
an entrepreneur who exists just outside of mainstream corporate America and
Wall Street. This allows me freedom to do things that many can not. For instance,
I pride myself on developing some of the highest quality research available,
regardless of price. No conflicts of interest, no corporate politics, no special
favors. Just the hard truth as I have found it - and believe me, my team and
I do find it! I welcome any and all to peruse my blog, use my custom hacked
collaborative social tools, read the articles, download the files, and make
a critical comparison of the opinion referencing the situation at hand and
the time stamp on the blog post to the reality both at the time of the post
and the present. Hopefully, you will be as impressed with the Boom Bust as
I am and our constituency.
I pay for significant information and data, and am well
aware of the value of quality research. I find most currently available research
lacking, in both quality and quantity. The reason why I had to create my own
research staff was due to my dissatisfaction with what was currently available
- to both individuals and institutions.
So here I am, creating my own research for my own investment
activity. What really sets my actions apart is that I offer much of what I
produce to the public without charge - free to distribute and redistribute,
as long as it is left unaltered and full attribution is given to the author
and owner. Why would I do such a thing when others easily charge 5 and 6 digits
annually for what some may consider a lesser product? It is akin to open
source analysis! My ideas and implementations are actually improved and
fine tuned when bounced off of the collective intellect of the many, in lieu
of that of the few - no matter how smart those few may believe themselves to
be.
Very recently, I have started charging for the forensics
portion of my work, which has freed up the resources to develop the site to
deliver even more research for free, particularly on the global macro and opinion
front. This move has allowed me to serve an more diverse constituency, which
now includes the institutional consumer (ie., investment turned consumer banks,
hedge funds, pensions, etc,) as well as the newbie individual investor who
is just getting started - basically the two polar opposites of the investing
spectrum. I am proud to announce major banks as paying clients, and brand new
investors who take my book recommendations and opinions on true wealth and
success to heart.
So, this is how I use my background and knowledge in new
media, distributed computing, risk management, insurance, financial engineering,
real estate, corporate valuation and financial analysis to pursue, analyze
and capitalize on global macroeconomic opportunities. I have included a more
in depth bio at the bottom of the page for those who really, really need to
know more about me.
Visit his blog Boom
Bust Blog.
Copyright © 2007-2010 Reggie Middleton
Image rendition and html coding Copyright © 2000-2010
SafeHaven.com
ADVERTISEMENTS
« Opinions expressed at SafeHaven are those of the
individual authors and do not necessarily represent the opinion of SafeHaven
or its management. Articles are available via RSS/XML. Please
visit RSSHelp for instructions. »
|