Share
32,985 Posts.
lightbulb Created with Sketch. 1378
clock Created with Sketch.
23/02/20
17:50
Share
Originally posted by Max5:
↑
I'm afraid not Skol-it looks like you have a serious reading and comprehension issue and missed a major point. That comparison is index based and the indexes composition changes from time to time as you should know so that type of comparison is flawed as it presupposes a investor anticipates (in advance) the dynamic nature of the index and all its (many sudden and unexpected) changes over the period and adjusts their portfolios exactly accordingly. As I said a 'theoretical' argument/comparison unreflective of the 'real' world and 'real' returns people might receive and virtually impossible. I said do it based on the composition of the index in late 1928 to now-that at least would have some integrity-needless to say I expect some of those stocks making the index up then might not be around today and your numbers would be very, very different... As I said it's a silly comparison Skol unreflective of the real world and returns investors might have achieved.
Expand
No matter how silly you think it is, 358,569% beats 7,490%. By quite a long way. And you won't need to invoke the Theory of Relativity to work that one out. The index is the index, the fact that stocks change over the years has absolutely nothing to do with it, the composition of the DJIA changes all the time.
Last edited by
Skol :
23/02/20