BoomBustBlog Performance, year to date
Tweet me! Before we begin, Pro subscribers should look to the "Latest Content" list in the lower right margin for an informative note on the latest REIT analysis. There will be a banking note and some macro stuff posted for retail and general subscribers shortly.
On to this year's performance, I have spent some time calculating the YTD performance figures for both the blog research and my proprietary trading account. I have made some changes to the presentation to prevent the confusion that resulted in the Forbes reporter thinking that I took "losses" (see "Going Short"). These changes boil down to:
-
-
Posting raw, absolute returns to prevent confusion with cumulative averages. The raw return means if I put $100 in and get $1000 out, I made 9 times my money (($1000-$100)/$100=900%).
Cumulative Returns being calculated as follows: 10% + 5% - (-5%) + 3% = 13%. This yields a different figure from absolute returns, but is used to compare disparate investment vehicles as reported.
-
The returns above have been graphed with hypothetical (don't try to guess what's in mine) account levels to demonstrate the wealth creation/destruction effect of true fundamental research and decent trading - and/or the lack thereof! As a result you can see that a well to do upper middle class investor could have catapulted himself firmly into the upper class in terms of wealth, while many around him/her would have fallen to the wayside. Social mobility, my friend! See "Super Brokers form to push Super Broken products to make those with High Net Worth Super Broke" (don't forget to download the BoomBustBlog Social Class Model to see what I am talking about) and "666: That's the Sign of Your Broker Giving You Bad Investment Advice!" for an example this mobility.
Proprietary account numbers will appear higher due to use of gross returns in lieu of pro forma net returns. If you remember, I had intended to start a hedge fund, thus I set my performance model to include 2 and 20 fees to form an apples to apples comparison to other hedge funds. Since the fund plans have been scrapped, I will use my actual returns from now on unless other indicated.
So, YTD (basically two months and a week into the year) my proprietary trading accounts have returned 19.9% on an absolute basis and 23.23% on a cumulative monthly basis. The total return since the inception of the account is 727.08% since June of 2007. the S&P 500 has returned -52.58% for the same period. The Blog's static research model has returned about 131% since its inception (9/2007) and 66% for the year. The few companies covered in the most recent quarter have tanked tremendously, providing big returns. As you can see, the effects of keeping a large cash balance (averaging over 50%), a diverse portfolio of puts and shorted securities and not being fully invested show the blog research pulling ahead in the beginning of the year. I will be putting large swaths of cash to work if the research subjects pop considerably above their valuation bands which should boost returns immensely (unless I'm wrong, of course), but I will leave a lot of cash available as part of my risk management strategy as well. I would always enjoy juicier returns, but greed is what killed the cat, not curiosity.
Click to enlarge to printer quality
The orange shaded area below is what I have included in the 2009 pick calculations. Although many probably do have additional positions in their portfolio, I picked a hypothetical cutoff point. The average gain for the blog research since inception is 131%. That is very good, and probably beats almost all numbers available from the investment advisors and money managers you probably deal with, particularly considering that this is a static model that incorporates no trading. If one were to incorporate trading and money management at a fairly sophisticated level, one should be seeing results such as my proprietary trading account which is up over 720% since inception. The average gain for this year's research pick's in a margined short account is about 66%, very good in my opinion. For those who are risk averse, you could sell off right now and probably boast of the best results in the market. It would be even more if one were to use well selected options lieu of shorting. I would like to make clear that derivatives are primarily what I use in my proprietary account, except where not available or not appropriate. In those limited cases I will short the stock.
| BoomBustBlog's Holding period return (with leverage) | BoomBustBlog's HPR without margin and commissions | Brokers (Holding period return) | |||||||
| Stock | 1 month | 3 months | Since invested | Return of Blog's forensic /drill down analysis | Citi | GS | JPM | MS | |
| len | 149.9% | 27.4% | 32.9% | 78.7% | 149.9% | -46.8% | 73.8% | -99.3% | |
| hov | 183.2% | 65.5% | 75.2% | 95.4% | 183.2% | -94.6% | -94.2% | ||
| phm | 99.2% | 30.0% | 33.4% | 53.4% | 99.2% | -36.6% | -46.0% | -45.6% | |
| ctx | 154.9% | 43.8% | 53.3% | 81.2% | 154.9% | -63.3% | -79.0% | 77.8% | |
| dhom | 129.0% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 68.3% | 129.0% | No coverage | |||
| bzh | 187.3% | 67.0% | 86.5% | 97.4% | 187.3% | -96.6% | 97.6% | ||
| rdn | 181.8% | 67.1% | 72.3% | 94.7% | 181.8% | No coverage | |||
| mtg | 184.3% | 59.9% | 45.1% | 95.9% | 184.3% | -84.3% | |||
| dhi | 102.5% | 14.1% | 15.2% | 55.0% | 102.5% | 168.4% | -47.8% | -53.2% | |
| tol | 61.8% | 21.6% | 35.3% | 34.7% | 61.8% | -30.9% | -29.9% | -31.7% | |
| bsc | 184.2% | 22.1% | 14.8% | 95.9% | 184.2% | No coverage | |||
| cfc | 149.5% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 78.5% | 149.5% | No coverage | |||
| mbi | 184.3% | 40.5% | 62.6% | 95.9% | 184.3% | -48.3% | -92.3% | ||
| abk | 191.2% | 66.1% | 75.3% | 99.4% | 191.2% | -82.0% | -88.3% | ||
| wm | 192.3% | 9.1% | 14.3% | 99.9% | 192.3% | 99.5% | |||
| ryl | 89.9% | 31.8% | 34.7% | 48.5% | 89.9% | -42.8% | -44.3% | -65.8% | |
| ms | 125.1% | 25.9% | -9.3% | 65.7% | 125.1% | -74.4% | -73.4% | -73.8% | |
| ggp | 192.1% | 56.0% | 80.0% | 99.0% | 192.1% | 63.2% | -99.4% | -99.3% | |
| bac | 178.1% | 35.1% | 79.4% | 92.0% | 178.1% | -93.6% | -90.4% | -93.8% | -14.9% |
| kbh | 124.6% | 32.9% | 41.8% | 65.0% | 124.6% | -53.3% | -67.0% | -81.5% | |
| lehmq | 194.4% | 25.0% | 25.0% | 99.9% | 194.4% | -99.9% | |||
| ago | 160.7% | 50.9% | 71.7% | 83.1% | 160.7% | 0.0% | -84.5% | -80.2% | |
| key | 148.0% | 26.3% | 36.1% | 76.7% | 148.0% | -84.0% | -78.6% | -21.4% | |
| ffhs | 158.5% | 54.1% | 72.2% | 81.8% | No coverage | ||||
| ms | 119.0% | 25.9% | -9.3% | 62.1% | 119.0% | -74.4% | -73.4% | -73.8% | |
| c | 186.6% | 70.8% | 86.6% | 95.8% | 186.6% | 32.0% | -97.1% | -92.7% | |
| wfc | 140.6% | 47.1% | 71.2% | 72.8% | 140.6% | -71.2% | -76.7% | -75.1% | |
| gs | 109.6% | 18.5% | -7.0% | 57.3% | 109.6% | -62.9% | -61.2% | -56.7% | |
| mer | 152.1% | 0.0% | 10.7% | 78.6% | -81.6% | -78.6% | -84.3% | -63.3% | |
| wb | 163.0% | 0.0% | 5.3% | 84.0% | 163.0% | No coverage | |||
| bsc | 182.9% | NA | NA | 48.4% | 182.9% | ||||
| kfn | 187.8% | 67.3% | -65.0% | 96.2% | 187.8% | -97.1% | -95.9% | ||
| jef | 94.8% | 31.9% | -7.2% | 49.7% | -62.0% | ||||
| pnc | 142.4% | 37.9% | 43.2% | 73.3% | 142.4% | -71.4% | -71.0% | -75.5% | |
| bpop | 160.6% | 10.5% | 60.9% | 82.2% | No coverage | ||||
| sti | 162.0% | 9.9% | 67.7% | 82.9% | 162.0% | -81.2% | -85.5% | -87.4% | -86.6% |
| snv | 153.2% | 18.7% | 62.3% | 78.5% | -78.0% | -79.0% | 75.7% | ||
| mi | 168.4% | 14.1% | 72.1% | 86.1% | -85.8% | 85.9% | 91.6% | -85.9% | |
| asbc | 118.4% | 27.1% | 23.9% | 61.1% | -16.0% | ||||
| fctr | -2.6% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 0.6% | No coverage | ||||
| mtb | 125.3% | 16.8% | 43.6% | 64.6% | 125.3% | -54.8% | -41.2% | -43.7% | -61.9% |
| hban | 174.1% | 43.0% | 77.5% | 88.9% | 174.1% | -82.3% | 91.8% | -94.8% | |
| bbt | 114.1% | 21.2% | 40.2% | 58.9% | -49.7% | -59.5% | -66.9% | -71.9% | |
| jpm | 122.2% | 35.1% | 26.4% | 63.0% | -65.9% | -62.6% | -66.1% | ||
| usb | 143.1% | 41.2% | 48.1% | 73.5% | 74.8% | -74.1% | -74.5% | -75.5% | |
| cof | 162.2% | 41.5% | 56.6% | 83.0% | 162.2% | -82.5% | |||
| nara | 160.0% | 58.6% | 41.2% | 81.9% | No coverage | ||||
| sasr | 142.6% | 53.1% | 21.1% | 73.2% | No coverage | ||||
| hnbc | 130.3% | 51.9% | 31.7% | 67.1% | No coverage | ||||
| cvbf | 83.9% | 37.3% | 16.7% | 43.9% | No coverage | ||||
| gbci | 75.3% | 27.1% | 3.3% | 39.6% | No coverage | ||||
| fhn | 24.5% | 20.0% | 6.4% | 14.2% | -65.5% | 10.6% | -57.3% | 9.2% | |
| ncc | 133.9% | 0.0% | 10.4% | 68.8% | -88.1% | -83.5% | -89.5% | -53.9% | |
| WAMUQ | 195.5% | 9.1% | 5.7% | 99.7% | 195.5% | 52.2% | |||
| cfc | 14.9% | 0.0% | 0.0% | 9.4% | 14.9% | No coverage | |||
| rf | 165.5% | -3.9% | 70.4% | 84.6% | -77.4% | -87.6% | -87.7% | 0.0% | |
| zion | 166.4% | 50.0% | 56.8% | 85.1% | -80.1% | -35.9% | -91.0% | -85.8% | |
| tcbk | 56.4% | 35.6% | 31.5% | 30.1% | No coverage | ||||
| fitb | 183.2% | 21.3% | 80.1% | 93.5% | -95.7% | -90.8% | 96.3% | -81.8% | |
| sov | 139.9% | 0.0% | 0.8% | 71.9% | -76.4% | ||||
| ge | 147.4% | 34.9% | 39.2% | 75.6% | 147.4% | -81.9% | -83.1% | -83.1% | |
| axp | 142.3% | 39.8% | 21.8% | 72.7% | 142.3% | -76.7% | -77.9% | ||
| hbc | 135.1% | 35.8% | 25.4% | 69.0% | 135.1% | 71.5% | |||
| nav | 114.1% | 27.1% | -61.3% | 58.6% | 114.1% | -58.2% | |||
| wire | 14.9% | 7.5% | -13.3% | 8.7% | 14.9% | No coverage | |||
| sfd | 140.9% | 46.7% | -28.0% | 71.8% | 140.9% | -76.1% | -62.6% | ||
| hig | 172.7% | 76.0% | -3.4% | 87.4% | 172.7% | ||||
| mac | 163.5% | 48.7% | -28.0% | 82.8% | 163.5% | ||||
| pfg | 130.6% | 63.4% | 13.4% | 65.9% | 130.6% | ||||
| fro | 86.5% | 40.7% | -0.3% | 43.9% | 86.5% | ||||
| sivb | 102.4% | 42.6% | 44.1% | 51.9% | 102.4% | ||||
| shld | 39.9% | 11.2% | 14.1% | 20.2% | 39.9% | ||||
| bbv | 80.0% | 37.7% | 7.1% | 40.2% | 80.0% | ||||
| puk | 68.2% | 43.6% | -12.2% | 34.4% | 68.2% | ||||
| Subscibers only |
53.7% | 23.9% | 0.6% | 27.1% | 53.7% | ||||
| Subscibers only | 81.2% | 45.4% | 30.6% | 40.9% | 81.2% | ||||
| Subscibers only | 23.7% | 29.7% | 3.1% | 12.1% | 23.7% | ||||
| Subscibers only | 25.3% | 35.3% | 18.4% | 12.7% | 25.3% | ||||
| Subscibers only | 13.1% | 22.6% | 10.6% | 6.6% | 13.1% | ||||
| Reggie's Returns | 129.0% | 32.4% | 28.4% | 66.1% | 131.2% | -54.8% | -45.6% | -55.5% | -52.6% |
| DJI Index | -14.7% | -20.4% | -48.9% | ||||||
| CCMP INDEX | -12.4% | -10.3% | -48.5% | ||||||
| CTRN Index | -19.7% | -22.4% | -53.7% | ||||||
| UTIL Index | -19.4% | -15.0% | -37.8% | ||||||
| UKX Index | -13.8% | -10.0% | -41.9% | ||||||
| HSI Index | -7.3% | -11.8% | -43.4% | ||||||
| RTY Index | -18.4% | -19.5% | -53.6% | ||||||
| OEX Index | -15.2% | -20.4% | -51.3% | ||||||
| SPX Index | -15.7% | -18.6% | -52.1% | ||||||
| AS30 Index | -6.6% | -8.1% | -49.8% | ||||||
| SPTSX Index | -11.8% | -3.7% | -41.9% | ||||||
| MXWO Index | -15.3% | -14.9% | -53.5% | ||||||
| FTAW11 Index | -15.3% | -12.9% | -58.5% | ||||||
| MXEUG Index | -13.4% | -11.9% | -53.4% | ||||||
| MXWO Index | -15.3% | -14.9% | -53.5% | ||||||
| MXEU Index | -14.0% | -12.0% | -53.9% | ||||||
| DJGT Index | -14.6% | -17.8% | -52.7% | ||||||
| SGX Index | -13.7% | -11.0% | -44.5% | ||||||
| SVX Index | -18.1% | -26.5% | -59.3% | ||||||
As you can see, I (and the blog's static research model) have beaten all global indices, hedge fund indices, and prominent Wall Street brokers by a very, very, very wise margin. The most conservative comparison will be with the blog research, which is based upon a hypothetical buy and hold static model (no trading) and that has also trounced all competition and indices (by several hundred percent). By inference, you subscribers should have whupped the tail of all of the hedgies and Wall Street banks as well. If not, you are probably trading too much. My targets are chosen for downward movement in this environment. There is no need to actively trade. That means having convictions in one's researched positions and not jumping ship the second you feel the position moving against you. I cannot control the market (which is moved by traders in the short term, not fundamentals or macro drivers) and I cannot predict the future, thus you have to hold on to allow fundamentals to do their work. Many people ask me why the market has done this or moved that way, etc. My answer always is "because traders need to capture short term price movements in order to make money, and they will act upon any impetus to both create and capture that price movement in the short term, which tends to exacerbate that very same movement". That is why I would recommend Obama's administration to ignore market reaction to their policies and speeches. The momentum orientated, short term trader's market cannot be sated, satisfied or satiated and its whimsical temper tantrum's have absolutely no correlation to fundamentals, doing what's right or wrong, or common damns sense.
For the sake of comparison, I have included cash returns for the Blog's static research model below. This is unrealistic since you require a margin account to short stock, but I wanted to be as fair and conservative as humanly possible since analysts recommendations and indices are given on a cash basis as well.
| Blog's unlevered returns | 66.1% |
| Citi | -54.8% |
| GS | -45.6% |
| MS | -52.6% |
| JPM | -55.5% |
I hate to pick on the mainstream media since they are starting to show a little love for me, but folks.... We need need to keep the facts straight. This is off of CNBC's home page:
Why a Lousy Jobs Report Could Actually Help Stocks: Investors have been searching for that vital capitulation point where stocks form a true bottom. A higher-than-expected jobless rate could set the stage for that.
Do you guys have any idea how dangerous it is to try and time the market? You'd be better off just smoking the money! Keep looking for the bottom and all you will see is the bottom of your piggy bank staring back at you as all of your money disappears! Let's take a look at this from a historical perspective, but before we do I want to address a pet peeve that I have with the media. Nobody is quoting the Middleton index, or the BoomBustBlog index (although the Doo Doo 32 did get rather popular). The reason? Probably because it is irrelevant, and the only reason to do so would be to market my name. So, why quote the Dow? It is not that representative of the market, and it shows an amateurish bent. Now, on to our regular scheduled programming...
image002.png
Yes, it does look as if we have fallen alot over the last two years, but if go back to the last comparable market fall during the Great Depression we will find 3 years of a falling market and 16 years of zigzagging on and off of that holy grail, that oh so elusive, so called "bottom" that I hear mentioned on CNBC by their reporters and pundits at least 20 some odd times per day. Not only is it bad for your net worth to attempt to invest around finding a bottom, but once you do find it, you may very find that it really wasn't all that you were led to believe it was!
image001.png
Image Gallery
ReggieMiddleton: UK Retail Sales Slide at Fastest Pace in 2 Years in April - Well of course. Don't these guys read the BoomBust??? http://t.co/EBqwBmeAReggieMiddleton: BOE Prints Money if Econ Worsens: No UK Double Dip If It Never Truly Left The First Recession - #MaxKesier VIDEO http://t.co/PCCZhprNReggieMiddleton: BOE to Print Money if Economy Worsens: UK Can't Be In A Double Dip Recession If It Never Truly Left The First Recession http://t.co/hvTY90qoTopics
Live Spreadsheet Content
Latest comments
- Why Shouldn't Practitioners Of...
Reggie, great article. I think you mean overvalued in this sentence: "...
22.05.12 15:59
By JoshS - Shorting Federal Facebook Note...
You rock Reggie....keep telling them whats up. Also another great site...
22.05.12 02:43
By marketcycles79 - Shorting Federal Facebook Note...
The average person does not know how money works.
21.05.12 15:51
By Robert McCorkle - 3+3=2 As Big US Banks Amass Tr...
love u Reggie. i do believe you called the imminent jpm years ago. sta...
18.05.12 18:59
By sacco - As I Promised Last Year, Faceb...
Here is my own take on why Facebook is a worthless pile of steaming du...
17.05.12 13:55
By Manuel Pfister
