Google for "Dollar-Costing Averaging Using the CAPE Ratio: An Identifiable Trend Influencing Outperformance" by Jon Luskin from the Journal of Financial Planning January 2017. The paper is a bit weird though, they do DCA over a 15-year period which....I don't know anyone who is even considering that as an option. It also has all the same issues that every other study using CAPE has: CAPE doesn't have a mean, it doesn't mean revert, it hasn't been "right" for 25 years, results are overstated due to overlapping data, etc.CarpeDiem22 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 21, 2018 11:30 pmI would have loved to see how DCA vs LSI compare when measured against starting P/B. Very informative paper, nonetheless. Thanks.CyberBob wrote: ↑Thu Jun 21, 2018 9:04 am Vanguard has a paper which may help in your situation, as it looks to answer the question How might an individual who receives a $1 million windfall approach the decision of investing those funds immediately versus dollar-cost averaging the investment over time?
Their final recommendation is:
They admit that it hasn't worked since the mid 1980s but has the usual CAPE-apologist explanation:Therefore, if market valuations are above 18.6, an adviser should consider DCA for its superior ability to generate wealth
This study also showed that during the tech bubble mere above-average valuations (CAPE ratio of 21 to 26) climbed even higher amidst the irrational exuberance of investors (Shiller 2000). It was the process of moving from an already high to an even higher valued market that made for the underperformance of DCA during that period