schooner wrote: ↑
Tue Jul 09, 2019 8:22 am
larryswedroe wrote: ↑
Tue Jul 09, 2019 7:38 am
...a) first 10 years is not a long time at all, that's one of the most common and worst mistakes investors make. 10 years with risky assets is just NOISE...
...Mr. Swedroe, You published your advice in Kiplinger Magazine - which is geared towards folks near retirement age. I’d argue that 10 years is long term.
Almost everyone, including me, tends to be selectively inconsistent about appealing to long-term or short-term results, depending on which favors their argument. In 2013, in Buiding your own hedge fund
, Larry Swedroe sharply criticized four funds, none more than four years old, saying
We don't yet have much data, as the funds are fairly new. Still, it's worth taking a look to see how they have performed since inception. In other words, we'll hold them accountable.
So, sometimes short-term performance is "worth taking a look at," and sometimes it is even appropriate to "hold them accountable" for short-term performance.
(Just the record, the actual funds he was looking at were Natixis ASG Global Alternatives Fund (GAFAX), IQ Alpha Hedge Strategy Fund (IQHOX), AQR Multi-Strategy Alternatives Fund (ASAIX), Ramius Dynamic Replication Fund (RDRIX). I'm not sure what's happened to the Ramius fund. The others, now with ten years of data behind them, have continued to justify Larry Swedroe's low opinion of them. But perhaps the managers of these funds would say that the first 10 years is not a long time at all.)
Morningstar growth chart for GAFAX, IQHOX, ASAIX, and Vanguard Balanced Index (VBINX) for comparison
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness; Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.