Our Long-Term
Performance
From the time Hulbert’s Financial Digest began
tracking our work in January of 2001 (two months
after we started publishing) to this writing
(February 2009), Insiders Plus has delivered
a compound annualized return of 6.9% per year,
versus a 2.5% loss per year for the Wilshire
5000. Over that period, the Dow did a little better
than the Wilshire, but still lost money; the S&P
500 did a little worse, and the NASDAQ did a lot worse.
Over the last five years our compound annualized
return has been 8.7%, versus losses for all the
major averages. Here’s the rest of the story:
- Insiders Plus came in number 5 in absolute
returns among all 180 newsletters tracked.
- Insiders Plus came in number 5 in
risk-adjusted returns among all 180 newsletters
tracked.
- Only three newsletters finished in the top
five in absolute and risk-adjusted
returns.
- Insiders Plus is the only newsletter
that finished in the top five in both
categories, and received a clarity rating of
"A" from Hulbert’s — the highest
standard for clarity of advice on buy and sell
recommendations, and portfolio allocation.
- No standard stock index has had a positive
return over the last five years.
- We also beat all mutual fund
newsletters both on an absolute and
risk-adjusted basis.
When you consider that diversification is
allegedly the cornerstone of risk mitigation, it’s
pretty remarkable that we outperformed on that
basis, despite having far fewer stocks with which to
diversify.
As everyone knows, 2008 was the worst year for
the market in nearly 80 years. We won't duck the
obvious question. Yes, we lost money in 2008. The
combined portfolios lost 23.1%. The S&P 500 lost
38.5%. Our track record includes
our 2008 loss.
Incidentally, Insiders Plus has only been
published for 8 years; so we don’t
have a ten-year track record yet. But, Hulbert’s
tracked our prior, paper-based newsletter for 28
months until it was discontinued. We had a 10.2%
annualized return during that period.
___________________________________
Insiders Plus beat the market by
10.4% per year for the last five years!
What’s the risk?.
That’s a question all
investors should ask before following investment
advice. If you have to risk your entire bankroll to
make above-average gains, it surely isn’t worth
it.
According to modern
portfolio theory, risk is measured by volatility.
The standard volatility gauge employed by most of
these theoreticians is Beta. Beta is a measure of
individual stock price or portfolio movement
compared to the market as a whole.
We have some reservations about this theory. Like
Warren Buffett, we believe risk comes from weak
analysis, not volatility. Nonetheless, according to
this standard measure, our two combined portfolios
were 4% more volatile than the market during the
full period measured. We think 4% more volatility is
a small price to pay to outperform the market by
10.4% per year, for the last five years.
How do we do it? Here’s a perfect example:
Our
quick 60% gain in a stock no one wanted ...
If you'd like to try our service risk-free, please
click here.
Please
take me back to the beginning of the introduction to
Insiders Plus.
