Very nice returns but it is not off the charts. I count at least 5 years in which the TSX Composite returned better than 30% since 1970. The S&P 500 has 9 years in which gains were better than 25% in the same time period.With the end of November in sight, North American stock markets are producing crushing returns.
2009 YTD Returns
It takes about a 43% gain to make up for a 30% loss. Not to mention that the stock market lost about 50% of it's value from high to low. That takes a 100% gain to break even. However, it's nice to see that we're moving in the right direction.What are the odds that all those people who complained about their 30% losses in 2008 will stop whining now?
If you invested all the portfolio cash at the precise market peak, then yes, the markets have not recovered yet. In the same vein, unless you invested all the portfolio cash at the precise market bottom, you are not up 50%.True CC, you would have to have held your positions through the whole scenario for that to work. Some will have successfully been out and in the market, some unsuccessfully in and then out, and once it jumps back up back in again.
With 100% recoveries needed markets up 18% - 39% really isn't anywhere near "off the charts" territory. Nor is it reason to let someone else do the buying. Of course there will be peaks and valleys to navigate or ride along the way as always.
I wonder what peoples real numbers look like. I sold nothing, added many positions, and am down only marginally now - and we made lots of new acquisitions in my wife's account. Personally, I don't know too many people who were selling nor buying extensively during last Oct-Mar.Some will have successfully been out and in the market, some unsuccessfully in and then out, and once it jumps back up back in again.
Ditto.So far this calendar year I am up 18% in my RRSP (from Jan.1). I am still down about 20% from the peak in July 2007, but who isn't? Overall I have a net positive return since inception, although my IRR is pretty pitiful right now.
I've been far too uninvolved in my investments to have made (back) anywhere near as much as I could have, or prevented losses last year, and in 2007 in some cases. That said my moderately aggressive RRSP is up over 30% YTD, close to 40% for 12 months, but lost 48% last year. I also have two work pensions that I don't really control, and two other accounts, one being a fairly new minuscule TFSA with one stock with a minimal gain. The other my main account that is mostly not invested (~10.7%) in the stock market. I've not put in much effort here lately either. And with that said it's still ahead of the aggressive account. Really that shouldn't surprise anyone after a large correction.I wonder what peoples real numbers look like. I sold nothing, added many positions, and am down only marginally now - and we made lots of new acquisitions in my wife's account. Personally, I don't know too many people who were selling nor buying extensively during last Oct-Mar.
There are the high profile cases of the seniors who lost 50% due to aggressive allocations, hopefully they didn't sell at the lows. You never know with the media
A quick check tells me that the total portfolio (RRSPs, taxable accounts, RESPs but not TFSAs) is up 43%, including additions, dividend reinvestments and rebalancing. I was buying heavily in the Oct-Dec markets but other than regular contributions, I don't think I added too much to the portfolio. So, I'm chalking this up as an excellent year.I wonder what peoples real numbers look like. I sold nothing, added many positions, and am down only marginally now - and we made lots of new acquisitions in my wife's account. Personally, I don't know too many people who were selling nor buying extensively during last Oct-Mar.
You're absolutely right. I'll have to deduct additions to the portfolio. It's quicker to look up how much the entire portfolio has grown.CC -- I'm curious why you included additions in your calculation. Unless I'm misunderstanding you, I can turn my portfolio positive by adding funds, too. But that has nothing to do with investment growth...right?
That is easy in theory, but I found very difficult in practice. Firstly, it is next to impossible to know when you've hit bottom. I was way too early with investing available money -- probably mostly when the market was between 11,000 to 8000. By the time it dropped lower, I had very little extra investing cash or nerves left. Aside from that, even though my wife is pretty understanding, she started to get a little nervous about our constantly deteriorating portfolios. Then you had very experienced investors saying that the market could go as low as 5000.It is true that if an individual invested $1 and suffered a 50% decline, it would take a 100% return in the following year to make it all back.
However, this assumes that the investor stood by as one of the biggest buying opportunities arrived and didn't do anything.
It is equally true that if an individual invested $1, suffered a 50% decline, invested another $1 during this opportunity that they would only require a 25% return to get back to par.
I compute my returns at the end of every financial year. It's my financial book keeping time... tallying up the net worth, portfolio return etc. The point is I have to calculate the inflow to the portfolio. I do that at the end of the year.