What is a realistic return on value investing?

[arriyana]

You might also want note that Buffet did not invest heavily in listed stocks when he first started. He took risk in obscure stocks which not everyone is equipped to do the level of research and skill he has.

I target 20%-25% returns over long run, it can be done if the strategy is correct. IMO if after using so much time & effort to analyze stocks still end up <15% then might as well close shop buy a S&P500 or STI ETF, why waste time?

We have a Warren Buffett here, no doubt about it! The great man himself only managed to compound Berkshire's per share BV by 19.7% p.a. from 1965-2013.

No harm to set high target. With a much smaller AUM, beating current Mr. Buffett's performance isn't a unthinkable proposition. I asked myself a question, How will Mr. Buffett perform, with a AUM of just few million non-OPM? My guesstimate is around 40%.

I read that Buffett compounded his own $$ between 1950-1956 at 50-60% p.a. During 1957 till 1969 when he closed Buffett Partnership due to retirement, he compounded the $$ at 30% p.a. compared to the 9% return of the Dow.

I doubt many people can do this. Beating the market over 20% through a market cycle is not as easy as doing it for a year or two. $33,000 invested in year 1 will be $1m in 13 years time if one can get 30% p.a over the years(the same time Buffett Partnership was in operation)

Both size and OPM, are handicaps, IMO. Mr. Buffett did it with 50-60%, so a 20-25% target might not be too unrealistic, if most things are right, including luck.

[Ray168]

Read uncle CW888 blog.

http://createwealth8888.blogspot.sg/2014...-time.html



Be realistic on longterm CAGR goal.

Oh please, I’m not interested in empty boasting of richness by anonymous online nicks. So far the only high net worth investor who dare to post his wealth with proper proof is Dividends Warrior.

He is highly respected in the online investment world and I never see him make sarcastic remarks and name calling like some of you here doing. In fact I see many here also attacking him with negative rep points just because he dun agree with you.

If you all want to laugh and make fun of people, at least have the guts to show me your SGX statements, otherwise stop boasting about “old bird” or “rich beyond imagination”, sibei rude and childish.

I agree with the point about building career, I am aiming to save at least 10k every year which together with investment will hopefully let me retire before 50. Like I say, not interested in saving for saving sake or working for working sake until old.

[fat al]

Now with information available much easier and trading through internet. The barrier to entry is low and competitive. Investment knowledge is wider spread. I would say is harder now than 1950s to achieve same performance.

On the other hand, it is a more level playing field for small timers now. I recalled the early 90s:
No internet
No pdfs of quarterly/annual reports
IR function nonexistent, brief disclosure by management
Have to kowtow to brokers/remeisers for information
To get a physical copy of annual report itself is a hurdle sometimes.

Now, with a laptop and internet access, you can do your research and trade/invest almost anywhere you want. Search/filter engines also minimise requirement for mundane work like sifting through list of securities' parameters.

[Temperament]

Actually, (imho) as we invest in the stock market, if we calculate only the CAGR of our stock portfolio then it's very narrow calculation. It is because you make money in the stock market, you have surplus $$$ in so many other assets too.
Example, my CAGR (using microsoft money for tracking)) for 26 years show only 8-10 %.
But if i CAGR my Total Asset, it definitely > 20%

To me WB is still the champion though he is not the Top CAGR. Because he has done it for 48 years and of course he makes more money then anyone, if your table is correct, even though he is not the top CAGR.

Read uncle CW888 blog.

http://createwealth8888.blogspot.sg/2014...-time.html



Be realistic on longterm CAGR goal.

Oh please, I’m not interested in empty boasting of richness by anonymous online nicks. So far the only high net worth investor who dare to post his wealth with proper proof is Dividends Warrior.

He is highly respected in the online investment world and I never see him make sarcastic remarks and name calling like some of you here doing. In fact I see many here also attacking him with negative rep points just because he dun agree with you.

If you all want to laugh and make fun of people, at least have the guts to show me your SGX statements, otherwise stop boasting about “old bird” or “rich beyond imagination”, sibei rude and childish.

I agree with the point about building career, I am aiming to save at least 10k every year which together with investment will hopefully let me retire before 50. Like I say, not interested in saving for saving sake or working for working sake until old.

[yeokiwi]

If no one posts their net worth, how do you guys actually know this info?

If you hang long enough, you probably will get clues here and there. And, some forum members may exchange information privately for investment purposes.

Many members here are trading/investing in corporate bonds => they are accredited investors.
Many members here are investing in hedge funds => they are accredited investors.


An individual is an accredited investor

(A) Whose net personal assets exceed in value $2 million (or its equivalent in a foreign currency) or such other amount as the Authority may prescribe in place of the first amount; or

(B) Whose income in the preceding 12 months is not less than $300,000 (or its equivalent in a foreign currency) or such other amount as the Authority may prescribe in place of the first amount;


At least, I know two members that had posted here are hedge fund managers managing their own funds.
And, we have oil traders, accountants, doctor, businessmen.
And if you are resourceful enough, you probably can trace some members to the top 20 list of shareholders in listed companies.

But, the most telling of all, is the maturity and the content of the articles that are posted in this forum.

[corydorus]

Now with information available much easier and trading through internet. The barrier to entry is low and competitive. Investment knowledge is wider spread. I would say is harder now than 1950s to achieve same performance.

On the other hand, it is a more level playing field for small timers now. I recalled the early 90s:
No internet
No pdfs of quarterly/annual reports
IR function nonexistent, brief disclosure by management
Have to kowtow to brokers/remeisers for information
To get a physical copy of annual report itself is a hurdle sometimes.

Now, with a laptop and internet access, you can do your research and trade/invest almost anywhere you want. Search/filter engines also minimise requirement for mundane work like sifting through list of securities' parameters.

Agreed. Which is my point that beating many fund managers in recent time performance is not hard since is now much harder for them to outperform vs 50 years ago.

[franko.yank]

The problem is you guys always assume everyone is like Warren Buffet want to run multi million dollar fund. All the eg. you all give is always some world famous fund manager managing big money. They own so many things in so many stocks of course very hard to make big returns % wise.

If the amount is small you just invest in a few good stocks can make a hundred % if buy correctly. For e.g, my Hankore make >80% by the time I sell in 9 months, but if I own 20 stocks how to get all 20 >80%. Simple maths rite?

[brattzz]

aiyoh, just a discussion, relax lah, everyone got different style lah!

i just try not to lose money that's all....
and no one has to follow my style... nor expect me to follow them too!
end of the day, my $, my life, my choice.

[yeokiwi]

The problem is you guys always assume everyone is like Warren Buffet want to run multi million dollar fund. All the eg. you all give is always some world famous fund manager managing big money. They own so many things in so many stocks of course very hard to make big returns % wise.

If the amount is small you just invest in a few good stocks can make a hundred % if buy correctly. For e.g, my Hankore make >80% by the time I sell in 9 months, but if I own 20 stocks how to get all 20 >80%. Simple maths rite?

Since you think you are right, I suppose there is no need to get approval from anyone here?
And whether we think you are right is not going to improve your return anyway. So why bother to ask the forum?
Just do whatever you want and enjoy your return

[Dividend Hermit]

Setting a target makes investing much more fun.
And fun is what keeps me going in investing!