MintKit Growth Index – Final Report

A Lean Benchmark of the Stock Marketfor Spry Growth at Modest Risk 
 — 

A pool of lively stocks based on equal weighting can beat the top benchmark of the bourse at modest risk over a representative window that covers a full cycle of boom and bust. Moreover, the setup requires a minim of time and effort; to wit, culling a dozen stocks or less in a single session lasting a couple of hours each year.

The lean strategy was tracked by the MintKit Growth Index (MGX). Since the streamlined method applies to portfolios both large and small, it befits a personal account as much as a large vessel such as a mutual fund or a pension fund. In particular, the lithe approach suits a busy investor who can devote only a dollop of time and effort to minding their portfolio.

The case study ran for half a decade starting in 2018. During this stretch, the representative window on the market spanned four years ending in 2021. Over that timespan, the sparky lodestar eclipsed the top benchmark of the bourse; namely, the S&P 500 Index (SPX). More precisely, the MGX gained 18.4% per year on average as opposed to 15.5% for the SPX over the same period.

In short, the study affirmed the merits of a combo of equal weighting, deft selection, and light handling of a lean portfolio. Simply put, a demure but mindful approach to tending spry stocks using equal weights can outpace the SPX. Moreover, the superior performance may be attained at modest risk by devoting only a couple of hours in a single session each year.

 

Note

The full review is titled “MintKit Growth Index – Final Report”. The document may be downloaded in PDF mode at MintKit Gist or Internet Archive.

*       *       *

 

Myths versus Facts Behind Asset Diversification

Tesla Spotlights Pitfalls and Safeguards in Risk Management 
 — 

The goal of asset diversification lies in shrunken risk for equal gain. This precept, however, shrugs off a host of grave dangers in the real and financial markets. An example involves an investor who allots a uniform sum to the firms in a newborn industry. Unfortunately, the vast majority of hatchlings are doomed to perish within a few years if not months. 

Another instance of flawed diversity concerns an index fund trained on a dynamic market such as clean energy. The products at hand could range from solar cells and electric cars to motile batteries and basic materials. In that case, the stocks will likely be weighted by their valuations on the bourse. However, certain markets such as commodities should at length contract in a green and sustainable economy. Moreover, many a miner will be poorly placed to harness the uprise even in the odd niches that do grow in the interim. 

In these and other ways, a gung-ho approach to diverseness is fraught with perils. An exception to prove the rule concerns a bellwether named Tesla. The mass of investors treats the vanguard as little more than a carmaker. Yet, the beacon also leads the way in other areas such as charging stations and advanced batteries, self-driving software and power grids. Given this backdrop, the sage investor sidesteps the markets staked by Tesla and expands instead into remote fields that lie beyond the firebrand’s sights for the foreseeable future.

In the larger scheme of things, the foul-up of asset diversification is a rampant reason for the failure of investors and pundits alike to keep up with the benchmarks of the stock market. As an antidote, a solid grasp of the myths and mistakes is a basic step toward crafting a sound program of investment.

 

Notes

The full report is titled “Myths versus Facts Behind Asset Diversification”. The document may be downloaded in EPUB format at Smashwords; in Kindle form at Amazon; and in PDF mode at the Internet Archive.

Moreover, a short video provides a preview of the report. The clip, labeled “Best Way to Diversify Beyond Tesla”, is available at Youtube.

*       *       *

  

#Investing  $TSLA 

MintKit Growth Index – Update 2022

 

A Benchmark for Spry Growth at Modest Risk

The coronavirus plague that ravaged the global economy in 2020 continued to linger in diminished form during the past year. On the upside, though, the real economy as well as the stock market trudged ahead without any major problems. 

After thrashing around during the spring and autumn, the bourse reached all-time highs by the end of 2021. As a result, the flagship benchmark – namely, the S&P 500 Index (SPX) – rose by 26.9% from the previous year. 

When the stock market forges ahead, high-growth stocks tend to outrun their plodding peers. On the glum side, though, high-flying firms in China broke down en masse this year. Among them was Alibaba – a component of the MintKit Growth Index (MGX) – which plunged by 49%. Other washouts in the Index included a couple of mining firms, each of which lost around one-quarter of its value. As a result, the benchmark advanced by just 13.2% during the year.

From a broader stance, however, the MGX still managed to outpace the SPX. To wit, the Growth Index gained 18.4% per year on average since its debut, as opposed to 15.5% for the S&P yardstick over the same stretch.

From a different angle, the MGX upon its launch was set to unity (1); that is, 100 percentage points. Given this baseline, the Index reached 196.6695 points at the end of last year.

Looking downstream, the outlook for 2022 is roughly comparable to the previous year’s. The real economy will continue to recover from the drubbing dealt by the pandemic. In that case, the stock market should tramp higher as well.

As usual, the revised roster for MGX takes a moderately aggressive approach. To wit, the goal for the new year centers on ample growth at modest risk rather than huge potential at great peril.

On a fulfilling note, this will be the fifth and last year of the current experiment that began in 2018. That is, the project to maintain and appraise the MGX will conclude at the end of 2022.

On the other hand, the basic methodology behind the Growth Index will prevail for the foreseeable future. An example involves an expansion of the screening procedure to include option contracts as well as common stocks, or a variation among the weights assigned to the members of the Index. In these and other ways, the studies downrange will break free of a number of artificial fetters imposed on MGX during the current experiment.

NOTE:  The report is a slide presentation under the title of “MintKit Growth Index – Update 2022”. The briefing is available in PDF mode at the Internet Archive.

 

*       *       *

 

MintKit Growth Index – Update 2021

 

A Benchmark for Spry Growth at Modest Risk

 

It has been a rough year for everyone as the coronavirus pandemic roiled the real and financial markets. One nasty blow was the crash of the stock market in the spring. Luckily, though, the bourse rebounded promptly and set a new record by the end of the summer. 

After thrashing around in the autumn, the market again scaled an all-time peak by the end of the year. As a result, the flagship benchmark – namely, the S&P 500 Index – rose by some 16% over the previous year. 

When the stock market forges ahead, high-growth stocks tend to outrun their plodding peers. In keeping with the norm, the MintKit Growth Index (MGX) climbed by nearly 48% over the same timespan.

From a larger stance, the MGX upon its launch was set to unity (1); that is, 100 percentage points. From this baseline, the Index reached 173.6965 points at the end of last year.

Looking downstream, the outlook for 2021 is much brighter compared to the gloom of the past year. For one thing, the real economy will recover in stages from the drubbing caused by the pandemic. In that case, the stock market will continue to climb higher.

From a different slant, the politicians whipped up trillions of dollars out of thin air in a frantic effort to stimulate the economy in the throes of the pandemic. One fallout downrange is a swelling fear of inflation which will drive a growing throng of investors into the arms of precious metals such as gold. In that case, the mining industry will fare better than most of its peers in the near future and for many years to come. 

Against this backdrop, the revised roster for MGX takes a moderately aggressive approach to the stock market. Even so, the goal for the coming year centers on zesty growth with ample stability rather than lusty vigor with stellar potential.

NOTE:  The publication is a slide presentation under the title of “MintKit Growth Index – Update 2021”. The report is available in PDF mode at the Internet Archive. 

 

*       *       *

 

MintKit Growth Index – Update 2020

A Benchmark for Spry Growth at Modest Risk

After enduring a crash in late 2018, the stock market scrambled higher over the past year. Despite a few fallbacks along the way, the bourse racked up hefty gains in the end. In particular, the flagship benchmark—namely, the S&P 500 Index (SPX)—rose by 28.9% during 2019.

When the stock market forges ahead, high-growth stocks tend to surpass their plodding peers. In keeping with the norm, the MintKit Growth Index (MGX) climbed by 33.5%.

From a larger stance, the MGX upon its launch was set to unity (1); that is, 100 percentage points. Starting from this baseline, the Index reached 117.6893 points at the end of last year.

Looking downstream, the outlook for 2020 is humdrum compared to the slant over the past year. The main damper lies in the prospect of a recession in the U.S. by 2021. Given the frailty of the economy, the stock market is slated to flail around a lot more than press ahead. In that case, the bourse will at best chalk up a modest return over the year to come.

In this tepid environment, it seems prudent to seek stable growth rather than zippy gains going forward. For this reason, the revised roster for MGX takes a somewhat conservative approach much like the tack taken in 2019. To sum up, the goal for the coming year centers on sturdy growth with ample stability rather than lusty vigor with stellar potential.


NOTE:  The report is a slide presentation under the title of “MintKit Growth Index – Update 2020”. The file is available in PDF form at SlideShare.

 

*       *       *

MintKit Growth Index – 2019 Update

A Benchmark for Spry Growth at Modest Risk

The stock market thrashed around a great deal in 2018. The initial flap involved an upsurge that began around the end of the previous year. The upthrow soon gave way a smackdown within a few weeks.

Following an upward trudge during the spring and summer, the market lurched lower in the autumn. As a finale, the bourse sustained a jarring crash in December: a rare event for this time of year.

When the stock market flounders, high-growth stocks tend to thrash around more than their plodding peers. Not surprisingly, the MintKit Growth Index (MGX) fared worse than the stock market as a whole.

We may reckon the initial value of the Index upon its launch as unity (1); that is, 100 percentage points. In that case, the newfound level of MGX at the onset of 2019 comes out to 88.1746 points.

Since the Index fell by some 11.8% last year, it fared worse than the SPX which lost 6.2% over the same stretch. That much was to be expected given the heightened sensitivity of high-growth stocks to the movements of the stock market at large.

Looking downstream, the prospects for 2019 are not much better than last year's. In particular, the market is slated to soar and dive a couple of times during the year.

In that case, it seems prudent to favor stable growth rather than zippy gains over the year to come. For this reason, the revised roster for MGX takes a slightly conservative approach by seeking sturdy growth with ample stability rather than sparkling pep with lofty potential.


NOTE:  The report is a slide presentation under the title of “MintKit Growth Index – Update”. The file is available in PDF form at SlideShare.

 

*       *       *

MintKit Growth Index

A Benchmark of the Stock Market

for

Sprightly Growth at Modest Risk

The ideal of investment lies in a robust strategy for high growth at low risk. Granted, a perfect solution could never emerge in an imperfect world such as ours. Even so, certain approaches toward the objective make more sense than others.

By received wisdom, the leading benchmarks of the stock market are cogent and meaningful portraits of the action on the bourse. Sadly, though, the reality differs greatly from the mirage.

For starters, the renowned indexes track the stocks in the prime of their lives rather than the entirety of their lifespans. In the process, the yardsticks gloss over the fact that death is the way of life for all companies along with their equities. The outcome is a grossly distorted picture of the payoff for the entire throng of shareholders over the long range.

Even in the near term, the traditional benchmarks have little or no bearing on the mass of participants. For instance, many an index monitors a group of stocks according to their market caps.

While this approach may befit a profile of the bourse as a whole over the short run, the unbalanced scheme has scant relevance to the thoughtful investor who is most unlikely to load up their portfolios according to the market caps of the stocks at hand.

For these and other reasons, the traditional benchmarks are unsuitable as beacons for the investing public. Instead, a worthwhile index should address the true concerns of serious investors in areas ranging from pertinent metrics to workable strategies.

An example of a fruitful scheme involves the equal weighting of stocks within a benchmark. The benefits lie in conceptual elegance as well as practical relevance for the participants. Another drawcard is the tendency of uniform weighting to deliver higher returns compared to the labored scheme based on market caps.

In seeking a trusty path, a basic step is to canvass the timeworn benchmarks in multiplex areas ranging from conceptual soundness and logical rigor to common sense and pragmatic import. The wholesome assay then leads to guidelines for designing trenchant beacons suited to investors in tending their private portfolios. The enhanced framework is showcased by the MintKit Growth Index: a model benchmark geared toward promising stocks poised for zesty growth at modest risk.


NOTE: The briefing is titled, “MintKit Growth Index”. The slide presentation may be viewed as a document in PDF form or a video in MP4 mode.


*       *       *

Top Index Funds for Technology – PSCT, PSI and XSD

 

A performance review of the top index funds for technology paves the way for investing in a lively branch of the stock market. For this purpose, a robust and convenient vehicle for the earnest investor takes the form of an exchange traded fund (ETF).

The market sector dealing with technology tends to be volatile but vibrant; the companies in this category focus on information systems and their applications. Over the past 3 years ending in spring 2016, XSD snagged the best total return – namely, capital gain plus dividend yield; the runners-up were PSI and PSCT. All three bantam funds fared better than XLK which in turn trounced SPY. Over a longer spell, PSCT won the race in terms of capital gains over the past 5 years.

Note: This infographic available in a crisp (high definition) mode in PDF form at MintKit Gist.

*       *       *

 

Top Index Funds for Consumer Staples

Performance Review of 

FXG, RHS and PSL

Versus SPY

A performance review of the top index funds for consumer staples paves the way for investing in a sturdy branch of the stock market. For this purpose, a handy vehicle for the earnest investor lies in an exchange traded fund (ETF).

Among the high flyers, FXG bagged the best total return over the past 3 years. Meanwhile RHS triumphed in terms of capital gain over half a decade. PSL placed third in the 5-year race but still outpaced SPY by a hefty margin.

All three dynamos fared better than SPY during the wobble and crash of the bourse in the second half of 2011. From a different angle, RHS advanced at a steady rate compared to its rivals and thus prevailed in terms of risk-adjusted gain over the 5-year stretch.


Note: A crisp (high definition) version of this poster is available in PDF form at MintKit Gist.

*       *       *

What is an ETF or ETN?

Guide to 

Exchange Traded Funds and Notes

 versus Mutual Funds

–

An exchange traded fund (ETF) is a communal vehicle for investment, as is an exchange traded note (ETN). This primer profiles the duo of instruments and compares them to mutual funds. The relative merits of the securities are explained, along with the grave risks both blatant and subtle. The serious investor has to juggle the crucial factors in order to thrash out a robust program of investment.

The ebook is available in multiple formats including Amazon Kindle. Another example is PDF at the Internet Archive; but here you should shun conversions such as EPUB which were produced automatically by the archiving system and features poor formatting.  ;-)

*       *       *

 

Asset Classes for Investment

 

Concrete and Virtual Goods 

for Investing in 

Real and Financial Markets

The asset classes for investment include stocks and bonds, commodities and realty. The best picks depend on personal factors like financial status and risk tolerance.

*       *       *

 

Top ETF Review for Investing in Asia – DBJP, DXJ and CQQQ

Performance of Spearheads 

Versus Mature and Emerging Markets

A review of the top picks in the exchange traded fund (ETF) category is a prudent approach to investing in Asia. On the whole, the stock markets in the budding regions of the world have a way of soaring and plunging far more than their peers in the mature countries. This hallmark applies to the bourses of Asia as much as anywhere else.

Unfortunately, the emerging regions as a whole have fared a lot worse than the U.S. market in recent years. Amid the widespread funk, however, Japan and China have turned into a couple of hotspots on the global stage.

Over the past three years, the best performance was turned in by the MSCI Japan US Dollar Hedged Index fund, which trades in the U.S. under the ticker symbol of DBJP. The total return for the dynamo, given by the sum of capital gain plus dividend yield, came out to an annual gain of 28.15% on average over a 3-year period ending in spring 2015.

During the same timespan, the runner-up was the WisdomTree Japan Hedged Equity ETF. The index fund, which runs under the banner of DXJ, racked up 26.54% a year on average.

Meanwhile the third slot was nabbed by the Guggenheim China Technology ETF, which sports the call sign of CQQQ. The tracking vehicle scored an average gain of 25.92% a year.

By way of comparison, the flagship fund within the mature economies takes the form of SPY. The beacon chalked up an advance of 18.11% a year over the same interval. Meanwhile the heavyweight for the emerging markets lies in VWO, which eked out a mere 4.94% per annum.

From a different slant, a graphic survey of the price action over a longer time frame provides a wholesome view of the markets. For this purpose, a fitting window is a span of half a decade, which is long enough to cover the crash of the stock market in the autumn of 2011 as well as the recovery in the years to follow.

The visual plot serves to highlight the advantage of SPY in terms of ample growth coupled with muted risk over the entire stretch. More precisely, the flagship ETF turned in an admirable showing compared to its rivals in terms of risk-adjusted growth over the course of half a decade.

NOTE: The full briefing is a document in PDF form. The report, titled “Top ETF Review for Investing in Asia”, may be viewed or downloaded here.

*       *       *

 

Top 3 Index Funds for Technology – FDN, PNQI and SOXX

 

Triumph of Internet Stocks

A performance review of the top index funds for the technology sector paves the way for investing in a lively branch of the stock market. For this purpose, a robust and convenient vehicle for the earnest investor takes the form of an exchange traded fund (ETF).

In sizing up the performance of the pools, a lengthy timespan provides a wealth of data for a thorough survey. On the other hand, the turnout in recent years is likely to be a better guide to the prospects going forward than the results of the distant past. Given this backdrop, a window of three years seems like a fitting compromise between the contrasting concerns of ample data versus high relevance.

Based on the capital gains over the course of three years, the best index funds in the technology patch go by the ticker symbols of FDN, PNQI and SOXX. Among these vehicles, the first two entries outpaced by a huge margin the chief benchmark of the stock market in the form of SPY. By contrast, SOXX turned in a lackluster showing.

From a different angle, a graphic display of the price history can provide an intuitive grasp of the entrants in the race. The mindful investor has to consider the volatility of the vehicles during the appraisal window as well as the payoff over the entire stretch.

In order to obtain a balanced view of performance, the window of evaluation should cover a spell in which the market has witnessed a boom as well as a bust. For this purpose, a choice timespan is a window of 5 years ending in the late summer of 2014. This interval straddles the crash of the bourse in 2011 as well as the upswell and bounceback of the market that lie on either side of the smashup.

From the longer perspective of half a decade, the standard bearer in the world of index funds – namely, SPY – turned in a capital gain of 92.68%. Another touchstone lay in XLK, the primo within the technology sector, which chalked up a payoff of 97.78%.

Meanwhile the outturn was roughly similar for SOXX, whose return came out to 97.69%. In these ways, the semiconductor fund as well as the technology benchmark managed to edge out SPY by a small margin.

By contrast, FDN bagged a capital gain of nearly 192% over the entire stretch of half a decade. Better yet, PNQI won the derby by snagging a windfall of some 226% over the same period.


NOTE: The full report is a document in PDF form under the title of “Top 3 Index Funds for Technology”. The briefing may be viewed or downloaded here.


*       *       *

 

Myths versus Mistakes in Investing

Riot of 

 Passive Muffs and Active Goofs 

 in Financial Markets

The financial markets abound with beguiling myths and wanton mistakes. The two kinds of stumblers – namely, fables and bungles – are distinct as well as entwined. The slew of snags act singly as well as jointly to trip up all manner of investors ranging from rank amateurs to badged professionals.

The multitude of pitfalls may be classified into a couple of broad groups. A myth conveys a false view of the marketplace while a mistake denotes a bum move harmful to the investor. The former is a passive flub while the latter is an active goof.

The two types of spoilers run riot in isolation or combination. For instance, a tall tale may bedevil an investor without giving rise to a costly mistake. On the flip side, a wrackful move could arise in the absence of a slippery myth. In other cases, the two forms of sinkers work together to foil the hapless investor, thus fouling their agenda to varying degrees ranging from patchy losses to complete wipeouts.

From a larger stance, the awesome complexity of the real and financial markets hamstrings any attempt to drum up a cogent program of investment. The actors floundering in the mire run the gamut from dewy-eyed tyros puttering in their spare time to wizen pros plying their trade the whole day long.

Whatever the scope of experience in the field, the mass of participants succumbs to both kinds of muck-ups. As a safeguard, the first task of the canny player is to recognize the welter of hidden traps along with the mordant wounds they inflict. In this treacherous environment, a solid grasp of the myths and mistakes is a basic requirement for avoiding the sinkholes and escaping the minefield.


NOTE:  The full article is available as a Web page at MintKit Core. As an alternative, the same material appears as a document in PDF form at Scribd. 

REVISED:  2021/4/11. 

*       *       *

 

Top 5 Markets for ETF Investing in Europe – Ireland, Switzerland, Belgium, Britain and Nordics

 

Index Fund Performance

for

EIRL, EWL, EWK, EWU and GXF

A performance review of the top markets in Europe sets the stage for investing in a diverse region that includes budding countries as well as mature economies. For this purpose, a robust and convenient vehicle for the worldly investor lies in an exchange traded fund (ETF).

In sizing up the field of index funds, a straightforward tack is to begin with a list of the high flyers. Then other traits such as volatility and liquidity can be brought to bear on the subject in addition to the capital gains.

In order to obtain a balanced view of performance, the window of evaluation should cover a period in which the market has encountered a boom as well as a bust. On one hand, a longish timespan provides a wealth of data for a thorough survey of performance. On the other hand, the turnout in recent years is likely to be a better guide to the prospects going forward than the record of the remote past.

The vale of exchange traded funds has seen explosive growth around the turn of the millennium. Given the welter of saplings, an investor who insists on a long history will thereby rule out a raft of candidates. In this setting, a track record of three years seems like a fitting compromise in trading off the opposing factors of ample data versus plentiful candidates.

With these points in mind, the chosen window spans three years ending in spring 2014. From this standpoint, the front-runners take the form of index funds dealing with Ireland, Switzerland, Belgium, Britain and the Nordic region.

In addition to the return on investment over the entire stretch, a crucial issue concerns the volatility of each vehicle along the way. In gauging the extent of turbulence, a handy aid lies in a concurrent plot of the index funds. For this purpose, a suitable scheme involves a visual display spanning a stretch of 5 years ending in spring 2014.

Based on the capital gains over the past three years, the best vessels sport the ticker symbols of EIRL, EWL, EWK, EWU and GXF. Over this stretch, the index fund for Ireland (EIRL) outpaced the chief benchmark of the stock market – namely, SPY – by a solid margin. On the other hand, the other four vehicles lagged the latter beacon by varying degrees.

Meanwhile, over the longer span of half a decade, the Irish fund beat out SPY by a modest amount. During this period, the turnout for Switzerland (EWL) was comparable to the flagship benchmark of the stock market. By contrast, the remaining three contenders turned in worse results. In particular, Britain (EWU) brought up the rear amongst the top names in the European theater.


NOTE: The full briefing is a document in PDF form. The publication, titled “Top Markets for ETF Investing in Europe”, may be viewed or downloaded here.

*       *       *

 

Top Index Funds for Biotech – IBB, PJP and XBI

Performance Review

of the Best 3 Index Funds

A performance review of the top index funds for the biotech industry paves the way for investing in one of the most dynamic branches of the stock market. For this purpose, a robust and convenient vehicle for investment lies in an exchange traded fund (ETF).

In order to obtain a balanced view of performance, the window of evaluation should cover a period in which the market has encountered a boom as well as a bust. On one hand, a longish span provides a wealth of data for a thorough survey of performance. On the other hand, the turnout in recent years is likely to be a better guide to the prospects going forward than the experience of the distant past. Given this backdrop, a window of three years seems like a fitting compromise between the contrasting issues of ample data versus high relevance.

From a different angle, a graphic display of the price history can provide an intuitive grasp of the index funds under consideration. The earnest investor has to consider the volatility of the vehicles during the window of evaluation in tandem with the overall payoff over the entire stretch.

Based on the capital gains over the course of three years, the best index funds in the biotech patch go by the ticker symbols of IBB, PJP and XBI. Each of these vehicles trounced the chief benchmark of the stock market – namely, SPY – by a huge margin.


NOTE: The full report is a document in PDF form under the title of “Top 3 Index Funds for Biotech”. The briefing may be viewed or downloaded here.

*       *       *

 

Top Index Funds Based on IPO Stocks – FPX and CSD

Initial Public Offering

 as the Lifeblood of 

 Zesty Funds

The vitality of an initial public offering (IPO) is a compelling approach to growth for an exchange traded fund (ETF). As a rule, a newborn listing in the stock market has a way of outpacing the market averages, especially during the first year of its debut on the bourse. In the combined approach, the robustness and longevity of an ETF can be fortified by the vigor and potential of an IPO.

In the popular image, an IPO refers to the sale of equity to the general public upon the initial launch of a bantam venture on a stock exchange. In the financial community, however, the terminology is also used to denote any type of fresh listing on the bourse.

An example of the latter is a stricken firm whose equity was delisted in the throes of bankruptcy proceedings. If an overhaul of the struggling firm turns out to be successful, then the return of the outfit to the equity market is regarded as the IPO of a reborn stock.

From a different angle, an exchange traded fund is a handy way to participate in diverse markets ranging from equities and bonds to commodities and currencies. In terms of scope, an ETF may cover a broad swath such as a whole industry or even the entire economy. An example of the latter is an index fund based on the flagship benchmark of the stock market; namely, the Standard & Poor’s index of 500 giants on the bourse.

From the converse stance, a communal pool could focus on a compact niche. Examples in this vein range from computer hardware and real estate to precious metals and foreign currencies.

Whatever the choice of market, though, an initial public offering can perk up the return on a portfolio. Since the autumn of the 20th century, a raft of studies have shown that an IPO is apt to outpace the bourse as a whole during the couple of years of its debut.

On the downside, though, the basic equities of operating companies are in general inapt as the primary vehicles for investment by the mass of participants in the stock market. The reason lies in the endless hail of sideswipes and smashups in every industry ranging from mining and shipping to software and banking. The bugbear stems from a fact of life which is ignored by the simplistic models of orthodox finance. In the real world, companies of all stripes break down and go bust all of a sudden, or fade out and die off in slow motion.

By contrast, an index fund is much more likely to lead a long and productive life. The longevity of the vehicle springs from the continual process of renewal as the aging champs within the underlying index are replaced by rising stars in the marketplace. Given this background, the best course of action for the mass of investors is to funnel most or all of their savings into communal pools based on market benchmarks.

On the downside, though, a market index is wont to track the established firms within its field of interest. For this reason, the corresponding pool will contain little or nothing in the way of fledgling ventures.

As we noted earlier, newborn stocks tend to outpace their older peers; and likewise outrun the bourse as a whole. In that case, the canny investor can ratchet up the return on investment by fleshing out a primary position in an ETF in any domain with a secondary stake in one or more budding stocks within the same niche.

An alternative ploy is invest in an index fund that consists entirely of new-sprung stocks. A pioneer on this front lies in a tracking vehicle called the First Trust US IPO Index Fund; the ETF trades under the ticker symbol of FPX. Another spearhead is found in the Guggenheim Spin-Off Fund, which goes by the call sign of CSD.

To place the performance of the vanguards in context, the index funds can be matched against a couple of renowned benchmarks of the stock market. In the larger scheme of things, the Standard & Poor’s index of 500 heavyweights stands out as the leading proxy for the bourse as a whole. Meanwhile the S&P 400 Midcap Index is arguably the standard bearer within the vale of midsize stocks.

Each of the foregoing yardsticks has spawned an index fund of its own. The offsprings carry the ticker symbols of SPY and MDY respectively.

During a window of evaluation stretching from 2006 to 2013, the index funds based on infant stocks – namely, FPX and CSD – beat the prime benchmarks of the stock market by a hefty margin. For instance, CSD trumped MDY by a solid lead despite a modicum of turbulence along the way. Moreover, the overall gain for the live wire was more than twice the payoff of 37% for SPY.

The story was similar for FPX only better. On a negative note, the dynamo was a tad more volatile than SPY as well as MDY. On the upside, though, the cumulative gain for FPX over the entire stretch was about 29% higher than the copious bounty bagged by CSD.


NOTE:  The full briefing is a document in PDF form. The report, listed under the title of “IPO as a Growth Mode for an Exchange Traded Fund”, may be downloaded here.

*       *       *

 

Midcap ETF Review for CSD, RPV and RYJ

 

Performance of Top Index Funds

Given the attractions of an exchange traded fund, a midcap ETF review for the stock market paves the way for investing in lusty firms of moderate size. For this purpose, the first order of business is to select a timespan for sizing up the returns on investment.

On one hand, a lengthy window of observation provides a heap of data for a thorough analysis of performance. On the other hand, the broad-based approach has its drawbacks as well. One stumper springs from the dynamism within the financial forum. Due to the explosive growth of index funds in the millennium, a prolonged timespan has the side effect of brushing aside numerous entrants that have stepped into the arena only in the recent past.

For this reason, the wily investor has to strike a balance between the conflicting factors in order to pick an apt window of evaluation. In striking a compromise, a time frame of three years seems like a fitting choice in general.

From a different stance, the financial crisis of 2008 was a watershed in the global economy. In recognition of the landmark, a duration of five years ending in spring 2013 has the advantage of spanning the epic blowup and its aftermath. For this reason, the longer window of half a decade can provide a host of pointers on the true nature of motley markets.

In addition to grasping the price action in the arena, the wise investor takes into account a number of additional factors relating to the short run as well as the long range. A case in point is a modicum of liquidity needed for the artful player to enter and exit a given market in a timely fashion.

A second hallmark of the savvy investor lies in an aversion for levered vehicles. The reason stems from the constant threat of sudden death and/or gradual demise that dogs any type of rickety scheme based on high gearing. Due to the specter of certain doom, only a heedless speculator lusts after shaky contraptions pumped up by the gimmicks of leverage. In other words, the wise investor relies only on sturdy rigs that move with the target market in a direct and forthright way.

In sifting through a database of index funds focused on midsize firms, a straightforward approach is to begin with a muster of the front-runners in the field. Then the other factors such as liquidity and risk can be brought to bear on the appraisal.

In line with this thrust, we begin with a tally of raw performance over the course of three years ending in the autumn of 2013. The resulting list of candidates can then be whittled down further by a couple of secondary screens. As we noted above, the first filter deals with the liquidity of the ETF in the marketplace. Meanwhile the second criterion concerns the directness of the setup; that is, the absence of leverage.

Based on this regimen, the top 3 index funds turned out to be CSD, RPV and RYJ. The purpose of these pools is to keep pace with their respective benchmarks: the Beacon Spin-off Index, the S&P Pure Value Total Return Index, and the Raymond James SB-1 Equity Index.

Among these pacers, CSD turned out to be the clear winner. Moreover the return on investment for the spearhead displayed a series of higher peaks as well as rising troughs over the span of half a decade.

Of the pair of runners-up, the average payoff for RPV over the past three years was comparable to that for RYJ. On the other hand, the former pool broke down more severely than the latter during the financial flap of 2008. After the smashup, though, RPV for the most part kept up with its rival and managed to eke out a slightly better performance in recent years.

To place the turnout of the high flyers in context, the eagles were compared against a couple of renowned benchmarks of the stock market. Looking at the big picture, the Standard & Poor’s index of 500 giants stands out as a popular proxy for the bourse as a whole. Meanwhile the S&P 400 Midcap Index is arguably the leading beacon within the vale of midsize stocks.

Each of the foregoing yardsticks has spawned an index fund of its own. The offsprings carry the ticker symbols of SPY and MDY respectively. On the upside, the trio of winning funds for midcap stocks – namely, CSD, RPV and RYJ – trumped the popular benchmarks of the bourse by a solid margin.

NOTE: The full report is a document in PDF form. The publication, listed under the title of “Midcap ETF Review for Investing in Top Markets”, may be downloaded here.  

*       *       *

 

ETF Review of Top 3 Picks for Consumer Cyclical Stocks – XRT, PEJ and XHB

 

Comparison of Fund Performance

for

XRT, PEJ and XHB 

A review of the top performers is a springboard for sound investing in consumer cyclical stocks by way of an exchange tradedf fund (ETF). To pick out the best choice of index fund, the first step is to round up the front-runners. In sizing up the firebrands, the key gauges include the speed of capital gains and the extent of price volatility

To this end, a basic criterion involves the rate of return over the past few years. On the other hand, a lot of index funds are relative newcomers to the field. For this reason, a prober who insists on a lengthy history will exclude a raft of candidates. At this early stage in the upgrowth of exchange traded funds, a fitting compromise between the length of the track record and the size of the candidate pool is a life span of 3 years.

For our purpose here, the period of evaluation straddled three years ending in the summer of 2013. During this stretch, the best performance was turned in by an exchange traded fund based on the S&P Retail Select Industry Index. The communal pool, which sports the ticker symbol of XRT, chalked up a gain of 30.92 percent a year on average.

The runner-up in the sweepstakes was a vehicle tied to the S&P Homebuilders Select Industry Index. The dynamo, which flies under the banner of XHB, managed to snag an average return of 29.73% per year.

Meanwhile the bronze metal in the race went to the PowerShares Dynamic Leisure & Entertainment fund. The hustler, branded as PEJ, snapped up a yearly gain of 28.46%.

In order to obtain a better sense of the performance figures, we need to put the results into a larger context. For this purpose, the benchmark of choice among professional investors lies in the Standard & Poor’s index of 500 titans listed on the stock market.

The latter yardstick is tracked with remarkable accuracy by an exchange traded fund that runs under the banner of SPY. The tracking vehicle turned in a bounty of 18.87% a year on average over the course of three years.

To sum up, the third place in the rankings was claimed by PEJ which surpassed the chief benchmark of the market by nearly 10% a year. By contrast, the outcome for XHB turned out to be a mite better by about 1%. Finally, the payoff for XRT was higher still by another percent or so.


NOTE: The full report is a document in PDF form. The resource is available here: Top ETF Review for Consumer Cyclical Stocks.


*       *       *

 

Smallcap ETF Review – Top 3 Index Funds for Healthcare, Energy and Growth Stocks

 

 Index Fund Performance 

 for 

 PSCH, PSCE and IJT 

Given the drawcards of an exchange traded fund, a smallcap ETF review for the stock market lays the groundwork for investing with finesse in bantam firms. To this end, the first order of business is to select a suitable timespan for sizing up the candidates.

On one hand, a lengthy window of observation provides a heap of data for a thorough analysis of performance. On the other hand, the broad-based approach has its drawbacks as well. One stumper springs from the dynamism within the financial forum. Due to the explosive growth of index funds in the millennium, a prolonged timespan has the side effect of casting aside numerous entrants that have stepped into the arena only in the recent past.

For this reason, the wily investor has to strike a balance between the conflicting factors in order to pick an apt window of evaluation. In striking a compromise, a time frame of three years seems like a fitting choice in most cases.

From a different stance, the financial crisis of 2008 was a watershed in the global economy. In recognition of the landmark, a duration of five years ending in spring 2013 has the advantage of spanning the epic fiasco and its aftermath. For this reason, the longer window of half a decade can provide a host of pointers on the true nature of motley markets.

In addition to grokking the price action in the arena, the deft investor takes into account a number of additional factors relating to the short run as well as the long range. A case in point is a minimal level of liquidity needed for the artful player to enter and exit a given market in a timely fashion.

A second hallmark of the savvy investor is an aversion for levered vehicles. The reason lies in the constant threat of sudden death and/or gradual demise that besets any type of rickety scheme based on high gearing. Due to the specter of certain doom, only a heedless speculator lusts after shaky contraptions pumped up by the gimmicks of leverage. In other words, the sober investor relies only on sturdy rigs that move with the target market in a direct and forthright way.

In sifting through a database of index funds focused on smallish firms, a straightforward approach is to begin with a muster of the front-runners in the field. Then the other factors such as liquidity and risk can be brought to bear on the appraisal.

In line with this thrust, our search begins with a tally of raw performance over the course of three years ending in spring 2013. The resulting list of candidates is then whittled down by the duo of secondary screens. As we noted above, the first filter deals with the liquidity of the asset in the marketplace. Meanwhile the second criterion concerns the directness of the setup; that is, the absence of leverage.

Based on this routine, the top 3 index funds turned out to be PSCH, PSCE and IJT. These pools focus respectively on the healthcare sector, energy market, and growth stocks.

Within the ranks of acceptable funds based on bantam stocks, PSCH turned out to be the clear winner. The return on investment for the spearhead displayed a series of higher peaks as well as rising troughs over the span of three years following its debut in the stock market in spring 2010.

Of the pair of runners-up, the average payoff for PSCE was comparable to the turnout for IJT. On the other hand, the latter vehicle was a lot less volatile compared to the former. For this reason, IJT was the better choice for the genuine investor.

To place the performance of the high flyers in context, the eagles were compared against a couple of renowned benchmarks of the bourse. Looking at the big picture, the Standard & Poor’s index of 500 giants stands out as a popular proxy for the stock market as a whole. Meanwhile the Russell 2000 Index is arguably the leading beacon within the vale of bantam stocks.

Each of the foregoing yardsticks has spawned an index fund of its own. The offshoot vehicles carry the ticker symbols of SPY and IWM respectively. On the bright side, the trio of winning funds for smallcap stocks – namely, PSCH, PSCE and IJT – trounced the standard benchmarks of the bourse by a comfortable margin.


 NOTE: The full briefing is a document in PDF form. The publication, titled “Smallcap ETF Review for Investing in Top Markets”, may be viewed or downloaded here.

*       *       *