Model portfolio, update


D

dapperdobbs

While the site is up again, here's the promised earnings and PE ratio
update to the fictional portfolio I threw together a little over two
years ago.

http://www.stockalicious.com/portfolio-holdings/4710

EPS '08 '09 '10

T 2.12 2.12 2.30
BP 8.17 4.47 -1.57
CHRW 2.08 2.13 2.33
CSCO 1.26 1.04 1.32
DD 2.73 2.04 3.31
EMR 3.11 2.27 2.60
FAST 1.91 1.24 1.80
FISV 3.27 3.62 4.50
IR 2.69 1.41 2.24
MSM 3.06 1.77 2.62

PE '08 '09 '10

T 13.0 12.3
BP 5.4 N/A
CHRW 22.0 32.0
CSCO 11.9 14.3
DD 8.3 16.4
EMR 10.0 23.4
FAST 16.8 35.2
FISV 9.9 15.3
IR 5.3 20.8
MSM 10.2 23.7


portfolio 84%
index 64%

Of course a lot could be said about the market, but IMO the thing to
look at is the business of individual companies. The play-with-
statistics standouts above are T (for it's lower PE) and FISV (for its
EPS growth), but one must read up on the businesses to get an
understanding of what the companies actually do, and a feel for each.
The above took me about an hour and a half to do for the benefit of
interested readers (slave drivers).
 
Ad

Advertisements

T

Tad Borek

While the site is up again, here's the promised earnings and PE ratio
update to the fictional portfolio I threw together a little over two
years ago.

http://www.stockalicious.com/portfolio-holdings/4710
And for those interested, here is the "dart-throwing monkey" portfolio
of US stocks, which required exactly 4 seconds of work and will continue
to require that much work for the next 50 years, as long as you are
happy with a dart-throwing monkey managing your assets:
http://www.stockalicious.com/portfolio/4745

It's up somewhere around 70% including reinvested dividends.

Which is of course a good bit less than the 10-stock 4710 portfolio's
85% or so. Though if you ignore the chart-popping IM, I believe the rest
of the bunch collectively underperformed the market!

-Tad
 
D

dapperdobbs

And for those interested, here is the "dart-throwing monkey" portfolio
http://www.stockalicious.com/portfolio/4745

It's up somewhere around 70% including reinvested dividends.

Which is of course a good bit less than the 10-stock 4710 portfolio's
85% or so. Though if you ignore the chart-popping IM, I believe the rest
of the bunch collectively underperformed the market!

-Tad
Thank you for your comments and the reivested dividends computation on
the index fund.

IR and DD are stocks I was reading up on at the time. I included T and
BP for dividends (but didn't do enough thinking and comparing on BP -
I stopped at their interests in Russian oil, and didn't think to check
their operational safety record). It's interesting that some PE ratios
have more than doubled, while only five companies are showing
increased EPS.

In the waning months of 2008 some of the discussion was about the
market finding a bottom v. EOW (End of World). So the PE's were low.
 
B

BreadWithSpam

Tad Borek said:
On 2/11/2011 6:54 AM, dapperdobbs wrote:
And for those interested, here is the "dart-throwing monkey" portfolio
of US stocks, which required exactly 4 seconds of work and will
http://www.stockalicious.com/portfolio/4745
Well, let's be fair, "dart-throwing-monkey" is a cute, but
innaccurate descriptiong - unless that monkey threw about 8000 darts.

But yes - a total market index is pretty damned hard to beat.
It's up somewhere around 70% including reinvested dividends.
Stockalicious is a nifty site, but it does have some quirks -
the way it handles dividends, for example, is weird. It's
not entirely clear how it handles dividends.

On the FAQ page, they indicate that they neither reinvest
the dividends nor do they add them back into the portfolio
as cash. (both of which facts are clear when looking at the
holdings indicated on either of the portfolios noted above-
both had plenty of dividends over the two year period in
question).

However, it looks like the dividends *are* included when
computing the total return for the portfolios (as if they
were reinvested).

If that latter is true, then the only time the performance
analysis will be correct (if not the ending portfolio value)
would be for either a single-security portfolio (ie. the
second one noted above) or a portfolio of securities which
generate no dividends.

Like I said, it's weird. I haven't figured out whether it's
useful or not.

Or maybe I'm missing something.
 
Ad

Advertisements

D

dapperdobbs

However, it looks like the dividends *are* included when
computing the total return for the portfolios (as if they
were reinvested).


Or maybe I'm missing something.
T for example, 363 shs x last price = valuation.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top