This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
How bad at math do you need to be to think that it’s only 5 stocks driving this market? Russell 2000 is the big laggard in 2023, and has been much of the year. Only 5 stocks driving markets?! Then why are Equal-weighted indices doing so well? Recession is inevitable? Rally faltering Nasdaq is having a banner, nearing ATH (15.7%
Do the Math Let’s do the math. What better index than the Russell 3000, which includes the Russell 1000 big cap universe and the Russell 2000 small cap index. Okay, let’s go there.
My Two-for-Tuesday morning train WFH reads: • Stock Pickers Never Had a Chance Against Hard Math of the Market : In years like this one, when just a few big companies outperform, it’s hard to assemble a winning portfolio. 2000-2003 Dotcom implosion 6. Businessweek ) but see With cash earning 5%, why risk money on the stock market?
In 2000, General Electric accounted for over 5% of the S&P 500 ( source ). The Math Behind the Growth Let’s take a step back and think about what it would take for a company like Apple to reach a $10 trillion market cap. In 2000, the total value of the US stock market was $15.1
Yields were kind of low in the mid 2000's before the financial crisis which was part of the story for why I started to use liquid alternatives (that term didn't exist yet), bond substitutes and bond proxies. The above is why I've taken to referring to bonds as sources of unreliable volatility.
For example, if the house brings in $2000 per month ($24,000 each year) and the sale price is $240,000, the next investor is buying a business with a price-to-earnings ratio of 10, because 240k/24k=10. Its just basic math. But if you manage to convince someone to hand over $480,000 for that same house, youve sold at a P/E of 20.
A good decision about their mortgage way back when could see someone in their early 50's paying off a 15 year mortgage (taking out a 15 year being the good decision) and now has $1000 to maybe $2000 a month for additional savings. If it is going to happen, it won't be for ten years +/-, plenty of time to factor that into your math.
In 2000, General Electric accounted for over 5% of the S&P 500 ( source ). The Math Behind the Growth Let’s take a step back and think about what it would take for a company like Apple to reach a $10 trillion market cap. In 2000, the total value of the US stock market was $15.1
I might argue longer than two years considering the bear market from 2000 took 30 months to find a bottom. Also the 2000's being a bumpy ride to nowhere for the S&P 500 might lead people to view this part more conservatively too. These holdings can be a source of funds if some how the cash gets exhausted and stocks are still down.
Do the math S&P 500 Top Performers Bloomberg Data 25% of the S&P 500 is up more than the index this year. Russell 2000 Top Performers Bloomberg Data Even in the maligned Russell 2000, which is not having a great year at the index level, has some big winners. 60% of the index is positive year to date.
In a Howard Marks memo from January 2, 2000, he wrote "It is reported that the average new issue of 1999, which on average is probably about six months old, is selling roughly 160% above its issue price. The math on this one, wow. In 1999, the NASDAQ gained 86% while the Russell 2000 Value Index actually fell 1.5%.
But the numbers you can’t argue with, I mean, we all know that the brutal math of investing before costs investors collectively will earn the market return after costs. You, you wrote at the journal through the.com implosion as well as the whole runup to 2000 September 11th, the great financial Crisis. I did it in 2000, 2002.
ANAT ADMATI, PROFESSOR OF FIANCE AND ECONOMICS, STANFORD GRADUATE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS: So, my journey starts where I took a lot of math. I was good in math and I love the math. So, I was kind of, in my romantic mind when I was in my early 20s, I was going to take but not give back to math, that kind of thing.
Notably, between 2000 and 2016, U.S.-based STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) funding is steadily declining—a dynamic that potentially opens the door for China to gain ground on the AI innovation front. has commanded the majority of AI activity over the past two decades.
Notably, between 2000 and 2016, U.S.-based STEM (science, technology, engineering and math) funding is steadily declining—a dynamic that potentially opens the door for China to gain ground on the AI innovation front. has commanded the majority of AI activity over the past two decades.
I’d say management consulting is any of the other thing that least at that time was the other career trajectory, just my personality, more of a math oriented introvert. In 2000, right. But in extremis, which is the Microsoft and the Tonight 2000 example and maybe some other AI related stocks today, it really does matter.
Subscribe now Share The Better Letter Get more from Bob Seawright in the Substack app Available for iOS and Android Get the app TRIGGER WARNING: I’m going to do some sports math nerding-out this week. Accordingly, the last 11 NFL MVPs have all been QBs (16 of the last 17; and 21 of 24 since 2000). After all, they had Mike Phipps.
As a matter of math, it cannot repeat the run from 8.5% In the 2000's, foreign outperformed and a large allocation to foreign was very important during that time. Since it only goes back to 1988 it doesn't track from the highest interest rates from earlier in the 80's, the ten year was at 8.5% in November.
People entering the workforce in 2000 were not the 401k guinea pigs. And a follow up to last night's blog post related to very expensive things that happen and can throw off retirement plan math. According ICI via Microsoft Co-Pilot, in 1985 there were 30,000 401k plans. That is Rooster. Rooster loves duck toys.
BRYANT: So money, unlike math, money is highly emotional. I mean, there’s 50,000 kids in the Atlanta public school system, so you can do the math there. I believe I love math because it doesn’t have an opinion, that’s a Melody Hobson quote. RITHOLTZ: Was sub 2000 or the bottom of the range.
That’s $3,365 per year when you do the math! You might choose to save $1000, $2000, or more or less than this. Lastly, track this monthly money challenge with a spending journal for maximum results. 30-day meal planning challenge Eating out is expensive. The average amount spent eating out every day is $9.22.
I — I loved math, but really, I was going to go down that literature route more than anything else and — and study Spanish literature. And so, if you were someone who was sitting in cash, let’s say from like 2000 to 2010, you were earning on a real basis about three percent per annum. I was econ and kind of geeky.
00:03:14 [Mike Greene] So that was actually an outgrowth from my experience coming out of Wharton and you mentioned the, the, you know, the transition of people who tended to be skilled at math or physics into finance. The Russell 2000 has 2000 out of the roughly 3,500 stocks available publicly traded.
The Russell 2000 is off 21 percent. This is the best thing I read this week (it combines magic, music, mystery, and math); this is the best thing I saw. As I write this TBL, the S&P 500 is getting crushed and (using very rough numbers) is down 18 percent year-to-date. The Dow is down 8.5 The Nasdaq is down a dreadful 31 percent.
So I, I did a math degree at Oxford, which is more pure math. You know, pure math can be very theoretical and detached from the real world, and it’s getting worse. Some people look at a casino as entertainment and hey, we’re gonna spend X dollars, pick a number, 500, 2000, whatever it is.
Some quick math for the value of your $10,000 after a certain number of years: 10 years: $20,000. Whatever fund you select will aim to mimic the returns of a specific market index, like the S&P 500 or Russell 2000 Index. For example, if you estimate your 401(k) will earn 7% returns annually, 72 divided by 7 = 10.29.
It’s fun math – a 20% drop in prices means you get 25% more shares for your dollar, and a 50% drop means twice as many , or 100% more shares per dollar invested.). But in the Mustachian Era (the years since 2011 when I started writing this blog ), there has only been one: the 2020 Covid Crash which only lasted about a month.
So 2000 could have been 1900, and that could have caused challenges. SPACs had been around for probably 15 to 20 years and that’s what — RITHOLTZ: Yeah, since the early 2000, people forget that. I remember going to the Subway Series between them and the Yankees in the World Series in 2000, I think that was.
00:29:29 [Speaker Changed] Yeah, I think you can see this particularly in smaller cap companies right now where, you know, as you alluded to earlier, the Russell 2000 versus the Russell 1000 has basically underperformed by 95% from the end of 2016 until now. 00:29:45 [Speaker Changed] That’s amazing.
And then I developed this macro affinity starting in 2000, really? So that’s the math. It’s a, it’s the marrying, quite frankly, of macro and micro. So I have a, a deep background in micro, mainly the TMT space. 2009, 10 in that role. And so marrying the two to me is the advantage.
When you look at the 82 to 2000 bull market, something like 75% of those gains came not from earnings growth, but from multiple expansion. So what was challenging for me was like, actually, when we moved to the US when I was seven years old, I was always good with math, but my English was below average. RITHOLTZ: Right.
SETHI: Well, everybody thought they were a genius including me in 1999, 2000. It’s much deeper than math. You get a scholarship in high school, you put it in the stock market, and immediately lose half. How do you lose half of your money that quickly? Kind of sounds familiar to all of our crypto friends from the last few years.
He’s crushed the Russell 2000, whatever benchmark you want to talk about. And I was a math nerd as a kid. You’re 34th, you’re retiring after 34 years and you trounce what’s really the more appropriate benchmark, I would assume the Russell 2000. He has absolutely crushed his benchmark over that period.
You had the run up in the dot coms to 2000. ” 29, 87, 74, just pick any 50 plus percent number and certainly 2000 and ’08, ’09, a major index gets cut in half. RITHOLTZ: So hold the duration risk aside with those two, but just for an investor in treasuries, I know you’ve done the math before.
For a lot of funds, the early 2000 saw a lot of opportunity in the distressed market and in other spaces. And not only that, Reg FD I think was implemented in 2000, but what happened was that with technology, the information became cheap and available to all of us, retail and institutional investors. RITHOLTZ: Endurance and resilience.
KLINSKY: That was a super hot theme in the year 1999 and 2000. RITHOLTZ: So it’s different math then I need 100x winner versus 99? After I left, they changed their strategy and went into what were called CLECs. These are alternative telephone companies that were supposed to — RITHOLTZ: I remember those. KLINSKY: Yeah.
That is incredibly painful period for our process that both this time, which I think we’re still in the midst of end ’99, 2000, we’ve more than recovered from the roundtrip. My mom was a math teacher so — RITHOLTZ: Okay. The entire market, if you like, a Shiller CAPE or something was much worse in ’99, 2000.
1999, 2000, the internet was blowing up. The SNL crisis Tiger Chase had started, you know, in the wake of the internet melding down in 2000. I I was speaking at the Javits Center, 2000 people in the audience. If you think back to 2000, Amazon was the disruptor to Walmart or to Macy’s. And that was 25 years ago.
Yet debt only fell once, in the year 2000, by 113.875 billion vs a purported budget surplus of $236.241 billion. That was in 2000. 2022 Math The 2021 year end debt was $29.621 trillion. This is not a fiscal vs. calendar year distortion, but an ongoing deficit lie. 2001 had a reported surplus of $128,236 billion.
And I, and I really like the application of math and statistics and computer science to markets. You learn the math that can help you with, with market making operations. And I think that helped fuel the smart beta boom of the 2000 tens. It’s just not smart on a math basis to do that. And I just caught the bug.
It’s not because they’re not good enough at math. was founded in 1926, acquired by Natixis in 2000, and manages over $335 billion in client assets. Trump enjoys unwavering devotion — and collects the staggering price of admission. ( Now the strategy is starting to bear fruit. Loomis Sayles & Co.
NADIG: And trying to help people understand what that means for next week, and the next year, and the next decade, to position products underneath it, like ETFs in 1992, or model portfolios in 2000, or direct indexing in 2010. I read all those academic papers, I understand where the math comes from. It’s how math works.
I’d been ranked i i back in the seventies, if you can do the math. And like you mentioned, the smooth sailing in the 2000 tens 00:15:07 [Speaker Changed] Didn’t feel that way at the time. Tell us a little bit about the plan for launching an independent economics research 00:09:15 [Speaker Changed] Shop.
And that’s, that’s the predecessor to Amherst, which we bought in 2000 and had been running it since then. So think about 2003 home prices had gone up a lot from 2000. So mortgage position in 2000 were way more valuable in 2003 than they were when they originated because they weigh less credit risk. Anything else?
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 36,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content