Comments on: Lies, damned lies, and equity mutual fund statistics A slice of lime in the soda Sun, 26 Oct 2014 19:05:02 +0000 hourly 1 By: stockprofessors Thu, 05 Jan 2012 07:28:25 +0000 Wow! What a great writing style? I really appreciate your blog.. Well done

By: Jehnavipat Fri, 10 Dec 2010 10:06:41 +0000 One can draw some similarity of balanced funds with well diversified funds. Asset allocated for stocks are diversified into different sectors which are performing with high returns. Fund allocation weightage is determined by the stocks’ return potentials. The top stock, for example may get an allocation of say 10% and the lesser the potential the lesser is the percentage allocation of funds. The same pattern is then repeated for another sector of stocks. Sectors are chosen subject to various parameters. tual-funds.html

By: Curmudgeon Tue, 24 Aug 2010 12:44:56 +0000 @jparnell – while I might not agree with you in all the details, your point is well made. Whenever someone aggregates data and make sweeping pronouncements of the national psyche, or any national trend for that matter, we lose so much data in the process that the conclusion is almost certainly wrong, or at least wrong for a good portion of the country. That goes for you too, Felix.

By: jparnell Tue, 24 Aug 2010 07:18:46 +0000 I live on a combination of social security and self-employment in a California county where the basic unemployment rate is 13%, the U-6 probably 20%. When economics bloggers refer to ‘people’ who are investing in the stock market I tend to bristle when those bloggers and regular commenters are clearly talking about ‘people’ just like themselves — college educated, employed, making a good salary and having disposable income.

The stock market to a lot of ‘people’ is the place where their 401K funds are invested. If they’re lucky enough to have a job with a 401K plan.

With the average wage having been flat or falling for a decade or two, with the top 1% doing very well and the bottom 90% going nowhere, with social security benefits absent a cost of living increase this year (and almost certainly next year) there are a lot of ‘people’ who are struggling just to survive paycheck to paycheck.

Whether there’s a net inflow or outflow of mutual funds is largely irrelevant to the lives of a majority of ‘people.’

To those of us living essentially on fixed incomes, the ‘volatile’ food and energy costs that continue to rise — an 18-ounce loaf of bread in the local supermarket is currently $4.69 and a gallon of gas has just dipped to $2.95 — are far more relevant than the theoretical concerns of economics writers.

Down here at the micro-economic level in California, the effects of the bursting of an 8 trillion dollar housing bubble can be seen in the cuts in government services, the use of IOUs by the state, the shuttered stores and empty offices and the ubiquitous lists of short-sales and bank owned properties.

The ups and downs of the market are like the scoreboard for a game most of us aren’t playing. Both Josh Brown and Tom Petruno could be right. It may be that Brown spends more time with the serfs and Petruno with the oligarchs.

It’s s Clintonesque question of what the definition of ‘people’ is.

By: EorrFU Tue, 24 Aug 2010 01:17:30 +0000 Josh Brown makes a common error believing that the investors of mutual funds are somehow representative of the american people. The people who can’t pay there bills are overwhelmingly poorer than those who are investors who may be hurting but not nearly as badly as others. We college graduates often forget that we are an elite of sorts and the problems experienced by the vast majority of pundits and readers of those pundits are unique and not representative. All I see from the data is that the american savings rate is high and our economy isn’t going to get a kick start from the wealthiest quintiles.