value - What We're Reading - StockBuz2024-03-28T12:33:31Zhttp://stockbuz.ning.com/articles/feed/tag/valueThe Run In Small Caps. Will It Continue In 2017http://stockbuz.ning.com/articles/the-run-in-small-caps-will-it-continue-in-20172016-12-23T15:36:41.000Z2016-12-23T15:36:41.000ZStockBuzhttp://stockbuz.ning.com/members/1t2xbcvddkrir<div><div class="copy last-child">
<p><span class="font-size-3"><a href="https://www.roycefunds.com/insights/editorial/images/Frank-Gannon_1a.jpg" target="_blank"><img src="https://www.roycefunds.com/insights/editorial/images/Frank-Gannon_1a.jpg?width=300" style="padding: 10px;" class="align-left" width="300" /></a></span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">The stock market went on quite a tear in the 3+ weeks immediately following the election, with the month of November especially beneficial for small-cap stocks.</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">Before delving into what it all might mean for small-cap investors, here's a quick rundown to help contextualize just how dynamic a month it was:</span></p>
<div class="bullet-list" style="margin-left: 2em;">
<ol class="bullet-list last-child">
<li style="font-size: 15px;"><span class="font-size-2">This was the best November in the history of the Russell 2000 Index. featuring its highest monthly return since October 2011 when small-caps were just emerging from a precipitous decline.</span></li>
<li style="font-size: 15px;"><span class="font-size-2">The performance spread between small-cap and large-cap was the widest in 14 years (since April 2002). The Russell 2000 gained 11.2% for the month versus respective gains of 3.9% and 3.7% for the large-cap Russell 1000 and S&P 500 Indexes.</span></li>
<li style="font-size: 15px;"><span class="font-size-2">Small-cap value enjoyed a good year's worth of results in one month! During November, the Russell 2000 Value advanced 13.3% compared to 9.0% for the Russell 2000 Growth.</span></li>
<li style="font-size: 15px;" class="last-child"><span class="font-size-2">Small-cap value earned an even bigger advantage quarter-to-date, thanks to better performance during the mini-correction earlier in the quarter. From 9/30/16-11/30/16, small-cap value was up 9.6% versus a gain of 2.2% for small-cap growth.</span></li>
</ol>
</div>
<p><span class="font-size-2"><strong class="last-child">What drove small-cap value?<br class="last-child" /></strong> The strength of small-cap value has come from cyclical (and diverse) sectors including Financials, Industrials, Consumer Discretionary, Energy, and Materials.</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">Financials benefited from a steepening yield curve that should help to boost bank profits, while optimism about accelerating economic growth helped Industrials and many Materials stocks. The U.S. consumer has ratcheted up spending, and rebounding commodity prices helped both Energy and, again, Materials.</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2"><strong>Small-Cap Cyclical Sectors Lead in November</strong></span><br class="last-child" />
<span class="font-size-2">Russell 2000 Sector Returns November 2016 and QTD</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2"><img alt="Small-Cap Cyclical Sectors Lead in November" src="https://www.roycefunds.com/insights/editorial/2016/12/Images/sectors-1116-4QTD.png" class="last-child" height="356" width="632" /></span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2"><sup>1</sup><em class="last-child">Real Estate, formerly part of Financials, became a separate GICS sector on 8/31/16. </em></span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2"><strong>What does this mean for small-cap investors?</strong></span><br class="last-child" />
<span class="font-size-2">To be sure, this is all welcome news, especially for small-cap active managers with a cyclical tilt.</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">After such a remarkable run, it’s also understandable to ask, perhaps with a bit of trepidation, where small-caps go from here. We are contrarians, after all.</span></p>
<a href="https://www.roycefunds.com/insights/2016/11/what-does-a-post-trump-market-mean-for-investors"><span class="font-size-2"><img src="https://www.roycefunds.com/insights/2016/02/images/Charlie-Dreifus_141_2.jpg" /></span></a>
<h3><span class="font-size-2">What Does a Post-Trump Market Mean for Investors?</span></h3>
<p><span class="font-size-2">First, the current rally has exacerbated an already pronounced shift from growth to value while also solidifying a move from large-cap to small-cap.</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">The post-election environment has also seen a dramatic rotation away from safety—bonds and defensive stocks most notably. Investors have shown increased confidence in the potential for accelerated economic growth and a likely policy shift from monetary to fiscal—chiefly in the form of tax cuts and projected spending increases on infrastructure and defense.</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">How much of this is accurate and how much has already been priced in remain to be seen. Certainly, we see these as the critical questions to be answered going forward.</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">It is not uncommon for major events (political or otherwise) to create outsized, short-term swings that manage to correct themselves as the future becomes clearer. We would not be at all surprised to see a correction over the next few months.</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">After all, one result of the uptick is that many stocks now sport very high valuations based on these great expectations.</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">As always, we think certain fundamentals will continue to matter as the interest rate environment (and with it the economy as a whole) returns to a more historically normal (and, in this instance, possibly inflationary) pattern.</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">From our perspective as small-cap specialists, we see the key fundamentals going forward as earnings, profitability, the ability to self-fund, and valuations that we believe do not fully reflect these positive attributes.</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">We view small-cap value's leadership as <a href="https://www.roycefunds.com/insights/editorial/2016/11/is-the-current-small-cap-cyle-different-than-large-cap.aspx">still comparably new</a> and that the cycle will remain favorable for both small-cap value and <a href="https://www.roycefunds.com/insights/2016/10/undiscovered-connection-between-value-led-periods-and-active-management.aspx" class="last-child">active approaches to the asset class</a>.</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">Stay tuned…</span></p>
<p><span class="font-size-2">Courtesy of <a href="https://www.roycefunds.com/insights/editorial/2016/12/small-caps-enjoy-their-best-november" target="_blank">Royce Funds</a></span></p>
</div>
</div>Bonds Are 'Housing' All Over Againhttp://stockbuz.ning.com/articles/bonds-are-housing-all-over-again2016-06-16T00:05:29.000Z2016-06-16T00:05:29.000ZStockBuzhttp://stockbuz.ning.com/members/1t2xbcvddkrir<div><p>As German bond yields breach unthinkable levels, BK was struck by a chart from Deutsche Bank – it is a chart of German yields since 1807.</p>
<p><a href="http://tickerdistrict.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/clip00004.jpeg"><img class="alignnone wp-image-5140" src="http://tickerdistrict.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/clip00004.jpeg" alt="clip0000(4)" height="385" width="661" /></a></p>
<p>Take a moment to reflect on this chart – in over 200 years, German bond yields have never been lower. This period of time includes such notable and notorious events as:</p>
<ul>
<li>US Civil War</li>
<li>The British Railway Mania Bubble</li>
<li>The Panic of 1873 and The Long Global Depression</li>
<li>Industrial Revolution</li>
<li>Thomas Edison’s Invention of Electric Light</li>
<li>Invention of the Automobile</li>
<li>Stock Market Panic of 1907</li>
<li>World War I</li>
<li>1929 Stock Market Crash</li>
<li>The Depression of the 1930’s</li>
<li>World War II</li>
<li>Japan’s Real Estate Bubble and Crash</li>
<li>The Dot-Com Bubble</li>
<li>1987 US Stock Market Crash</li>
<li>1997 Asian Currency Crisis</li>
<li>1998 Russian Default and Long Term Capital Management Bailout</li>
<li>9/11</li>
<li>The US Housing Bubble and 2008 Great Financial Crisis</li>
</ul>
<p>During each of these spectacular and horrific events, German bond yields managed to stay in a range of roughly 4-10% with the occasional spike up or down. However during this semi-peaceful economic recovery from the Great Recession, German bond yield have done something they have never done… they have gone negative.</p>
<p>It’s a paradox for sure. The global economy is most certainly stronger than during the 1873 Depression, or the 1930’s Depression, or after 9/11 or even following the 2008 crash… yet yields have never been lower. We are living through a period of economic history that will be the main subject of textbooks for decades to come.</p>
<p>This note is not supposed to be an economic history lesson, this post is meant to be cautionary. The last time we saw an asset class do something it hasn’t done in over 200 years was the US Housing bubble. The following chart was constructed using Robert Shiller’s US Home Price index.</p>
<p><a href="http://tickerdistrict.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/clip00005.jpeg"><img class="alignnone size-full wp-image-5141" src="http://tickerdistrict.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/06/clip00005.jpeg" alt="clip0000(5)" height="462" width="676" /></a></p>
<p>Notice anything familiar? Just like German yields, US home prices remained relatively stable from 1880 to 2001. When interest rates were lowered after 9/11 the price of US Homes skyrocketed to record levels. During the housing bubble people were buying homes in hopes of flipping them to the next fool. Like a game of musical chairs, this fun for a lot of of people… until it wasn’t. When the music stopped, everyone was left without a chair – this included both individuals and institutions like Lehman Brothers. In the end, central bankers had to print money to stop the panic.</p>
<p>This time the the people playing musical chairs are the central banks themselves. So the question is, when the music stops, who bails them out?</p>
<p>BK needs to make one thing very clear – bubbles can continue for a lot longer than most people think. In fact, with US 10 year yields at 1.6% it seems that there is a lot of room for yields to fall. So a bond market bubble bust is unlikely to occur in 2016.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, those buying bonds in this environment (which includes BK) need to be aware that we are buying into one of the greatest financial bubbles of all time. There is money to be made, but one ear MUST be listening for signs that the song is about to end.</p>
<p>Courtesy of <a href="http://tickerdistrict.com/2016/06/15/bk-bonds-are-housing-all-over-again/" target="_blank">TickerDistrict</a></p>
</div>Why "Tobins Q" Ratio Should Have You Concernedhttp://stockbuz.ning.com/articles/why-tobins-q-ratio-should-have-you-concerned2016-05-07T21:37:49.000Z2016-05-07T21:37:49.000ZStockBuzhttp://stockbuz.ning.com/members/1t2xbcvddkrir<div><p><a target="_self" href="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1291310?profile=original"><img class="align-full" src="http://storage.ning.com/topology/rest/1.0/file/get/1291310?profile=RESIZE_1024x1024" width="750"></a>After writing “<a href="https://www.thefelderreport.com/2016/04/12/heres-the-perfect-metaphor-for-fed-policy/">Here’s The Perfect Metaphor For Recent Fed Policy</a>,” I had to pick up a copy of <a href="http://amzn.to/1Tt8VTd"><em>The Dao of Capital</em></a>. Mark Spitznagel just has a unique way of looking at the markets that really resonates with me.</p>
<p>One thing that really jumped out at me while reading it was Spitznagel’s research regarding Tobin’s Q, (though he calls it, “The Misesian Stationarity Index”). It struck me for two reasons. First, I haven’t seen much research like this elsewhere and second, the opinions I have seen regarding it are all of a dismissive nature.</p>
<p>Just Google “Tobin’s Q” and you’ll find all sorts of pieces proclaiming, ‘Don’t worry about Tobin’s Q,’ and, ‘Tobin’s Q is not an effective way to time the market,’ etc. Actually, both of these sentiments are incorrect.</p>
<p>Spitznagel’s research published in the book shows investors should be worried about the extreme level of Tobin’s Q today for the simple fact that is a very good way to time the market.</p>
<p>But before I get into that I should probably explain what the ratio is. It’s pretty simple, really; the Q-Ratio is just the total value of the stock market (numerator) relative to the total net worth of the companies that comprise it (denominator). The data is provided quarterly by the Fed.</p>
<p>When the Q-Ratio is very low, stocks, as a group, are inexpensive relative to their replacement cost. Conversely, when the ratio is very high, stocks are relatively expensive in this regard.</p>
<p>Critics have suggested this way of thinking about the stock market is outdated. In other words, “<a href="https://www.thefelderreport.com/2015/03/23/im-hearing-a-lot-of-smart-people-use-the-four-most-dangerous-words-in-investing-these-days/">this time is different</a>.” And even if they admit that comparing equity valuations to net worth has some value they insist that value does not include timing the market.</p>
<p>However, Spitznagel shows that when you separate the historical record of the ratio into quartiles and compare forward returns to the risk-free rate, stocks have performed very poorly after very high q-ratio readings. They also performed very well after very low q-ratio readings. Once again, it turns out that, “<a href="https://www.thefelderreport.com/2016/01/21/is-it-time-to-buy-stocks-not-if-youre-a-long-term-investor/">the price you pay determines your rate of return</a>,” is validated by the data.</p>
<p><a href="https://i2.wp.com/www.thefelderreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Returns.jpeg?ssl=1"><img class="aligncenter size-large wp-image-10549" src="https://i2.wp.com/www.thefelderreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Returns.jpeg?zoom=1.5&resize=696%2C531&ssl=1" alt="Returns" height="531" width="696"></a></p>
<p>Additionally, when the Q-Ratio has been very high, as it is today, the size of the subsequent drawdowns were much larger than those following low readings in the ratio. In other words, when stocks become largely very expensive, as they are today (see the chart at the top of this post) we should come to expect large losses.</p>
<p><a href="https://i2.wp.com/www.thefelderreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Drawdowns.jpg?ssl=1"><img class="aligncenter size-large wp-image-10550" src="https://i2.wp.com/www.thefelderreport.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/05/Drawdowns.jpg?zoom=1.5&resize=696%2C517&ssl=1" alt="Drawdowns" height="517" width="696"></a></p>
<p>So if you care about forward returns relative to potential drawdowns, the Q-Ratio is something you probably want to pay very close attention to. Clearly, it has great value in determining this reward-to-risk ratio that is critical to the <a href="https://www.thefelderreport.com/2016/01/25/2-questions-to-ask-yourself-if-youre-worried-about-your-investments-right-now/">investment process</a>. And, like <a href="https://www.thefelderreport.com/2016/03/11/this-is-still-the-worst-possible-environment-for-stock-market-investors/">other measures</a>, the Q-Ratio is currently suggesting investors are taking a great deal of risk for very little in the way of potential reward.</p>
<p>How the Q-Ratio comes to be so skewed is different topic altogether and something you’ll learn in reading the book. But <a href="https://www.thefelderreport.com/2016/01/05/if-youve-been-wondering-whats-driven-the-recent-bull-market-in-stocks/">here’s a hint</a>. And if you need further incentive to <a href="http://amzn.to/1WIF9yT">pick up a copy</a>, Spitznagel also includes a couple of simple strategies built around the Q-Ratio that handily beat a buy-and-hold approach.</p>
<p>Courtesy of <a href="https://www.thefelderreport.com/2016/05/04/why-tobins-q-should-make-you-more-cautious-towards-the-stock-market-today/" target="_blank">TheFelderReport</a></p></div>The Fiscal Cliff Doesn't Matterhttp://stockbuz.ning.com/articles/fiscal-cliff-doesn-t-matter-reprint-from-the-brooklyn-investor2012-12-01T13:00:00.000Z2012-12-01T13:00:00.000ZHoney Badger(Drewski)http://stockbuz.ning.com/members/DrewNShingler<div><p>So the markets now are driven by the fiscal cliff. What will happen? If they don't do something, the markets will plunge. If they come to some sort of agreement, the Dow would be up 1,000 points. <br/> <br/> Nobody wants to be long on a failure to come up with a solution, and nobody wants to miss the boat on a 1,000 point Dow rally. OK, 1,000 points is not much. Maybe I should say 2,000 points. <br/> <br/> In any case, this reminds me of a recent Howard Marks interview where he talked about the European situation. He says there are three things he can say for certain about the situation:<br/></p><ol><li>He doesn't know what will happen in Europe</li><li>Nobody knows what is going to happen in Europe</li><li>If you ask an expert what they think will happen and take their advice, it would be a mistake.</li></ol><p><br/> So to apply this to the current situation:</p><ol><li>I have no idea what will happen in Washington with the fiscal cliff</li><li>Nobody knows what will happen in Washington with the fiscal cliff</li><li>If you ask an expert what they think will happen and take their advice, you are making a mistake.</li></ol><p>Of course, ths fiscal cliff matters in many ways. But what I am talking about is within the context of investing for the long term. <br/> <br/> If you believe that the U.S. and the world is drowning in debt and the Fed is out of silver bullets and the economy is peaking out and won't recover for years to come, then you shouldn't be invested in the stock market fiscal cliff or not. <br/> <br/> If you believe that the U.S. and the world will eventually recover and be fine (maybe not as 'hot' as back in 2007, but some growth and stability), then you should be invested in businesses you like at reasonable prices fiscal cliff or not. <br/> <br/> Here are some things you might want to think about:</p><ul><li>Selling stocks now because you are worried about the fiscal cliff is a mistake. This is not a rational decision; it is driven by emotion (fear). And emotions should never drive investment decisions.</li><li>Buying stocks now because you think the fiscal cliff will be resolved is a mistake. This is not investing; that's speculating. Nobody knows what will happen with the fiscal cliff. Betting on single event outcomes is speculating, not investing. (One should invest in businesses or situations because they are priced right etc...) Betting on single outcomes if the odds are reasonably calculable and the stock is priced or mispriced accordingly, that's different.</li><li>Shorting stocks or hedging against the fiscal cliff is also a mistake as it is not too different from selling your stocks out of fear (although hedging may be tax efficient as you don't have to realize capital gains like you do when you sell out longs). This may seem 'prudent' and responsible, but it's still speculating. Nobody ever knows when the markets go up or down. Hedging or buying puts in anticipation of a sell-off, to me, seems more like speculating than rational investment behavior. </li></ul><p>...which leads me to the something that I thought about that is related to Buffett's frequent comments about not selling a good business you own just because of what is in the headlines. </p><p> </p><p><strong><u>Why People Make Money in Real Estate</u></strong><br/> OK, so this title seems odd given that we are trying to recover from the biggest real estate bubble/collapse in history. Real estate has a history of big booms and busts, and there have been big real estate bankruptcies (Reichmann, Trump etc...) not to mention the disaster that is Japan and the most recent U.S. real estate bust. <br/> <br/> But on the other hand, why is it that so often the biggest gain that many people have ever made in their lives have been in real estate? (I know tons have been lost in real estate too)<br/> <br/> Just thinking about family, relatives and friends (very small sample size, but...), it seems that the biggest winner has been their house or some other property, and not a stock. I don't live in Omaha so I don't know anyone in person that has owned Berkshire Hathaway since the 1970s. <br/> <br/> I have always noticed this and thought about it but never really expressed it out loud. <br/> <br/> There are a lot of reasons for this, of course. Your primary residence is a big asset; if there is inflation, of course it's going to be your biggest winner. Tax-incentivized leverage also helps. Nobody is going to take out a 20% down loan and spend a good portion of their disposable income paying interest/principle on a stock investment. <br/> <br/> But for me, what I often thought about was the illiquidity of the house. This is why individuals were able to do so well in real estate over time while they get clobbered in stocks. <br/> <br/> Check this out. Compared to stocks, in real estate:</p><ul><li>You can't get a quote on your house every day. You can't look up the price of your house on Yahoo Finance. OK, you can Zillow it, but it's not the same as seeing a firm bid and offer that is hittable instantly.</li><li>The evening news doesn't start by telling you that your house price was marked down by 2% that day due to some event that happened in Europe, or because of what some politician in Washington said.</li><li>You can't push some buttons on your iPhone and liquidate your house in less than five seconds.</li><li>Pundits are not on TV, the internet or in magazines telling you every minute of the day to sell your house and buy the one across the street because it will go up more, or tell you to sell your house because it will go down because of some fiscal cliff, canyon, valley or whatever...</li><li>People don't talk about how much their house went up at cocktail parties (well, this did happen during the housing bubble) and tell you to buy a house next to theirs (unless you are so wealthy that you buy and sell homes like people buy and sell stocks).</li><li>Financial Advisors don't tell you to sell some of your house and put more in bonds as the economic outlook isn't as good as it was a few months ago.</li><li>People don't pound the table and tell you to sell your house because it has been raining in your neighborhood for the last five out of seven days.</li><li>People don't tell you to sell your house because it is worth 10% less than it was last week and it may go down more. Or because your house value, as of yesterday, is now below the 200-day moving average.</li><li>You don't have some crazy guy on CNBC every day waving his arms around spitting into the camera telling you to sell your house and buy the one across the street one day and then doing the exact opposite the very next day. But I already said this in bullet point three, but I thought it's important enough to say it again.</li><li>Most people can only afford to own one or two houses at a time, so each purchase is done very, very carefully (like the Buffett 20-hole punch card*; only most people have a 2-hole punch card). They spend days, weeks, months and even years looking and researching their house before they buy as it is a huge commitment (unlike people buying 100 shares "for fun" just in case someone's 'tip' proves correct. Many people can afford to do this very often; so often as to build up a really crappy portfolio of stocks they know nothing about).</li></ul><p>Anyway, we can go on and on with this list. Surely, there are some negatives too. <br/> <br/> But my point is that many people have done really well in real estate over a long period of time, but it's not so common to hear the same about stocks. And that's because of the curse of liquidity. I think liquidity is actually a good thing, of course. But it can have it's drawbacks. When it's right there at your fingertips, it's hard not to want to do something. And everyone around you including the professionals are constantly telling you to do something! <br/> <br/> I was stunned when a "professional" investor on CNBC was telling people with a straight face that you can't ignore this stuff (fiscal cliff); this stuff is very important and it will move markets. Well, if you are a professional fund manager being evaluated on a daily, weekly and monthly basis, I guess he is right; you can't ignore this stuff. But if he thinks people can trade in and out based on what is going on in Washington, I think he's nuts. <br/> <br/> Anyway, with the fiscal cliff approaching, everybody talks about what to do with the stock portfolios, but nobody ever talks about what to do with their houses (OK, I admit some people must be thinking about it and I'm sure personal finance magazines, websites and blogs probably do consider that too as they would make good 'filler' content). <br/> <br/> But no real rational person is going to buy or sell their house on this issue. And that's what Buffett keeps saying about stocks. You have to look at it like a business (or a house). <br/> <br/> What businesses are thinking about selling out because of fears of the fiscal cliff? If you own and run a profitable restaurant at a great location, why would you sell just because of this near term issue? If you love your house, why would you sell just because of this? <br/> <br/> <strong><u>So What's Going to Happen?</u></strong><br/> Well, I said I have no idea and nobody really knows. Anyone who claims to know has something to sell you. <br/> <br/> Having said that, this is a blog and we are allowed to say anything we want. So if I had to guess, my guess is that they go to the very end of the line, the market plunges, people freak out and they come to some sort of kick-the-can-down-the-road agreement. <br/> <br/> You know at the end of the day they will come to some agreement. The only question is when it will happen and how far the market has to go down to convince Washington that something has to happen. <br/> <br/> It's just like what happened with TARP. First, they said "no", the market plunged 700+ points (or whatever it was) and they all suddenly rushed in, "where do I sign?!". <br/> <br/> This doesn't mean that's the way it's going to go this time around. It's just my guess. <br/> <br/> To do anything based on that scenario (buy puts, sell out with the intent of getting back in cheaper later etc...) is pure speculation so don't do it. <br/> <br/> Ignore all this noise.<br/> <br/> <br/> <strong><u>*Buffett's 20-hole Punch Card</u></strong><br/> Value investors know what this is, but I realize this blog is read by a wide range of people. For those who don't know what the 20-hole punch card idea is, it's Buffett's way of telling students to choose investments carefully. In a lifetime, people will find only very few really good ideas. And having just a few very good ideas is going to be enough to get very rich. <br/> <br/> So instead of just buying stocks left and right promiscuously (as many novices tend to do), do solid research, look hard and look for only the best ideas. When that is found, then invest big in the idea and try to go on to the next one. And invest as if you only have 20 times you are allowed to invest. Once you invest in one thing, one hole in the punchcard will be punched out. <br/> <br/> This will make you think very carefully about what you buy as you can't afford to make too many mistakes. <br/> <br/> This also reminds me of Peter Lynch's comment that he is baffled that people spend more time researching and shopping for a refrigerator or car than they do a stock even when their stock investment is much larger than their fridge or car. <br/> <br/> Going back to my house argument, if people did as much work on stocks they buy as they did shopping for a house, more people would do better. <br/> <br/> Even if they did, though, since this is not Lake Wobegan, we can't all become better than average investors. <br/> <br/></p><p>[<em>Reprinted from the Brooklyn Investor Blog - post from kk.</em> <a rel="nofollow" href="http://brooklyninvestor.blogspot.com/">http://brooklyninvestor.blogspot.com/]</a></p><p> </p><p>Note from Da Badger - I considered writing a blog covering the same material, but found this recently. He/she said it better than I ever could. Badger out.....</p></div>