Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
From MARK HULBERT about Bob Brinker
http://cbs.marketwatch.com/news/story.asp?guid={845D4009-9B10-4B80-9B38-B47F0163EFA3}&siteid=mkt...
Hot hands are bullish
By Mark Hulbert, CBS.MarketWatch.com
Last Update: 12:01 AM ET March 1, 2004
ANNANDALE, Va. (CBS.MW) - I've got some good news, for a change.
HULBERT FINANCIAL DIGEST
Order your copy of the HFD Monthly Newsletter
Search the HFD database with Hulbert Interactive
Get a Profile of any newsletter tracked by HFD.
Discover the best performers with HFD Honor Roll.
From a select group of five top-performing market timers, three currently are fully invested, and two are partially invested. Their average equity exposure is 84 percent.
Before discussing their specific market forecasts, let me review how I selected them.
The first criterion I used takes advantage of the fast-approaching one-year anniversary of the market low that was recorded just prior to the beginning of the Iraqi war. I selected those newsletters that have had a significantly higher equity exposure in the period since then than over the 12 months prior.
In other words, which market timers correctly anticipated that the last 12 months would be a lot more bullish than the previous 12?
The second criterion focused on the stock market's top in March 2000: Of the timers that satisfied my first criterion, how many had a significantly lower exposure over the 12 months following that market top than over the 12 months prior?
Not surprisingly, not very many newsletters satisfied both these criteria. But I didn't stop there.
My third and final criterion was that a timer needed to have beaten the market over the last five years on a risk-adjusted basis.
The five newsletters that satisfied all three criteria are listed alphabetically in the accompanying table, along with their recommended equity exposures as of the end of February.
Newsletter Recommended Equity Exposure at the end of February
All Star Fund Trader 100%
Bob Brinker's Marketimer 100%
Dennis Slothower's On The Money 29%
Investor's Guide to Closed-End Funds 42%
Medical Technology Stock Letter 151%
Here's what each of these timers currently is saying about the stock market.
All Star Fund Trader
Editor Ron Rowland recently turned to the Peter Sellers movie "Being There" to describe his market outlook: "We're still in a bull market, and to paraphrase Peter Sellers... 'we like to watch.'"
And Rowland has been watching since last May, when he moved from the 0 percent position he had maintained for most of the previous year. He moved first to a 50 percent invested position, and in June became fully invested.
To be sure, there are no guarantees that Rowland will remain fully invested during March, or the rest of the year, for that matter. He notes that the major market averages largely remain in a sideways trading pattern, and that "the market has some work to do before it can break out" of that pattern.
On the other side of the coin, however, Rowland thinks it is positive that the market was able to find support in late February, thus ending what to some had looked like the beginning of a much bigger correction.
For now, Rowland remains fully invested.
Bob Brinker's Marketimer
Of the five timers that made my list, Brinker's market-timing calls probably came closest to catching the precise tops and bottoms. His buy signal a year ago came on March 12, just a day after the March 11 close of the Dow Jones Industrials Average ($INDU: news, chart, profile) at 7524, which was its low for 2003.
And his previous sell signal came on Jan. 10, 2000, only slightly more than two months prior to the market's high that occurred in mid-March.
Before proceeding to discuss what Brinker is now saying, I need to say a few words to the several thousand of you who e-mailed me the last time I said something nice about Brinker.
Yes, I know all about Brinker's October 2000 forecast of a bear market rally and his disastrous recommendation to purchase the Nasdaq 100 Trust (QQQ: news, chart, profile), which at that time was trading around $80.
But for the several years that Brinker stood behind this recommendation, he consistently chose not to make this trade a formal part of his model portfolios. Note carefully that this wasn't an after-the-fact decision on his part, but made before he knew whether the trade would be profitable.
Because the Hulbert Financial Digest takes a rigorously empirical approach to performance monitoring, his HFD ratings -- which are based on his model portfolios -- did not suffer from this QQQ trade.
If you disagree with how the HFD dealt with Brinker's advice, simply ignore this section of my column -- and leave my long suffering e-mail inbox alone.
Brinker remains on his March 12, 2003, buy signal. He regards "the risk of a recession this year as essentially zero," because of which "corporate earnings prospects remain excellent."
Brinker acknowledges, however, that bullish sentiment among investors is very high right now. He therefore suggests "that subscribers... avoid chasing stock market rallies when adding new monies to equity positions... We believe the best strategy for those seeking to add to equity holdings is to take a dollar-cost-average approach."
Dennis Slothower's On The Money
Slothower is least bullish of my group of five timers.
Among the several factors that concern Slothower, one is recent weakness in the Nasdaq Composite index ($COMPQ: news, chart, profile). "When the Nasdaq trails [the rest of the market] or leads downward, the trend is normally bearish and portends a down market."
Slothower is also concerned that sentiment is too bullish: "Now that everyone in the marketplace has been willing to take on risk, it is evident that risk is high and it is time to wait on the sidelines."
Lest you believe that Slothower has turned into a perma-bear, he stresses that the correction he thinks the market is in right now "will establish a base of promising returns for the remainder of the year."
Investors Guide to Closed-End Funds
Editor Thomas Herzfeld gave the rationale in the January issue of his newsletter for why he is not fully invested: "After a strong year..., we are a little nervous going forward. Concerns of a terrorist threat overhang the market. Frankly, we are challenged about whether to position our accounts for a major disaster, which of course, we hope will never occur. But if it were to happen, we would no doubt want to have ready cash to buy into a sell off."
Medical Technology Stock Letter
The appearance of this newsletter in my gang of five might surprise you, since editor John McCamant focuses primarily on the biotech and medical technology sectors.
But it also is true that you would have beaten the market over the past five years by buying and selling an S&P 500 index fund using the recommended equity exposures in his model portfolios of medical technology stocks.
And, just as already mentioned in the case of Brinker's newsletter, the Hulbert Financial Digest takes a rigorously empirical approach to determining which newsletters satisfy various performance criteria.
McCamant is bullish. He views recent market weakness "as part of a healthy correction. We are reassured by some of the earnings that have been reported, which have easily exceeded estimates, and the continued signs of strong economic growth... The results for the first quarter will be helped by comparisons with a weak first quarter last year. The combination of monetary and fiscal stimulus gives the economy a powerful tailwind. With this positive environment, it continues to be a time to add to attractive stocks on their periodic dips."
New feature: Hulbert Interactive
A brand new CBS MarketWatch feature lets you research stocks and mutual funds using the same in-depth data we use: The Hulbert Financial Digest database. After 20 years of compiling this data, we're excited to now be able to share it with you. Hulbert Interactive
Editor's note: The most recent edition of the Hulbert Financial Digest is now available by e-mail or regular mail. Highlights this month include:
Too many people jumping on the same stock? Maybe they know something you don't.
Most- and least-popular stocks and funds
Profiles of Value Line Investment Survey, The Chartist, Investment Quality Trends, and MPT Review
For more information or to subscribe to the Hulbert Financial Digest, click here.
Mark Hulbert is the founder of Hulbert Financial Digest in Annandale, Va. He has been tracking the advice of more than 160 financial newsletters since 1980.
© 1997-2004 MarketWatch.com, Inc. All rights reserved. Disclaimer. See our Privacy Policy - updated 4/3/03.
CBS and the CBS "eye device" are registered trademarks of CBS Broadcasting, Inc.
Intraday data provided by Comstock, a division of Interactive Data Corp. and subject to terms of use.
Historical and current end-of-day data provided by FT Interactive Data.
Intraday data delayed 15 minutes for Nasdaq, and 20 minutes for other exchanges.
SEHK intraday data is provided by Comstock and is at least 60-minutes delayed.
All quotes are in local exchange time.
Question on QQQ trades.
Bob Brinker's latest newsletter has QQQ position still long.
Does any one know if this QQQ position has remained in
his newsletter since he first bought QQQ in 2000 ?
Or did it get posted there in Mar 2003?
Thanks in advance
SURVEY RESULTS: Do you currently read Brinker Newsletter?
NO = 9
YES = 6
No Answer = 1
Total = 16
"Because that was my interest."
Ok, if that makes you feel more important,
but it is apparent that noone else shares
your interest here. I wonder why? Good-bye,
and keep doing what interests you and nobody
else.
Stockalot
Matt(IHUB) says only one vote per person.
I guess only you and I are reading this board(g)
Looks like no one cares about Bob Brinker.
Looks like you are back to posting to yourself. If I were you I would vote early and often....nobody would know and nobody would care. Good luck.
***Do you currently read Bob Brinker's Newsletter?***
Either buy it or read it at the local library.
See SURVEY below:
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/board_surveymenu.asp?board_id=1832
Stockalot
Welcome to IHUB.
Post what ever you want as long as you follow IHUB rules.
You may want to read the Jail Board
see #board-38
Having watched the Silicon Investor threads, it would seem that almost none of the former staunch Brinker supporters took his advice to go all in back in March 03.
Did you take Brinker's advice to move the 1/3 or more of a portfolio into the Market on March 11, 2003? Who has posted then or in the subsequent time that they did so that has a history of following Brinker?
It would stand to reason it seems to establish if anybody took the March advice as given, before asking if they are going to continue acting on it.
You wrote
"Otherwise why compare the 2?"
Because that was my interest.
>> was just trying to determine if one should buy
Kirk's newsletter of use Brinker's buy and sells
with the SMH(Holder)
OK, now I see. Are you going to change the forum title to Kirk and Bob Brinker Data in that case? Otherwise why compare the 2?
I was just trying to determine if one should buy
Kirk's newsletter of use Brinker's buy and sells
with the SMH(Holder)
So far Brinker's call would have resulted in
more money.
SMH vs newsletter for 2003 ?
http://www.geocities.com/kirk54345/
>>Looks like SMH is up about 73 % since his buy call.
When did Bob say to buy SMH? Why are you using this as a standard to measure Bob's performance? It does not make sense.
Why not use a stock like CACS that went up 3200%, and make Bob even look better?
Steve
What you need to do is create a board on IHUB and start your
own survey. That way to get exactly what you want(g)
What kind of survey is that? You need more choices. For starters how about the smart move. Stay long after bob issues a sell call.
Take Bob Brinker Survey.
Are you going to stay long until Bob Brinker gives SELL ?
http://www.investorshub.com/boards/board_surveymenu.asp?board_id=1832
Larry: Has me made a major signal since 3/03?
Have not updated Bob Brinker in awhile
Here is Bob Brinker's Mar Buy using SMH
Looks like SMH is up about 73 % since his buy call.
http://www.geocities.com/geode000/
Bob is old school.
Bob was born in the eighties ...
during the middle of an awesome bull market.
choad
Sorry.
I do not listen to Bob Brinker's radio show.
Every show seems 'same ole same ole'
Does anyone keep stats on how often Brinker has hosted his own show this year? My gut feeling is approx. 70%.It seems Bob is not having very much fun anymore,maybe he should take his critical mass and go home.
The base rate for I-Bonds after November 1 has remained at 1.1%, so there was no advantage to locking in the rate.
The inflation adjustment for all I-Bonds has declined to 1.08%, for a total of what the Treasury claims is 2.19%.
The inflation adjustment plus 1.1% base rate for this period is down significantly from the previous total of 4.66%.
Good Stuff David
There is a good discussion of Brinker over awt Suite101.
You should read this one from bernardo on market timing.
http://www.suite101.com/discussion.cfm/investing/95456/1143-1152#message_8
I'd suggest you put it in your next newsletter.
For those interested in Bob Brinker's Moneytalk, here is an excerpt from my newsletter.
Excerpt from David Korn's Stock Market Commentary, Interpretation of Moneytalk (Bob Brinker Host), Financial Education, Helpful Links, Guest Editorials and Special Alert E-mail Service.
BOB BRINKER PREDICTS NEW I-BOND RATE WILL BE LOWER
Caller: How much do the I-Bonds pay? Bob noted that current holders of I-bonds during the 6-month period ending October 31st, are earning an annualized rate of 4.66%. If you buy them prior to November 1, 2003, you will get a base rate of 1.1% plus the annualized inflation rate which totals 4.66%. On November 1, 2003, the Treasury will revisit the base rate and Bob projects that the base rate will either stay the same, or decline. Bob said he thinks the chances of the Treasury raising the base rate are zero. With respect to the inflation component, Bob thinks that will be lowered on November 1st. Accordingly, when the new rate gets issued on November 1st, Bob said he expects the new rate to be lower than 4.66%. If you buy it by October 31, you lock in the 1.1% base rate for up to 30 years. The inflation component is subject to change every six months. Bob noted that when the I-Bonds first came out, they were paying a fixed rate of over 3% for 30 years which shows you how off base the Treasury was thinking at that time. Bob said he still likes the I-Bonds if you are looking for inflation protection and have a conservative objective.
Editorial Comment "EC": I agree with Bob's view that the total I-Bond rate will probably be lower effective November 1st. Thus, if you want to purchase I-Bonds before November 1st, you have about 6 weeks left. On a related note, I e-mailed the Treasury to verify that for 2003 individuals can invest $60,000 in I-Bonds. I received a prompt e-mail reply confirming that this was accurate provided you invest up to $30,000 in paper I-Bonds, and the other $30,000 in electronic I-Bonds through Treasury Direct:
http://tinyurl.com/l2rw
Caller: This caller noted that if you use a credit card to purchase I-Bonds online, you can get a 1% rebate depending upon your credit card. That means, if a husband and wife team purchased $30,000 each, you could get a $600 rebate. Bob said he heard this option will not be available next year.
EC: I suppose you could also get airline miles if you used certain credit cards to purchase I-Bonds. Just another benefit to purchasing I-Bonds!
REBALANCING A PORTFOLIO FOR YOUR OPTIMUM ASSET ALLOCATION
Caller: This couple is in their late 30s to early 40s, and just subscribed to Bob's newsletter. They need to know how to go about rebalancing their portfolio which is all in stocks right now. Bob said the first thing they need to decide, is what their asset allocation should be. Bob said in his opinion, based on their age bracket, they could have 70-75% of their assets dedicated to the stock market during "favorable periods" and 25-30% in fixed income securities. Since they were 100% invested, all they needed to do was move about 25% into the fixed income area. Bob said if it were him, he would try to do that in tax-deferred accounts so that all of the income they earned would be deferred all the way out to retirement. In other wards, try to make the asset allocation changes in the tax-deferred accounts, rather than the personal accounts. The caller then asked whether they should get to the 25% fixed income by relegating new money to fixed income. Bob said that was one possibility, or they could do a combination new money, and selling some equities now.
EC: One of my subscribers recently asked me if I had a link to a good synopsis of the concept of asset allocation. Here is a good one-page primer on asset allocation:
http://tinyurl.com/nd7t
Caller: This caller has about 8-10 years until retirement, and isn't sure what her asset allocation should be. Bob said if you are close to retirement or in retirement a balanced approach is a good start for your asset allocation. A "balanced approach" means that you have 50% of your assets in stocks and 50% in fixed income. If you have reached critical mass (i.e. have enough money such that you never have to work again), there is no need to place your entire portfolio at risk. If you are 8-10 years from retirement, Bob said he would be comfortable having 2/3rds of your holdings in stocks, and 1/3rd in fixed income, during a positive market environment.
EC: Since Bob would presumably view today's market as a "positive market environment" you could have as much as 66% of your asset allocation in equities if you are 8-10 years away from retirement and want to follow Bob's guidelines.
Brinker Comment: In determining your asset allocation, you have to keep in mind your risk tolerance. Bob referred to a caller who said she was totally unnerved by the stock market. Bob noted that emotions should not play a part in your investment strategy. If you invest in stocks emotionally, that is a ticket to losses. Why? Because emotional investors tend to sell on weakness, and buy on strength.
Caller: This caller has all of his 401(k) plan invested in a fixed income security that is generating a 6.86% annual rate of return. Should he switch some of it over to equities? Bob asked the caller if he held equity holding outside the retirement plan, which the caller said he did. In response, Bob noted that you calculate your asset allocation by taking into consideration ALL of your holdings, not just one particular account. In addition, Bob noted that if you can make 6.8% guaranteed in a fixed income account, keeping it in a tax-deferred account would be the perfect situation.
EC: Here are links to three sites that have asset allocation calculators which can help you decide how to allocate your investment assets among stocks, bonds and cash:
http://www.smartmoney.com/oneasset/
http://www.forbes.com/tools/calculator/asset_alloc.jhtml
http://tinyurl.com/nd83
Caller: This caller cashed in a life insurance policy, and put the bulk of her money into a money market account, but wants to get to her proper asset allocation. Bob, of course, recommends a diversified portfolio and to the extent you are going to invest in the equity market, Bob recommends using a dollar cost averaging approach. HOWEVER, there is still risk in that approach, which Bob pointed out he has said on numerous occasions. Bob cautioned people who think that dollar cost averaging carries no risk, when in fact it does, depending upon what kind of market environment you get into. Bob concluded this call by saying that the dollar cost averaging approach is well-grounded, but does entail risk.
EC: I was waiting for this comment from Bob which confirms that his stance toward new money has not changed. Bob continues to recommend dollar cost averaging new money into the stock market, although today, he didn't use the phrase "on market weakness" which may have just been an oversight on his part. Trust me, if the market declines precipitously, Bob will say that he had recommended dollar cost averaging on weakness! More importantly, the fact that he continues to stress the risks of this approach implies that he believes there is a chance (even a small one) that the market could correct significantly at any given time.
GOLD AND OTHER PRECIOUS METALS
Caller: What is your opinion on gold as an investment right now? Bob thinks that what you are seeing with respect to the gold is speculation by traders who think that inflation will get out of control which so far hasn't happened. In addition, the gold bugs are betting on geopolitical events that would threaten the currency. This could come in the form of a major terrorist attack, or a nuclear holocaust involving India/Pakistan or North Korea. Any type of chaotic event would be good for gold. By in large, Bob thinks gold remains a speculative vehicle.
EC: Another caller this weekend told Bob that she was afraid of investing in stocks out of fear that there would be another major terrorist attack on U.S. soil. I can certainly empathize with this fear. In the wake of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, the Dow declined from 9.605.50 to 8,235.80 in the five trading days the market was opened after the attack. Bob has previously stated that his stock market timing model does not factor in the threat of a terrorist attack; however, he has acknowledged that the risk of terrorism is now a component of equity investing that we all have to live with.
Caller: This caller wants to invest in a gold mutual fund. Bob said there are dozens of such funds, some of which are even no load funds. The caller asked Bob for a recommendation, but Bob didn't know any and recommended that the caller refer to Morningstar to find a fund.
EC: The Fidelity Select Gold Fund (FSAGX) is perhaps the largest gold mutual fund. Other gold mutual funds include The Midas Fund (MIDSX), Tocqueville Gold (TGLDX), and Gabellie Gold (GOLDX). Compare these funds to each other at the following link:
http://cbs.marketwatch.com/tools/mutualfunds/fundcomparison.asp
Caller: This caller believes that gold is a worthwhile investment at this juncture due the fact that he thinks we will have more problems with Iraq. In addition, he thinks the situation in Israel is going to escalate, and that the chances of a terrorist attack on U.S. soil are high. Bob gave the caller credit for at least justifying his position in gold. However, Bob noted that there is a counter-argument to the caller's position. For example, if we do have more terrorism and the like, that could be counter-productive to economic growth which would be directly contrary to the notion of inflation coming back which typically is the basis for a fundamental rise in gold prices. Bottom line? Bob isn't sure that gold would do well even if the caller was right.
EC: John Hathaway, manager of the Tocqueville Gold fund (TGLDX), thinks that the case for gold transcends Iraq and the that "the overriding driver of money into gold is the loss of confidence in financial assets." Check out the article in which he made those comments entitled, "Gold Ringer - Fund manager says the case for gold transcends Iraq":
http://tinyurl.com/cpc6
Caller: Do you have any thoughts on silver as an investment? Bob said he doesn't really follow silver, and asked the caller what price it is trading at. The caller noted that it is trading around $5.33 an ounce. Bob remarked that it seems as if silver has been trading in the $5 range forever, and he has no recommendation on it.
EC: Gold, silver and other so-called "hard" assets have done exceptionally well since the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, being up around 25% since that time, compared to the Dow Jones Industrial Average which is about even since then. If you have never considered owning a precious metal or "hard asset" holding, you should at least know about their availability. I recommend an article written by Thom Calandra this weekend entitled, "Hard asset bugs keep the faith" which you can access at the following link:
http://tinyurl.com/nbik
S&P EQUAL WEIGHT INDEX
Caller: This caller heard about an equal weighted S&P 500 fund and wanted to know if Bob heard about it? Bob said he was aware of the fund which instead of being market cap weighted, is equal weighted. Bob noted that there really wasn't a track record yet to judge it. What we do know, is that if large amounts of money flowed into the smaller companies in the S&P 500 that should drive up the price. Bob didn't make a recommendation either way, and just said he was going to have to see how it played out.
EC: The S&P Equal Weight Index (EWI) will conduct its quarterly rebalancing at the close of business Friday, September 19, 2003. All stocks will be rebalanced to have an equal weight in the index. You can trade the S&P Equal Weight Index through the Rydex S&P Equal Weight Exchange Traded Fund which seeks investment results that correspond to the S&P Equal Weight Index. It trades under the ticker symbol, RSP and has an expense ratio of 0.4%.
NOTE: If you want a full copy of my newsletter, or learn how to subscribe to my service, e-mail me at: davidk555@earthlink.net
- David Korn,
Editor, http://www.BeginInvesting.com/
Good catch on the March 7, 1998 issue. At that time he switched Microsoft and Vodaphone to 4% based on market value, while leaving other stocks on a cost basis.
I notice that in that issue he also mentioned the entry point on MSFT as a split-adjusted $4 in 1990. There have been two 2:1 splits since March of 1998, so that means the entry point was at a split-adjusted $1 per share in today's terms. Apparently he forgot about one of the splits when he said $2 this weekend.
http://table.finance.yahoo.com/d?a=0&b=1&c=1998&d=7&e=4&f=2003&g=v&s=msf...
Richard, I think he first went from recommending Microsoft as 4% of cost to 4% of market value in the March, 1998 Marketimer.
Do you know when he first moved Microsoft from a buy to a hold?
Richard
(1)Thanks for the adjusted price on AMAT $6.27
(2)As stated before, I am going to ignore the 4% rule.
And let everyone figure that out for their own portfolio.
Yahoo Historical Quotes shows a split-adjusted price of $6.27 for AMAT on 9/22/1995:
http://table.finance.yahoo.com/d?a=8&b=1&c=1995&d=8&e=30&f=1995&g=d&s=am...
By the way, today I thought I heard Bob say that he first recommended MSFT at a split-adjusted $2 per share in 1990 (he didn't specify which month). This doesn't quite make sense, because the split-adjusted range for MSFT during 1990 was $0.58 to $1.13.
http://table.finance.yahoo.com/d?a=0&b=1&c=1990&d=11&e=31&f=1990&s=msft&...
I also heard him say that he switched to 4% by market value in the newsletter in the Fall of 1998. I looked it up and found the following statement in the October 8, 1998 issue: "We believe specific stock risk should be managed carefully by limiting individual stock holdings to no more than four percent of equities based on market value." The limitation in the previous issue did not mention market value. MSFT was trading in the split-adjusted $24 - $25 range in the first few trading days after the publication date. Depending on how close the individual subscriber was to the 4% guideline when this change was made, it could have resulted in 90% of the position being sold at that time. Since it's only in the mid-twenties five years later, this looks like it was a good move.
http://table.finance.yahoo.com/d?a=9&b=1&c=1998&d=9&e=31&f=1998&g=d&s=ms...
Bob Brinker Bought AMAT at 25.06 on 9/22/1995
Unable to get adjusted price on yahoo.
Will use 12.50 because I recall at least one split since then.
Have sent an email to AMAT investor's relations asking for
the split adjusted price of AMAT on 9/22/1995
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=4519762
UNPH sold at a profit.
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=3707213
STII now STII.PK
http://www.siliconinvestor.com/stocktalk/msg.gsp?msgid=3706289
Hi Larry. Bob Brinker has said the cyclical bull could last 1-3 years; however, I think he likes measuring it from his buy signal for "advertising" purposes, rather than the bear market bottom from which most market historians measure bear/bull markets. Here is an excerpt from my newsletter where Bob Brinker discussed this:
Excerpt from David Korn's Stock Market Commentary, Interpretation of Moneytalk (Bob Brinker Host), Financial Education, Helpful Links, Guest Editorials and Special Alert E-mail Service. Excerpt from June 1st Newsletter
HOW HIGH WILL THIS CYCLICAL BULL MARKET TAKE US?
Caller: This caller missed Bob Brinker's initial buy signal at around 800 in the S&P 500, but he did buy into the market when the S&P 500 was trading around 840. He heard someone say that the market might rise 25% from that the 800 level, and based on that, he is considering selling when the S&P 500 reaches 1000 because he thinks that is as high as this cyclical bull market might go. What do you think of that strategy? Bob said he will exit the market when his long term stock market timing model issues a sell signal. Bob said he estimates that a cyclical bull market has the potential to last 12 to 36 months. We are only 2-1/2 months into that time frame, so we have a ways to go. Sure, there will be pullbacks along the way, but Bob expects this cyclical bull market to last at least anywhere from 1 year up to 3 years. As the Moneytalk bumper music came on, Bob added a nugget that had Trekkies salivating across the country. Specifically, Bob said that he expects to see gains for this cyclical bull market "in excess" of 25%, with the possibility that those gains in excess of 25% could be "substantial."
EC: Ok, a few things here. First, Bob's comments indicate that Bob is not about to sell anytime soon, despite these dramatic gains. It looks like he is going to let the historical time frame for a cyclical bull market play out, before he decides to sell. That means, we have at least 7-1/2 months to go if it is a short cyclical bull market and up to 2 years and 7-1/2 months if it is a long cyclical bull market.
EC#2: Bob specifically mentioned to his audience to expect "pull backs." I try to stress that the market does not move in a straight line at least once a month in my newsletters, because when you follow the market day-to-day, or even week-by-week as you all do, you can easily get caught up in the momentum of the market and think the market will only keep going down, or as of late, that it will only keep going up. That has never been the case.
EC#3: One thing that I find very interesting about Bob's estimation of the time frame for the cyclical bull, is that he choose the closing level of 800 for the S&P 500 which occurred on May 11th as the beginning point for his 1-3 year estimation of how long it would last. Why did he choose this date, other than it was the day that he recommended becoming fully invested? It would seem that a market historian like daBrink would choose the ultimate bear market low which occurred on October 9, 2002 when the S&P 500 at 776.76 to measure the cyclical bull market.
EC#4: Consider this. Bob Brinker (and many others) have often referred to a bull market as lasting a minimum of 6 months which produced gains in excess of 20%. If you start from the all-time bear market closing lows, then we are already in the midst of a cyclical bear market that began almost 8 months ago. I am not making this up. All three indices have produced gains in excess of 20% during a period of time in excess of 6 months. I hand crunched the numbers myself tonight. Check it out:
Dow Jones Industrial Average:
October 9, 2002: 7,286.27
May 30, 2003: 8,850.26
Percentage Gain: Up 21.46%
S&P 500 Index:
October 9, 2002: 776.76
May 30, 2003: 963.59
Percentage Gain: Up 24.05%
Nasdaq Comp:
October 9, 2002: 1,114.11
May 30, 2003: 1,595.91
Percentage Gain: Up 43.24%
What's the importance of my data? Frankly, I am not sure yet. As you know, I don't always see eye-to-eye with daBrink, and I am pondering whether he is letting his ego get in the way of using the ultimate bear market bottom as the measuring point for the cyclical bull market, rather than the point in time that he chose to become fully invested. I will have to study this issue a little more. In the meantime, I at least wanted to provide you with the data.
If you would like to learn more about my newsletter service, simply e-mail me at:
davidk555@earthlink.net
or visit my website at
Website: http://www.BeginInvesting.com/
David
Didn't Brinker say this bull phase could last 9 to 18 months?
If one assumes the low was Oct 2002, even if his entry was
Mar 2003 then...
OCT=0
NOV=1
DEC=2
JAN=3
FEB=4
MAR=5
APR=6
MAY=7
JUN=8
JUL=9
That is 9 months, so Brinker could give a sell starting
in Aug 2003 ?
Some thing to think about.
Title Page has been updated to include "T"
Current loss is -83.44%
Larry, I did some more research to find an accurate date to track Bob's recommendation of AT&T.
I would use October 23, 1999 as the date of the recommendation. I would use a price of $131.83 which is where the stock closed at on October 22nd. There is no record of Bob ever saying he sold those shares.
My reasoning is based on my research into my newsletters from the fall of 1999! The synopsis of that research is that on October 23, 1999, Brinker said he liked AT&T at these levels for a long term investment. The stock closed at $131.83 on October 22, 1999 ($42.75 without accounting for the splits). A few months later on December 12, 1999 when AT&T was trading at $174.75 ($57 without adjustments), Bob reiterated that he would purchase AT&T at the levels he previously mentioned which would equate to the low $40s (or around $131 as referenced in his October 22, 1999 show.
- David Korn
Editor of David Korn's Stock Market Commentary, Interpretation of Moneytalk (Bob Brinker Host), Financial Education, Helpful Links, Guest Editorials and Special Alert E-mail Service.
E-mail: davidk555@earthlink.net
Website: http://www.BeginInvesting.com/
Time will tell who is the most honest person in this little mind game you people are playing.
Evidence proves that Brinker has covered his tracks, is totally non-commital and unwilling to answer any questions about his market decisions.
Kirk has always been straight up and honest about his dealings, whether it be in the market, or in other things in life. He will admit he has made a mistake, and will stand by the things he belives in
Steve,
I have known Kirk for more than 10 years and I have found he is totally honest.
I would not have stayed on his site, if he were a liar.
Time will prove Kirk is an honest person. I have known him since 1997 and found him to be a true gentleman. I urge all people to further investigate those ardent supporters of dabrink. You will very soon see they have ulterior motives. Don’t believe me check it out for yourself and decide.
Kirk
Your post #msg-1259110 has been sent to Matt for review.
It is important that I stay neutral on this.IMHO.
So you must pick the date and price of the buy.
In September, 1999 it hit the high $120s.
Sep-23-99 44.00 44.25 42.25 42.44 11,630,600 129.46
And it was trading in the 120s for a while in the fall of 1998
Dec-04-98 62.19 63.69 62.06 63.44 4,908,900 127.42
Dec-03-98 62.31 62.75 61.75 62.19 3,437,200 124.90
Dec-02-98 62.13 62.81 61.69 62.31 3,720,500 125.15
Dec-01-98 62.19 62.50 61.69 62.13 3,175,200 124.78
Nov-30-98 63.06 63.94 62.19 62.19 4,273,000 124.90
Really, I am giving Brinker the benefit of the doubt, since he was recommending the stock in the 40s (split-adjusted) which translates to a range of around $120-$150 I think.
A yahoo check shows T= 180.90 on 3/25/2000
So when did Bob Brinker buy T= 120 ?
Larry, I would add AT&T to your list of Brinker recommendations. Since you like numbers, I would give Bob the benefit of the doubt and use $120 (split-adjusted) as his recommendation price. The stock has obviously been decimated since his recommendation and like many other of his issues that go south, he often simply rides them down, never issuing a sell signal. (i.e. QQQ, TEFQX, etc.) Unfortunately, he usually stops discussing them on the show which I personally view as disheartening since we can all learn from our mistakes. Anyhow, for the people that think Brinker can do no wrong, please don't shoot the messenger. I report on Brinker's great calls as well as his bad ones. My goal (like Larry's) is to objectively report on Bob Brinker's record and the fact that my subscription base has continued to grow over the last 5 years I hope is a testament to that fact. Here is an excerpt from my newsletter which in part tracks Bob Brinker's Moneytalk on point:
Excerpt from David Korn's March 25, 2000 Newsletter
Caller #14: This caller wanted to know at what price Bob Brinker would consider buying AT&T shares? Mr. Brinker said he really liked AT&T when the stock was trading in the 120s (split-adjusted) and he pointed out to the caller that he spoke very favorably about AT&T on the program when it was trading at those levels. Since that time, the stock has had a good run. Bob noted that when the stock is trading in the 120s that is probably the best time to establish a position in AT&T.
UPDATED EC: On the date of that last call, AT&T was trading at $180.90 (split-adjusted). On the Monday after that call, AT&T actually closed at $185, not too far from its peak. From there, the stock basically cratered. As of today's close, shares are trading at $22.20 and it is a very different company now.
- David Korn
Editor of David Korn's Stock Market Commentary, Interpretation of Moneytalk (Bob Brinker Host), Financial Education, Helpful Links, Guest Editorials and Special Alert E-mail Service.
Website: http://www.BeginInvesting.com/
We have already taken that road.IMHO.
A number of those references in the title page use
TV appearances of Bob Brinker.
This board is a tool to under stand "How to use Bob Brinker
to make money" IMHO.
This requires getting all the info you can about the past.
Each reader of this board should be better prepared to handle
Bob Brinker's next Sell Signal as well as any stock or fund he writes or talks about..IMHO.
I'll take COLD FACTS over warm opinions any day(g)
If you want to include investments that he spoke favorably about on the radio or television, it seems to me that is up to you. Just bear in mind that it's a much tougher job than tracking newsletter advice, because he has spent so much time in the broadcast media, and there is no record of most of it before David started his service.
I don't know whether he bought GE or not. All I know is that he used to say that it was so diversified that it was like buying a mutual fund. I never heard of it being recommended in the newsletter.
Let's talk in general terms.
Are you saying that if Bob Brinker says buy ZYX on the radio,
that it does not count?
It sure does not count in his newsletter.IMHO.
It sure does not count in Hulbert Digest.IMHO.
But it sure counts on his total record.IMHO.
And can be discussed here.IMHO.
Hey! By the way, if Bush says any thing on the radio,
it sure will count on his total record too(g)
Did Bob Brinker ever say buy GE in his newsletter?
If you know?
Larry, this is what I was referring to when I mentioned "he gets a lot of calls on many stocks on Moneytalk." I recall many folks calling in, and Bob referring to "the 4% rule." But that in a well-diversified company, one could go above that rule by a little, especially if there are tax consequences. I think GE was one of those stocks, but in my book that hardly constitutes a recommendation for 5 million listeners to go put up to 10% of their equity portfolio in GE at the market open first thing monday morning.
Y'know?
LisaAu
Looks like there is a "GE" bump under the rug(g)
Update 6/9/09
I am looking for return data for the "Brinker Fixed Income Advisor." I have data from Mark Hulbert but nothing from the Brinkers
They don't publish a table of return data by year for either Marketimer or "Brinker Fixed Income Advisor" so I'd like to make one here. If you have the data, send it to me and I'll add it here.
2008 Data
Mark Hulbert says Brinker's "fixed income advisor" model portfolio #1 lost 21.7% last year, 2008.
Mark Hulbert says Brinker's "fixed income advisor" model portfolio #2 lost 11.5% last year, 2008.
Mark Hulbert says Brinker's "fixed income advisor" model portfolio #3 lost 5.2% last year, 2008.
Brinker's "Marketimer" model portfolio #1 lost 39.7% last year, 2008.
Brinker's "Marketimer" model portfolio #2 lost 37.4% last year, 2008.
Brinker's "Marketimer" model portfolio #3 lost 23.9% last year, 2008.
Vanguard's Total Bond fund made 5.1% last year, 2008
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/snapshot?FundId=0084&FundIntExt=INT#hist=tab%3A1a
Vanguard's Total Stock Market fund lost 37.0% last year, 2008
https://personal.vanguard.com/us/funds/snapshot?FundId=0085&FundIntExt=INT#hist=tab%3A1a
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |