At any one instant in time prices will tend to be set, as best the collective market can estimate, with 50-50 probability of a gain or loss.
A good example is US long dated treasury's. Some wouldn't touch them with a barge pole when interest rates are so low, but in being priced to around 4% current yield levels there's an equal chance of the yields declining to 2% - and the current price doubling as there is the yield rising to 8% and the price halving.
Over longer time periods, perhaps 5 or even 10 years out, you might predict that yields would be more likely to rise from current levels, but equally a Japanese investor might have thought exactly the same back in 1990 for their market and here they are 20+ years out still with low (or lower) yields.
AIM has a natural tendency to steer the weightings over time to appropriate levels. Neither the best, nor the worse. But in averaging down the middle overall it does OK and if you look back at the actual exposure amounts it did adjust to over time, likely it will be much the same as the VWave i.e. auto-aligns in an appropriate manner whilst cost averaging down the average cost of stock over time.
Few investors consistently correctly predict the future. Those that do achieve above average gains over longer time frames tend to either be lucky or have an element of competitive edge. Warren Buffett's choice of stock picks for example are often widely followed, but those followers fail to recognise his competitive edge of having access to twice the amount of his actual investment funds available at zero cost (insurance float where premiums are paid in and the funds sit there until claims are paid out). Under such conditions, achieving a 20% yearly average compared to everyone else's 10% is a given.
AI
