>>>>I didn't say anything about doubling returns. Perhaps you read the following sentence and thought it was referring to returns...
"The Daryanani study showed that an Opportunistic Rebalancing strategy more than doubled the calendar rebalancing benefits over a wide range of market conditions." <<<<
Yeah I guess that is what I saw. Like I said it doesn't seem to make much difference to me and by his reference calendar year rebalance doesn't help much either (if .25 is a doubling of improvement then calendar year rebalancing is .25 better than not rebalancing ?) I personally think the improvement of rebalancing is much greater than that compared to dollar cost averaging or buy and hold. My thoughts are just subjective though.
I think the important thing is to rebalance and mainly between stocks (funds) and fixed income either by using AIM, calendar rebalancing, or Opportunistic Rebalancing. I don't know how to make sense of his analysis though. What am I missing?