Barry.
You bring up some good points.
Firstly, this method is not new at all. It is discussed by Lichello.
I don't remember reading this in his book although I do remember reading about using a port of multiple stocks, yes.
But I don't recall the monthly re-bal addition.
If Bernie Goldberg has already done this sort of thing it just proves the saying "nothing new under the sun".
One complication to this approach is the question of frequency of re-balancing in relation to frequency of actual AIM transactions. For example, one will of course always re-balance when there is an AIM directed transaction ... but ... should one also re-balance even if there was no AIM directed transaction? Thus there are two different approaches and hence two different potential flavours of AIM RE-Bal.
Yes. you should re-balance even if aim says do nothing and sometimes when that does happen, re-balancing may end up "do nothing" also. I set an arbitrary $100 min so if it says sell $80 of XYZ I ignore that because it's less than $100. The min would be set by the individual of course and a percentage would most likely be the way to go.
I hope to have some comparisons of aim on each of the individual issues to the AIM RE-BAL. I must admit I havn't had time to fully test the thing yet under dif conditions, like blue chips. Maybe the results would be less spectacular.
Fourthly, there is an error at the Web Site. It is stated that First, you don't use SHARES and PRICE as usual in your AIM formula
I only meant that genrally speaking. I agree there are exceptions.
jibes
News 
Market Data 
Discover 
