3 ms·

I think I’m gonna have to read up a little more, but I’ve seen this in support of the excess returns view: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/10/business/mutfund/

I think I’m gonna have to read up a little more, but I’ve seen this in support of the excess returns view: https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/10/business/mutfund/congressional-portfolios-outpacing-the-market-essay.html https://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/10/business/mutfund/congress... And this in support that avg congressional portfolio is not performing well: https://www.mit.edu/~jhainm/Paper/Eggmueller_CapitolLosses.pdf https://www.mit.edu/~jhainm/Paper/Eggmueller_CapitolLosses.p... https://www.morningstar.com/news/marketwatch/2020041854/senators-privileged-information-does-not-often-result-in-market-beating-returns-dartmouth-research-team-concludes https://www.morningstar.com/news/marketwatch/2020041854/sena... Looks like there might be a historical component around the STOCK act that different studies play with for their data window. In either case — I still say for the poor level of diversification within & around asset classes that I don’t see a lot of shining examples of how to achieve success.

noahc 6y ago
> I still say for the poor level of diversification within & around asset classes that I don’t see a lot of shining examples of how to achieve success. Wouldn't you expect a poor level of diversification in a stock portfolio based on corruption? They aren't dollar cost averaging and diversifying. They're doing the exact opposite to maximize the trade.
- awinder 6y ago
  Kinda, I guess for a sophisticated “corruption portfolio” I would expect to see suspiciously timed trading but maybe more coherent core holdings. Just because you have inside info doesn’t mean you have a time machine, you still have to protect against unknowns.