3 ms·
2800% is a much bigger number than 83%. But if you do the math using your numbers, you see that GE substantially underperformed the S&P since 1981: GE = (1+280
by 0zymandias 6y ago
2800% is a much bigger number than 83%. But if you do the math using your numbers, you see that GE substantially underperformed the S&P since 1981:
GE = (1+2800%)*(1-83%) = 4.93 = 393% appreciation since 1981.
S&P = S&P has appreciated 2000% since 1981.
GE << S&P
- erichurkman 6y agoMaybe that's why Welch said to measure against GE's future leaders if they are destined to forever underperform the S&P. :)
- ivalm 6y agoTo be fair, most companies underperform s&p 500. S&p is driven by giant winners, and every generation has different winners. In the 90s GE was the winner and other companies in s&p trailed them. This is what makes survivors like Microsoft so amazing, they managed to remain on top by reinventing themselves many times under different leaderships.