5 ms·
It's good that you have the S&P as a benchmark. It shows that the median performance of a senator (4%-6%) is lower than expected (10%). Can you add the S&P to t
by sxp 6y ago
It's good that you have the S&P as a benchmark. It shows that the median performance of a senator (4%-6%) is lower than expected (10%). Can you add the S&P to the histogram so it's always there? That would make the difference more obvious.
- harikb 6y agoIf the senators use this data and that argument to prove they didn’t make too much money or didn’t do anything wrong, then please remove all insider-trading laws. Right now, it only hurts the law abiding minority that accidentally makes a mistake
- solveit 6y agoIt's hard to accidentally insider trade and very hard to get prosecuted for accidental insider trading in the United States. Europe, maybe. But not the US.
- bingdig 6y agoTrue although it's not quite that simple. Most senators have less risky portfolios than the S&P 500 with lots of bond ETFs and the like, so that's not a perfect comparison. We're working on creating a risk-adjusted return measure to provide a more accurate comparison.
- hendzen 6y agoprobably makes sense to use a few different metrics of information ratio vs $SPY, t-bills and a 60/40 portfolio.
- mehrdadn 6y agoInstead of just plotting S&P, they should divide by it to reject the common-mode signal.
- all2 6y agoWhere does this signal come from in a time-sequence series? I looked up "common mode signal" and in EE it looks like line to line interference, or line to ground interference. Does the existence of this signal presume a Senate's portfolio performance is somehow coupled to some index fund performance (S&P in this case)?
- mehrdadn 6y agoThe common-signal would just be the general stock market performance. S&P is one way to approximate "the market". The idea being that you want a plot to show you how well they're doing in terms of market performance, not in terms of absolute share price (which is kind of meaningless here). Otherwise every shock to the general market ends up getting rendered in every line in the plot which is pretty distracting and makes it hard to see what's going on.
- mhh__ 6y agoI'm not entirely sure either but you could use some combination of dS/dt dI/dt where S is the senator and I is the market?
- rmrfstar 6y agoThey should actually regress senator returns against Ken French's research factors [1] and measure the statistical/economic significance of the intercept and the volatility of the residuals. If I return 2% per year, but do so at 1% volatility and zero market exposure, then I can be a highly successful hedge fund after applying 10x leverage. [1] https://mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/pages/faculty/ken.french/data_library.html https://mba.tuck.dartmouth.edu/pages/faculty/ken.french/data...
- philjohn 6y agoAnd others have had 20% annualised returns which are ... questionable.
- swyx 6y agoquestionable? they have inside knowledge
- underyx 6y agoI hit 20% this year, that much can totally be explained by random chance.
- xapata 6y agoAny particular person getting a 20% return is not suspicious. The question is whether the distribution of returns over all senators is suspicious.
- wtvanhest 6y agoOr a single person outperforming over a long time horizon.
- yibg 6y agoWhen you have enough people trading over some period of time, someone will have consistently high returns.
- albntomat0 6y agoAny person getting a 20% in some small number of trades is fine. An individual getting 20% over a long period and a wide range of trades is definitely suspicious.
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- itsspring 6y agoLooks like Mitch McConnell is doing well just following the benchmark (VFIAX: Vanguard 500 Index Admiral Fund)
- divbzero 6y agoIt appears that the Senate Majority Leader is a Bogle follower. I can cheer that even if I don’t agree with all of his policies :)
- ApolloRising 6y agoThe interface is misleading, put mitch in the search field by name and then you will see all his investments.