4 ms·

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^ixic http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^ixic Bernanke's magic. TC articles should probably be autokilled.

by ahi 13y ago

300bps 13y ago
Nasdaq is up 28.07% YTD while Microsoft is up 37% YTD. That's quite an accomplishment and can't be explained by the "rising tide" theory you are putting forth. Plus keep in mind that Apple is DOWN 4.38% YTD. http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=%5EIXIC+Interactive#symbol=^ixic;range=ytd;compare=aapl+msft;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined; http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=%5EIXIC+Interactive#symbo...
- RyanZAG 13y ago
  Let's try to reconcile your three facts: Average is positive. Microsoft up a bit more than the average. Apple down incredibly more than the average. If most decent stocks went up by about 40% but a few stocks like Apple actually went down, the average would be somewhere around 30%. This means that Microsoft's stock could stay at par while others went down and Microsoft would beat the average. Steve leaving probably helped a couple percent, but it's just noise.
  - 300bps 13y ago
    As someone that works at an investment bank, your comment makes my head hurt. The facts you cited aren't my facts; stocks and bonds are indexed to a benchmark made up of their peers. Matching the index is expected, beating it is great and underperforming it is really bad. For Apple and Microsoft, their peers are in the NASDAQ index so that is the benchmark by which they are judged. Microsoft being up 37% in contrast to its benchmark being up 28% is not "a bit more than the average". It is beating its benchmark by 32% which is an incredibly good performance. Likewise, Apple underperformed its benchmark horrifically. Think about it this way - $100 invested that returns 37% compounded growth over 8 years is now $1,240.98. However, $100 invested that returns 28% compounded growth over 8 years is now $720.58. Hopefully you can see why your downplaying of Microsoft's accomplishment seems a little silly. Oh, and the same $100 invested in Apple over 8 years would now be $69.88.
    - anonymoushn 13y ago
      Are percentages of percentages a useful thing to talk about? If the index was flat and MSFT was up 1%, I wouldn't learn much from "Microsoft is beating its benchmark by infinity%!"
    - 001sky 13y ago
      plot MSFT, AAPL, an SP500 for 24m They are about the same, all showing mean reversion.
    - qq66 13y ago
      Why are you using one year extrapolated to eight? For an eight year comparison you should compare investing $100 in the two stocks in 2005.

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^ixic http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^ixic Bernanke's magic. TC articles should probably be autokilled.

by ahi 13y ago

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^ixic http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^ixic Bernanke's magic. TC articles should probably be autokilled.

300bps 13y ago

Nasdaq is up 28.07% YTD while Microsoft is up 37% YTD. That's quite an accomplishment and can't be explained by the "rising tide" theory you are putting forth. Plus keep in mind that Apple is DOWN 4.38% YTD. http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=%5EIXIC+Interactive#symbol=^ixic;range=ytd;compare=aapl+msft;indicator=volume;charttype=area;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=off;source=undefined; http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=%5EIXIC+Interactive#symbo...

RyanZAG 13y ago
Let's try to reconcile your three facts: Average is positive. Microsoft up a bit more than the average. Apple down incredibly more than the average. If most decent stocks went up by about 40% but a few stocks like Apple actually went down, the average would be somewhere around 30%. This means that Microsoft's stock could stay at par while others went down and Microsoft would beat the average. Steve leaving probably helped a couple percent, but it's just noise.
- 300bps 13y ago
  As someone that works at an investment bank, your comment makes my head hurt. The facts you cited aren't my facts; stocks and bonds are indexed to a benchmark made up of their peers. Matching the index is expected, beating it is great and underperforming it is really bad. For Apple and Microsoft, their peers are in the NASDAQ index so that is the benchmark by which they are judged. Microsoft being up 37% in contrast to its benchmark being up 28% is not "a bit more than the average". It is beating its benchmark by 32% which is an incredibly good performance. Likewise, Apple underperformed its benchmark horrifically. Think about it this way - $100 invested that returns 37% compounded growth over 8 years is now $1,240.98. However, $100 invested that returns 28% compounded growth over 8 years is now $720.58. Hopefully you can see why your downplaying of Microsoft's accomplishment seems a little silly. Oh, and the same $100 invested in Apple over 8 years would now be $69.88.
  - anonymoushn 13y ago
    Are percentages of percentages a useful thing to talk about? If the index was flat and MSFT was up 1%, I wouldn't learn much from "Microsoft is beating its benchmark by infinity%!"
  - 001sky 13y ago
    plot MSFT, AAPL, an SP500 for 24m They are about the same, all showing mean reversion.
  - qq66 13y ago
    Why are you using one year extrapolated to eight? For an eight year comparison you should compare investing $100 in the two stocks in 2005.