The Motley Fool Discussion Boards
Investing/Strategies / Retirement Investing
|Subject: Re: Hi gang... wow!!!||Date: 9/16/2013 7:26 PM|
|Author: Rayvt||Number: 72895 of 78166|
then it's risk-adjusted returns are its gross returns times 1-drawdown.
There are a bunch of standard ways that risk-adjusted returns are calculated.
Average return divided by MaxDD is not one of those ways.
In fact, MaxDD is virtually useless because it is just a measure of the one-time worst case event.
CalMar, StdDev, Sortino, Sharpe, Ulcer Index, Ulcer Performance Index -- these are all common measures.
Just eyeballing the 40 year balance on the IUL I ran, versus the 40 year balance on the spreadsheet... looks to me like the IUL finishes with more money.
The spreadsheet uses actual historical data.
I can't cut-paste from your pdf, but it says, "reflect a hypothetical rate at the average historical rates". I don't see anywhere where they state what the rate they used. So you cannot compare the two, since one uses real data and the other uses an average.
How *did* you create that PDF? I can't cut/paste from it, which is rather annoying. [...sounds of typing, grumbling in the background...]
YES! HA! WHO'S THE MAN!
I checked the Illustration at 4 different dates 10 years apart, and every one computed as an annual gain of 8.8%.
This illustration is garbage and arguably fraudulent. They don't show any years where the return is zero, nor any years where the retur