So where did this CAPS feature go? (and why?)ZD
ZD,After tracking how often that button was used, we decided that the prime real estate that it took up would be better suited for something else. There are some new features in the works that should be showing up there soon.Fool on,Chris
Hey - how about to the right of Legal Information © 1995 - 2008? There is plenty of blue space right after All rights reserved...
I, for one, really miss the "beat this stock" feature. The highest ratest stocks are a great place to start a search for good companies to buy, and this was a very easy way to find them. Please reconsider and bring this feature back.Thanks,Aiken
Are there any studies that show them to be useful?http://caps.fool.com/Blogs/ViewPost.aspx?bpid=24454&t=01000000000000052298
I've said this once or twice before, but I'll say it again:>>Especially when it emanates every market day, all year long, from the world’s greatest investment community.>>The market itself is the world's greatest investment community, and community intelligence emanates from it every market day. It includes many orders of magnitudes more people than CAPS does, and includes more talented investors, like Warren Buffet, for example. And with all these advantages, the market has never once managed to beat the market.(The market might well beat SPY, because, shockingly, some stocks in the market are not American megacaps. Similarly, sometimes SPY itself will beat the market.)I know it is really tempting to plug a bunch of numbers into Excel and say "Wow, five arbitrarily chosen collections of stocks bracketed a particular index-tracking ETF. This is really earthshatteringly significant!" And then, after you've done that, you start slicing the data even thinner, and finding that certain composites of bits of data (stocks which have 4 stars, but only achieved them recently) have even better returns. This is confirmation bias talking -- if you slice random data up enough ways, it is statistically certain that several of the slices will look non-random, and humans in their boundless desire to make sense out of the senseless will be able to retrofit a plausible-sounding explanation for it. We could call the strategy, for example, Monkeys of the Market -- catchy, alliterative, and I hear that using animals for these sorts of things sells more books. And then, going forward, it would become undeniable that MoM actually does not underperform. So we'd look at the data again, and then realize with just ONE LITTLE TWEAK (stocks which have 4 stars but only achieved them recently... while paying above-average dividends! So obvious we don't know why we didn't see it before!) it is still market-beating. So the newly rechristened Maroon Monkeys of the Market would enjoy a brief time in the sun, and then they too would falter.As they say on Battlestar Galactica -- "All of this has happened before, and all of this will happen again."P.S. Anyone care to meet me on St. Patrick's Day in 2009 and see if a list of all Monkeys of the Market compiled today outperform a reasonably chosen index over the same interval?
Whoops, catastrophic typo up there (switched underperform and overperform). I blame the Monkeys. They are filthy, unruly animals who are good only for picking stocks by use of darts.
Individuals and institutions beat the market all the time. Some of them sustainably. Why? The market is driven by money flows -- specifically, big money flows. Big money sets the prices -- not big monkeys. :) By contrast, you and I can exercise our brains outside the framework of big money setting prices. This has worked well for me and for other long-term investors, for 20+ years running.CAPS also skirts this big-money price-setting market reality. CAPS is premised as follows: Merit-based real performance sets our ratings. Further, not only are we merit-weighted -- we're forward-looking. In this sense, what sets our "prices" is not big money but big brains eyes wide open. That is why CAPS is beating, and will beat, the market. The only danger to this is if CAPS becomes the market. If/when that becomes the case, two things happen: (1) the markets have become much more efficient and much better at allocating capital (i.e. a better world, one in which Bear Stearns never achieves the valuation it had and never folds so fast), and (2) CAPS wouldn't work quite as well at beating the market. Oh, and a third thing too -- Motley Fool shareholders are probably pretty happy. :)So I would encourage you to question your fundamental assumption, which I think wasn't fully thought through as you ran to your monkeys. I definitely will hit your tip jar for the Battlestar Galactica reference, though.Fool on,David
For what it's worth I don't miss the beat this stock feature at all. In fact I'm glad it's gone. There were far too many clicks involved to obtain useful information. The beat this stock feature gave you no clue how far or how close you were to the best of the best. I would think a sortable list (akin to what you have now in the stocks tag but without the one day return weighting) would be a much more useful way to access this info .If you have better use in mind for the space I think that's great.
Best Of |
Favorites & Replies |
Start a New Board |
My Fool |
BATS data provided in real-time. NYSE, NASDAQ and NYSEMKT data delayed 15 minutes.
Real-Time prices provided by BATS. Market data provided by Interactive Data.
Company fundamental data provided by Morningstar. Earnings Estimates, Analyst Ra