No. of Recommendations: 0
Books by John Bogle point out the mechanics of "regression toward the mean". A fund that did very well over a stated period of time is likely to not repeat in the next period of time; next 10 years a different fund is likely to be the most outstanding.

While most of my retirement funds are allocated on a coffehouse portfolio/couch potato blend, this blurb has me thinking: If we take "regression toward the mean" to be the norm, would it not make sense for funds to go up toward the mean as well as down. To wit, during the go-go 90s, growth funds were the rage, outperforming the S&P (and its own historical average) hand over fist. Then, in 2000, came the inevitable R-T-T-M and growth funds underperformed for the past couple years.

Wouldn't this theory hold that growth funds should soon outperform, given their recent beaten down status? Obviously I don't mean this to apply to any one individual stock, but to the group as a whole - say Vanguard's Growth Index (VIGRX). I guess this could be the equivalent of buying on the dips, but if you're in for the long haul, why not?

Print the post  


The Retirement Investing Board
This is the board for all discussions related to Investing for and during retirement. To keep the board relevant and Foolish to everyone, please avoid making any posts pertaining to political partisanship. Fool on and Retire on!
When Life Gives You Lemons
We all have had hardships and made poor decisions. The important thing is how we respond and grow. Read the story of a Fool who started from nothing, and looks to gain everything.
Contact Us
Contact Customer Service and other Fool departments here.
Work for Fools?
Winner of the Washingtonian great places to work, and Glassdoor #1 Company to Work For 2015! Have access to all of TMF's online and email products for FREE, and be paid for your contributions to TMF! Click the link and start your Fool career.