No. of Recommendations: 0
Shouldn't the values in the first column always be higher than the values in the second?

Dr. Pangloss would hope so, but in the real VL world the best performers from Bill's postings did not do as well as the screens at the bottom of the list

Clearly we are talking at cross purposes, and/or I'm being thick.
What is this table?
If the first column is the performance of the best 5 VL screens in a given period,
and the second column is the performance of the worst 5 VL screens in the same period,
doesn't the first column value in every row have to be bigger than the second column number in that same row?

i.e., if the best 5 screens returned 31% in 2009, then how can the worst 5 have returned 49%?
Wouldn't the worst five be, err, worse?

You've ranked them on the 12 month performance, right?
Or something else? Trailing 12 month performance?

Print the post  


What was Your Dumbest Investment?
Share it with us -- and learn from others' stories of flubs.
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.