NOTE: This website is purely informational; nothing is being recommended or guaranteed. "Brainwashing" book readers should find the numbers and ideas helpful for analytical purposes. Click here for more information.
IGVSI Continues to Outperform S & P as Direction Becomes Questionable
The S & P 500 began to achieve new All Time Highs in March 2013 --- impressed? The IGVSI started a run of new ATHs in late 2010 and achieved 60 new ATHs just in 2013... impressive!
The IGVSI tracks an elite sector of the stock market, Investment Grade Value Stocks. Only 346 companies meet IGVSI quality standards.
See The Latest Working Capital Model Index Chart & Numbers
The WCM indices provide benchmark numbers for investment portfolios managed using Market Cycle Investment Management, the methodology detailed in "The Brainwashing of the American Investor". Author/investor Steve Selengut developed the methodology in the early 1970s.
Toward the end of April '11, the IGVSI was 6.9% ABOVE its 2007 all time high while the S & P remained more than 13% below October 2007 levels. Recently, the S + P was 16% above 2007 levels; the IGVSI had gained 27%... and with far less risk.
Comparing MCIM component indices with the S & P 500 confirms that quality based portfolios typically fall more slowly, don't bend as far, and regain upward momentum more quickly than less refined indices.
LIVE INTERVIEW: Investment Management expert Steve Selengut Discusses MCIM Strategies
Because the MCIM operating system demands buying on weakness, positions are increased and new positions are added while markets weaken. A disciplined MCIM user takes profits during rallies, in preparation for the next inevitable downturn --- it's SOP.
Using MCIM, one would expect new all time high market values well before the averages and indices revisit their previous highs, with portfolio income growing as the process plays out.
Are YOU ready for a correction in the stock market? MCIM portfolios should be.
Investment Grade Value Stocks and high quality income CEFs are the only securities included in Market Cycle Investment Management (MCIM) portfolios. Then, using disciplines that encourage profit-taking during rallies, and selective buying during corrections, it should be clear that market balance performance should do better than brainless (passive, if you will) averages and indices.
Assuming that the average MCIM portfolio has an asset allocation of roughly 50% IGVSI equities and 50% MCMSI income closed end funds, it should be clear why these portfolios might just blow away all forms of passive investing --- especially in volatile markets. The figures speak for themselves: MCIMI represents the combined IGVSI and WCMSI Indices:
- From 9/30/07 to 3/9/09: MCIMI down 41% vs S&P down 56% and DJIA down 53%
- From 9/30/07 to 4/30/11: MCMI up 2% vs S&P down 11% and DJIA down 9%
- From 9/30/07 to 12/31/11: MCIM down 1% vs S&P down 18% and DJIA down 13%
Both the IGVSI and the MCMSI, individually, outperformed both major averages during the same time periods. The IGVSI first established new high ground in April, 2011 --- Income CEFs had done so regularly since July 2012, but have faltered recently as speculators throw safety to the winds...
The latest IGVSI ATH was set November 27th 2013; the latest WCMSI ATH was struck November 30 2012.
Now sit back and imagine how an MCIM portfolio would have performed during this time frame (and any other market cycle) --- what if you had bought IGVSI equities and high quality income CEFs every time the market fell, panicked, or hic-cupped? And then, what if you had the courage to take your profits each and every time they reached a reasonable level on an individual issue basis?
Well that's exactly what could happen in portfolios managed using the MCIM "Life Cycle" methodology; not to mention the added benefit of a consistent and constanly growing monthly cash flow....
Embrace MCIM, and learn more about the "Life Cycle" portfolio approach to developing a secure retirement income. Contact John Dohn for more information about the process.
Now doesn't this make a whole lot more sense than the hocus-pocus of "Modern Portfolio Theory"? It may not be as scholarly, but it sure should work better.
Click for Details --> IGVS - Part 2