Gold is the Worst Investment in History

Discussion in 'Bullion Investing' started by beef1020, Feb 25, 2015.

  1. GoldFinger1969

    GoldFinger1969 Well-Known Member

    Siegel himself would say that you can quibble with his numbers. He is not saying he is Moses bringing down performance numbers in the form of the 10 Commandments. :D

    As for gold, he is 'biased' in the sense that aside from very small windows, gold as an investment does NOT do well. It doesn't produce capital gains. It doesn't pay dividends or interest. And that impeded performance since almost 40% of stocks total returns are from dividends and for bonds its almost entirely interest.

    See the chart I attached earlier.

    Again...forget about going back to 1871....just go back to 1926...or 1950....or 1980....or 1990.....or even the 2000's.

    The rolling returns speak for themselves !!

    Yes, only small-cap stocks probably top out at a nominal return of 11%. But large-cap S&P 500-type stocks produce 9-10% returns.

    See the chart again...the numbers don't lie. See what happens to returns as the time horizon increases.

    Don't go back to 1871. Go back 10 or 20 or 30 or 40 years.

    You're comparing apples and kumquats. :D

    Fuel efficiency is a simple calculation of how many miles you go on 1 gallon of gas. End of story.

    What you injected is a measure of 'transportation efficiency' which is totally separate.

    You keep going back 200 years.....did you see the chart ? How about going back to when you or your parents were born ?

    Returns today may be lower for stocks and fees may or may not be higher than when Siegel started his analysis...but they don't 'impeach' the results. They may knock it down 50-100 bp. or so....but that's about it.

    Stop talking about 1871 and The Wild West of Investing.:D
     
  2. Avatar

    Guest User Guest



    to hide this ad.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page