Saturday, March 23, 2013

March 23, 2013, Bob Brinker's Marketimer Model Portfolios Profiled in Latest Hulbert Financial Digest

March 23, 2013.....Mark Hulbert periodically profiles various newsletters that he includes in the Hulbert Financial Digest performance ranking each month. He profiled Bob Brinker's Marketimer this month.

Hulbert explained that even though he tracks the performance of Bob Brinker's fixed-income portfolio, it is not used to calculate Brinker's official Marketimer performance. Instead, Hulbert uses an average of  Brinker's three model portfolios. Model portfolio I and II  are 100% equities and portfolio III is about half bonds and half stocks.

Now let's take a look at what Hulbert Financial Digest says about Bob Brinker's Marketimer:
Mark Hulbert said: ".....Brinker's portfolio average as of 2/23/13 is ranked in the 10th place over the last 25 years (among the 35 newsletters the HFD tracked over this period)......

Over the 25+ years that the HFD has tracked his letter, for example, only twice has he deviated from being fully invested. The first was after the 1987 crash, a move that ended up costing his portfolios. His second deviation, a profitable one, lasted from January 2000 until March 2003. Despite this mixed timing record, these deviations from being fully invested have, on balance, ended up helping his performance......

In contrast, Brinker's mutual fund selection on average have not beaten the market. For example, his "Aggressive" portfolio would have performed a half percentage point per year better since 1986 if, instead of investing in the mutual funds Brinker actually picked, it had allocated the same amounts to an index fund." 
Honey here: Hulbert also shows that the "Lifetime"  performance of Marketimer (time that HFD has tracked it) is slightly less than the Wilshire 5000 and index funds would have beaten his mutual fund picks.

So there you have it, even though Mark Hulbert gave Bob Brinker a BIG MULLIGAN in year-2000 by not including his QQQ disaster-trade in his performance ranking, Marketimer still ranks 10th place over the past 25 years, and it did not beat the Wilshire 5000.

BTW:  At the end of Brinker's profile, Hulbert always shows a footnote about Brinker's "quite unprofitable trade" and gives an excuse for ignoring it. Hulbert knows that Brinker told subscribers to use cash reserves raised from model portfolios for that trade, but he gives Brinker a pass anyway. It's certain that Brinker's "official" performance would be a lot less if he accounted for that trade.  Shady business for both of them? I report, you decide. (25 X $185 = $4625)

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

Folks with accounts that followed/mananged brinker experienced the QQQQ trade.

JimAlder said...

"Marketimer still ranks 10th place over the past 25 years, and it did not beat the Wilshire 5000."

How can you expect to beat the stock market if you include a portfolio that is half in bonds?

To average three disparate portfolios and compare the result against the total stock market is just plain silly. Each portfolio should be measured against a corresponding index.

gabe said...

Very informative.

Honeybee said...

anon,

You are absolutely correct. During that time, Bob Brinker co-owned the BJ Group, a fee-based company that managed large accounts.

Those investors were also put into that trade without consultation or consent.

Honeybee said...

JimAlder,

Mark Hulbert does a "risk-adjusted" ranking too. He usually gives "risk-adjusted numbers higher importance -- in most cases.

Wouldn't having the bonds lower risk?

Honeybee said...

A flash from the past that is still true today:

FIXED INCOME ADVISOR MISINFORMATION: Caller Carl from Buffalo Grove, Illinois said: "I'm a loyal subscriber to your Fixed Income Advisor." Brinker replied: "Thank you."

Birdbrain said: "Heard a caller during the first hour saying he subscribed to "your Fixed Income Advsor" to which Mr B uttered a quick thank you, without stating that supposedly his son is the publisher of said rag."

Honey EC: Obviously, this was one more (of many) callers who mistakenly believes that the "Bob Brinker" who publishes the Fixed Income Advisor is the host of Moneytalk. This is only made possible by the fact that the real publisher/editor of the newsletter (Brinker's middle-aged son) no longer makes any effort to differentiate himself from his father. He used to be very careful to make sure that he was not mistaken for his father, but that changed 5 or 6 years ago, about the same time that he started selling newsletters.

Pig said...

(25 X $185 = $4625)

Yamean if lotsa somebodies send me $4625 in fees for advice all I gots to do is be shady enough to make them lose (or LOOSE, if you prefer) more money than you would make in a NOBRAINER index fund?

Is that legal? That could make you filthy rich.

Wouldn't that make me a dishonest CHARLATAN?

No wonder he needs several pimps on these sites to muddy up the TRUTH and statistics.

Anonymous said...

"Those investors were also put into that trade without consultation or consent."

Those BJ Group clients signed discretionary accounts which gave the BJ Group the authority to trade for their accounts.

They understood the risk and gave adance consent. In fact, I believe a lawsuit was filed because it was claimed that the BJ Group had FAILED to follow Brinker's advice.

Grupo

Honeybee said...

Mr. Pig,

I cannot confirm that the source of this info is accurate:

"Bob Brinker net worth: American investment management expert, radio personality and publisher, Bob Brinker has an estimated net worth of $25 million. Bob Brinker has more than twenty seven years of investment management experience. He is the host of the weekend financial talk program MoneyTalk...."

Bob Brinker Net Worth

The same site says Donald Trump's net worth is $2.9 billion.

And Rush Limbaugh, who started in broadcasting about the same time as Bob Brinker, is listed at $350 million.