54% return -- looking for an internship
- Thread starter luojun
- Start date
check out this link:
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/partsub/funds/portfolio.asp?Symbol=ATCHX&Funds=1
ATCHX's alpha is 15.38.... which is very very very rare. Keep in mind its beta is 2.69!!!
hint: we're seeing a one-year outiler.
If you look at your list. All funds had HIGH BETAs. As I said before, high betas are a cause for concern.
P.S. Your calculation of beta is wrong as well. You have a low r-squared but a moderate beta....
http://moneycentral.msn.com/investor/partsub/funds/portfolio.asp?Symbol=ATCHX&Funds=1
ATCHX's alpha is 15.38.... which is very very very rare. Keep in mind its beta is 2.69!!!
hint: we're seeing a one-year outiler.
If you look at your list. All funds had HIGH BETAs. As I said before, high betas are a cause for concern.
P.S. Your calculation of beta is wrong as well. You have a low r-squared but a moderate beta....
"We have detected that your fund violated rule 3 on Apr 11, 2003 by purchasing stock that took a position to over 25% of your fund. This is a very serious rule violation and disqualifies your fund from ranking. On Apr 15, 2003 your brought your fund back into compliance. The NAV on that date was $11.10.
For ranking purposes, all gains and losses before Apr 15, 2003 will be ignored. We will treat the inception date of your fund to be Apr 15, 2003, and use $11.10 as the starting NAV. Again, this is only for ranking purposes, the rest of the analysis tools will work on your fund from the original date and NAV of $10. This allows you to continue working with your fund despite the rule violation, while ensuring the integrity of our fund rankings."
I cancelled several orders then put new orders in the evening of April 10. But accidently the position exceeded 25%. It seemed all my orders were excuted. I tried to argue, but it didn't work.
That's why it's different. Since Apr 15, 36.14% return.
For ranking purposes, all gains and losses before Apr 15, 2003 will be ignored. We will treat the inception date of your fund to be Apr 15, 2003, and use $11.10 as the starting NAV. Again, this is only for ranking purposes, the rest of the analysis tools will work on your fund from the original date and NAV of $10. This allows you to continue working with your fund despite the rule violation, while ensuring the integrity of our fund rankings."
I cancelled several orders then put new orders in the evening of April 10. But accidently the position exceeded 25%. It seemed all my orders were excuted. I tried to argue, but it didn't work.
That's why it's different. Since Apr 15, 36.14% return.I am using MSN money's database, which is pretty reliable.
And none has an alpha over 17%.
I am talking about YOUR fund performance calculation. How do you have a low r-squared but a moderate BETA?
Formula:
ri- rf = alpha + beta(rm-rf)
where rf is t-bill adjusted for 252 days of trading
ri = daily return of YOUR fund in %
rm = S&p 5000 daily return in %.
And none has an alpha over 17%.
I am talking about YOUR fund performance calculation. How do you have a low r-squared but a moderate BETA?
Formula:
ri- rf = alpha + beta(rm-rf)
where rf is t-bill adjusted for 252 days of trading
ri = daily return of YOUR fund in %
rm = S&p 5000 daily return in %.
It's more complicated than you think. They have a cash flow game. If I don't play well, I will face negative cash flow. and one day I did see my negative cash. You can see the sharp drop in May.
So I don't know how to adjust it. Anyway, they have real mutual funds. So I think their formulas might be correct.
At least, you think 36.14% is impressive.
After I close my positions, I will tell you what I have now. I also have that in my Scottrade account. 
So I don't know how to adjust it. Anyway, they have real mutual funds. So I think their formulas might be correct.
At least, you think 36.14% is impressive.
After I close my positions, I will tell you what I have now. I also have that in my Scottrade account.