Well if you can't see the difference between 4100%, "410% per year", and 0.15% a day......
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
George Soros Track Record
- Thread starter lasner
- Start date
Well if you can't see the difference between 4100%, "410% per year", and 0.15% a day......
He made enough to have a net worth of $11 billion. He's also given away $6 billion to charity since 1979.
He most likely makes more in one day than everyone on ET combined for a whole year.
He most likely makes more in one day than everyone on ET combined for a whole year.
Sounds correct. These numbers are still very good IMO. He made around 12% gross annualized before fees on a multi-billion account when we had 1997 (Asian crisis), 1998 (LTCM), 1999 (tech bubble), 2000-2002 (tech bubble pops, 9/11, Argentina blowup, Enron/Worldcom), 2007-2009 (commodity bubble and bust, financial blowup, record volatility). Imagine how many (smart) people blew up during the same time frame.Quote from nihao1234567890:
Based on this chat, I got following data (approximately):
1. About 14 year
2. About 250% return
3. About return = 9.4% compound
Does the above calculation look ok?
Or did I miss some thing?
Remember:
Soros had his key years in the 70s, 80s and early 90s. He had multiple 60% years then. The 45% annualized I believe was calculated for a 10 year period in the 70s.
He reduced his money at risk (and volatility) and added lots of diversification (due to his assets under management) going into the late 90s and 2000s. It's harder to put $15bln into one idea rather than $250m. Also, at some point in his life, capital preservation became more important than making another 20% month.
The late 90s weren't kind to Soros (and some other global macro investors). E.g. he bet against tech stocks in late 99, then reversed his position in December 99, made big money early 2000 just to be punished again in Spring 2000.
Quote from makloda:
Sounds correct. These numbers are still very good IMO. He made around 12% gross annualized before fees on a multi-billion account when we had 1997 (Asian crisis), 1998 (LTCM), 1999 (tech bubble), 2000-2002 (tech bubble pops, 9/11, Argentina blowup, Enron/Worldcom), 2007-2009 (commodity bubble and bust, financial blowup, record volatility). Imagine how many (smart) people blew up during the same time frame.
Remember:
Soros had his key years in the 70s, 80s and early 90s. He had multiple 60% years then. The 45% annualized I believe was calculated for a 10 year period in the 70s.
He reduced his money at risk (and volatility) and added lots of diversification (due to his assets under management) going into the late 90s and 2000s. It's harder to put $15bln into one idea rather than $250m. Also, at some point in his life, capital preservation became more important than making another 20% month.
The late 90s weren't kind to Soros (and some other global macro investors). E.g. he bet against tech stocks in late 99, then reversed his position in December 99, made big money early 2000 just to be punished again in Spring 2000.
#1) I don't think he has been the principle trader for years.
2) Returns for 2 & 20 suck as most hedge funds do.
3) Hedge funds are for customers who have more money than brains.
4) While he did get highly unusual gains in the past he was nowhere close to generating 20%/month.
1) Irrelevant.Quote from Index piker:
#1) I don't think he has been the principle trader for years.
2) Returns for 2 & 20 suck as most hedge funds do.
3) Hedge funds are for customers who have more money than brains.
4) While highly he did get highly unusual gains in the past he was nowhere close to generating 20%/month.
2) 3) Why comment when it's obvious you have no idea what you're talking about?
Ad 4) Nowhere did I claim he made 20% a month on average. Where did you get that from? I said he had less incentive for taking the risk to shoot for ANOTHER 20% month.
Going back to Jan 1987 through Oct 2009, Soros (Quantum Endowment NV A1 Restricted USD) has an annualized return of 20.3% annualized, net of fees, easily earning Soros a spot among the most successful speculators of the last 30 years.
Quote from makloda:
1) Irrelevant.
2) 3) Why comment when it's obvious you have no idea what you're talking about?
Ad 4) Nowhere did I claim he made 20% a month on average. Where did you get that from? I said he had less incentive for taking the risk to shoot for ANOTHER 20% month.
Going back to Jan 1987 through Oct 2009, Soros (Quantum Endowment NV A1 Restricted USD) has an annualized return of 20.3% annualized, net of fees, easily earning Soros a spot among the most successful speculators of the last 30 years.
1) Are you stupid or what? The conversational topic is george soros and his returns. Now if you really mean to discuss his fund that's another matter but good ol george has not been it's trader for years although he did found the fund. It's like still attributing Magellan's returns to Peter lynch.
2) Don't make me laugh , hedge fund investors do not get a good deal the returns do not justify the costs of 2 & 20.
The real kicker is if the fund loses 50% they close the fund because they know it will take too long to make new highs and get that 20% again .
So they close up shop stick the customer with a realized loss and open up shop with stupid new customers with big egos that get stroked by being "special". Little do they know it's the short bus of investing.
hmm 20% for 20 years that gives me something to shoot for, however my horizon is probably closer to 10 yrs myself. We shall see.
You're the idiot. It's like taking away credit from Bill Gates because he was "only the CEO" of Microsoft but he himself didn't actually actively perform any software programming anymore. What a bunch of non-sense.Quote from Index piker:
1) Are you stupid or what? The conversational topic is george soros and his returns. Now if you really mean to discuss his fund that's another matter but good ol george has not been it's trader for years although he did found the fund. It's like still attributing Magellan's returns to Peter lynch.
Soros has cultivated a firm with top traders located around the world, with him being the mentor and capital allocator on top of them. He operates a multi-strategy global macro fund with dozens of employees, you expect him to execute every single trade himself?
Soros adds much more value to his firm and clients by focusing on allocating capital among his traders and working on the macro strategy overlay rather than sitting in front of some terminal punching in buy and sell orders.
Yes, all those hedge funds investors are completely idiots. They don't know how they're handed the short end of the stick and some clown on a trading forum has it all figured out and is so much smarter than some of the richest and oldest families in the world who happily allocate part of their assets to hedge funds.Quote from Index piker:
2) Don't make me laugh , hedge fund investors do not get a good deal the returns do not justify the costs of 2 & 20.
Quote from Index piker:
1) Are you stupid or what? The conversational topic is george soros and his returns. Now if you really mean to discuss his fund that's another matter but good ol george has not been it's trader for years although he did found the fund. It's like still attributing Magellan's returns to Peter lynch.
2) Don't make me laugh , hedge fund investors do not get a good deal the returns do not justify the costs of 2 & 20.
The real kicker is if the fund loses 50% they close the fund because they know it will take too long to make new highs and get that 20% again .
So they close up shop stick the customer with a realized loss and open up shop with stupid new customers with big egos that get stroked by being "special". Little do they know it's the short bus of investing.
hmm 20% for 20 years that gives me something to shoot for, however my horizon is probably closer to 10 yrs myself. We shall see.
well think again pal, Bill Dunn and john henry don't justify the returns? lol first of they don't charge the 2, from the 2 & 20. They only charge comissions if they make profits.
Bill Dunn has been in the business for almost 40 years with a compounding return of 20% for the paste 35+ years.
John Henry is the same thing... he's in the biz since 83 I believe and has a compounded rate of 27%+ NET OF FEES.
I believe it was Bill Dunn that had a drawdown of 45% not that far away... still active, and still worth to put hte money in one of his funds (the drawdown is already behind their backs i believe... new all time highs or very short of it already)