Harry Harrison
Harry Harrison
United Kingdom
Hi everyone! šŸ‘‹ Will get down to some updates to the portfolio later on in this post & in the comments but wanted to start off with something else. One thing that I’ve literally never heard anyone talk about in investing (possible I’m just in the wrong circles & reading the wrong stuff) is the time spent working/returns ratio. People often talk about the fact that they’ve beaten X index but if the $NSDQ100 has returned 20% over the last 10 years (which I believe it has) and you’ve beaten it, it’s not always as good as it seems, depending on your account size & how much time you’ve spent researching the companies you invest in. I just signed up for a newsletter where the creator claims to have read an annual report ā€œback to backā€ every day for the last 10 years and has, by investing in tech stocks, returned 22% compounded over the last 10 years. Obviously I don’t know his account size (and don’t believe his claim about reading an annual report each day anyway) but to me, even assuming he’s working 9-5 researching companies, this seems like a huge waste of time. Let’s assume he’s a rich retail investor and his account size is $100k. If he’d have bought eh Nasdaq (compounding at ~20% a year) and forgot the password to his account he’d have made ~$620,000 over the 10 years. Now, he’s actually been compounding at 22%, so has made ~$730k over the 10 years – a $110k difference. But he also claims to have been researching stocks full time & reading an annual report every day during that period. Meaning he’s effectively been working a full time job for $11,000 a year, not that great. I think the ā€œmake your money work for youā€ thing is way overdone nowadays, but there is some truth to it. If you’re working full time and spending dozens of hours a week researching the things you’re investing in to earn 1% extra a year, assuming your account size isn’t in the millions of dollars, you’re likely not spending your time very well. Of course, you can break this down further. Maybe the enjoyment you get from research outweighs the relatively low returns to time spent ratio, or you’re learning in the hope that in a few years time the research you’re doing will help you beat the market, which is all possible. I just think there’s far too many people that go on about the fact they’ve beaten an index, whilst they’ve been working 40 hours a week to do so – I would hope you’ve beaten it if it’s your full time job, and I would hope you have a large account to make it worthwhile. That’s ignoring the fact that very few people will have even beaten the Nasdaq over the last 10 years. This doesn’t really apply if you’re giving your money to someone else to manage which I suppose is part of the attraction of giving money to an invetsment manager & the PI program to copiers and gets around the issue (assuming the manager is beating most indices over the long term). The above is more just a general observation that doesn't get brought up often enough imho. To help you calculate your money made per hour, I vibe-coded a little site so you can check, obviously the time spent will be your own estimate but it’s just a bit of fun. I’m also not sure the numbers of the other assets it mentions are 100% accurate but, ironically, I just don’t have the time today to totally verify them šŸ˜… www.moneyperhourinvesting.com/
Not investment advice. The author may have financial interests in the mentioned instruments.
1 Mentioned
2 replies
null
.