Sabri wrote:

> How about this one: I beat you by one bachelors and
> two masters degrees. Further, I teach debt at the
> graduate level, both at masters and PhD.

Talk about apples and oranges!  Wait until I get to be your age.  :-)

> But this is not the issue: why are you taking what I
> said in my original post as if I tried to insult you
> or some such thing? I just expressed a sincere opinion,
> or so I thought! If your objective in the graph you sent
> is to compare the "returns" of the three instruments
> there, you better make the measurements in the same
> measurement system.

Sabri,

No, my friend.  I didn't take it as an insult.  I took it (and still
take it) as an  error.  This is something that can be established by
anybody with a bit of patience.  If I'm right, yours is not an
impeachable offense.  We are both good people.  No question about it.
Errare humanum est.

You said -- and are now repeating -- that it is apple-to-oranges to
compare (1) the yield to maturity of T bonds (as measured by an index
that underlies CBOT options) to (2) the S&P net rate of return, and to
(3) a gold ETF net rate of return.

So, here's a couple of questions that should settle this: Do these
assets exist?  Do each of the measures refer to the net gain from
holding the asset (appreciation plus income) as a ratio of initial
prices?  The answer is yes to both.  Replace the percentage sign with
a cent sign and the graph will show how many cents $1 invested in each
of them (gross of transaction costs, taxes, etc.) would gain over the
corresponding period of time.  (I set the period to 5 years, but you
can toggle the time period as you wish.  If the data on different
assets start at different points, then just mentally shift the lines
so that they start with zero cents at the same point in time.)

Note that I'm not saying that these assets are otherwise similar.
They are assets.  They exist as such or can be engineered by combining
other traded assets.  That's what they have in common.  To that
extent, it is entirely acceptable to compare their respective
performance.  Why their performance is so different is entirely
another question which I'm not so foolish as to try to answer.

Now, this has nothing to do with whether the yields are on on- or
off-the-run T bonds.  On- or off-the-run, somebody buys these
Treasuries.  Furthermore, how can there be off-the-run T bonds without
them first being traded on-the-run?  Denying this is like saying that
we cannot buy IPOs, that we can only buy the stocks in the secondary
markets.

Now, you say that, in comparison to gold, long-term T bonds have done
well.  I don't know this as a matter of personal experience.  But I
can look at the data.

You say that my original graph underestimate the performance of T
bonds.  I should use a T bond ETF instead.  Well, I can't find T bond
ETFs on Yahoo or Bloomberg, but bond ETFs are available (that is, no T
bonds, just bonds).  Unlike T bonds, which are pricier (because they
are deemed safest), no-T bonds are expected to have higher returns.
So, if I show that no-T bonds ETFs performed below the gold ETF in the
last few years, then I am showing that gold very likely outperformed T
bonds over the period.

So, here:

http://finance.yahoo.com/echarts?s=GLD#chart3:symbol=gld;range=2y;compare=blv+biv+bsv+^tyx+bnd;indicator=volume;charttype=line;crosshair=on;ohlcvalues=0;logscale=on;source=undefined

No matter how you cut it, gold ends up way above the pack.

If you show that my facts are mistaken, my reasoning is faulty, or
something is just flat wrong, I'll admit it and accept a beer from
you.  (After all, I've been multitasking while typing this, trying to
get my son to bed and watching Dr Zhivago on PBS.)  But if cannot show
that, then you should buy me a beer.

In any case, peace.

[Final note on this: I didn't really intend the graph to be sent to
PEN-L.  I was sending it to Marxist Debate
(http://groups.google.com/group/marxist-debate), an emerging force
that is challenging Michael Perelman's dominance on listservs. But my
mind played a trick on me and by mistake sent it to PEN-L.  People
should know that I plan to cross-post these exchanges on Marxist
Debate whether I'm right *or* Sabri is wrong. :-) ]
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to