Historical Picks and Results

Last Quarter's Results

Prior Results

(The first predictions were posted using data as of January 2, 2003)

• It was inevitable that at some point the model would select a portfolio of funds with a negative risk adjusted return over the quarter and this quarter was it. While the risk loss for the quarter was −0.0482 the portfolio actually earned 0.03% more than the overall market as measured by the Wilshire 5000. Rankings based on data as of April 1, 2004. A portfolio equally invested in the table's top five funds returned −0.7143% and had a predicted beta of 0.93 for the second quarter of 2004. By comparison, the overall market return (as measured by the Wilshire 5000) equaled −0.7491% over the same period of time. The expected return on a typical portfolio with a beta of .93 over this period would have been about −0.6661% assuming the risk free (short term treasury bill) rate equals 1.5% per annum. On a risk adjusted basis the equally weighted portfolio produced an above market return of −0.0482% for the quarter. These calculations DO NOT include load fees.

  Notes: April 1, 2004
  Among the top five funds the "Saratoga Energy&Bas Mat" and the "State St Res Glob Res" funds are listed multiple times since they each have several share classes. For the holding period, returns were calculated under the assumption that an investor held an equally weighted portfolio that invests one-fifth of its funds in Saratoga Energy&Bas Mat A and one-fifth in State St Res Glob Res S and nothing in the other share classes of these funds. The portfolio will therefore equally weight SBMBX, SGLSX, FSESX, USAGX, and SSETX.

• Rankings based on data as of January 1, 2004. A portfolio equally invested in the table's top five funds returned 6.97% and had a predicted beta of .70 for the first quarter of 2004. By comparison, the overall market return (as measured by the Wilshire 5000) equaled 3.06% over the same period of time. The expected return on a typical portfolio with a beta of .70 over this period would have been about 2.24% assuming the risk free (short term treasury bill) rate equals 1.5% per annum. On a risk adjusted basis the equally weighted portfolio produced an above market return of 4.73% for the quarter. These calculations DO NOT include load fees.
• Overall 2003 Results: A portfolio invested in the model's top five picks and rebalanced each quarter returned 42.3% for the year and had a risk adjusted return of 12.2%. By comparison the Wilshire 5000 returned 25.6% for the year.
• Rankings based on data as of October 1, 2003. A portfolio equally invested in the table's top five funds returned 13% and had a predicted beta of .922 for the fourth quarter of 2003. By comparison, the overall market return (as measured by the Wilshire 5000) equaled 8.87% over the same period of time. The expected return on a typical portfolio with a beta of .922 over this period would have been about 8.21% assuming the risk free (short term treasury bill) rate equals 1.5% per annum. On a risk adjusted basis the equally weighted portfolio produced an above market return of 4.80% for the quarter. These calculations DO NOT include load fees.

  October 1, 2003 Notes
  Morgan Stan Health Sci is listed three times and Touchstone Emerging Gr twice since they each have several share classes. For the upcoming holding period, returns will be calculated under the assumption that an investor holds an equally weighted portfolio that invests one-fifth of its funds in Morgan Stan Health Sci D and one-fifth in Touchstone Emerging Gr A and nothing in the other share classes of these funds. The portfolio will therefore equally weight WMICX, HCRDX, BRSIX, OBMCX, and TEGAX.
  
  

• Rankings based on data as of July 1, 2003. A portfolio equally invested in the table's top five funds returned 8.35% and had a predicted beta of 1.28 for the third quarter of 2003. By comparison, the overall market return (as measured by the Wilshire 5000) equaled 4.25% over the same period of time. The expected return on a typical portfolio with a beta of 1.28 over this period would have been about 5.33% assuming the risk free (short term treasury bill) rate equals 1.5% per annum. On a risk adjusted basis the equally weighted portfolio produced an above market return of 3.02% for the quarter. These calculations DO NOT include load fees.
• Monthly rankings based on data as of August 1, 20003. Please see the notes above concerning the likely quality of the monthly estimates.
• Rankings based on data as of April 1, 2003. A portfolio equally invested in the table's top five funds returned 19.6% and had a predicted beta of 1.19 for the second three months of 2003. By comparison, the overall market return (as measured by the Wilshire 5000) equaled 15.6% over the same period of time. The expected return on a typical portfolio with a beta of 1.07 over this period would have been about 18.5% assuming the risk free (short term treasury bill) rate equals 1.5% per annum. On a risk adjusted basis the equally weighted portfolio produced an above market return of 1.1% for the quarter. These calculations DO NOT include load fees.
• Rankings based on data January 1, 2003. A portfolio equally invested in the table's top five funds returned −2.8% and had a predicted beta of 1.07 for the first three months of 2003. By comparison, the overall market return (as measured by the Wilshire 5000) equaled −5.3% over the same period of time. The expected return on a typical portfolio with a beta of 1.07 over this period would have been about −5.7% assuming the risk free (short term treasury bill) rate equals 1.5% per annum. On a risk adjusted basis the equally weighted portfolio produced an above market return of 2.9% for the quarter. These calculations DO NOT include load fees.