# How was your 2017 returns



## 1980z28 (Mar 4, 2010)

I made a lot of trades this year getting ready for retirement( holding 100% equities )

All 3 accounts returned me 13.7% for 2017

Trades for this year will only be to balance 

Hoping for the same in 2018

Happy New Year


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

2017 XIRR 10.5%, 6 years annualized 10.8%. 50% equities, 50% - FI.

Earned in dividends/interest 41K, 20% increase comparing to 2016


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

2017 rate of return (including all cash and stray amounts) was about 5.1%

Net worth, which includes savings from employment, is up 19% this year.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

12.8% forex adjusted,* 14.5% unadjusted indicating the loonie was stronger than in 2016. 

5 year CAGR 11.8% forex adjusted, 9.6% unadjusted.

8 year CAGR 10.0% forex adjusted, 8.2% unadjusted.

* per Quicken

It would be better to use a 10 year CAGR (rather than 8 year) to include a full business cycle. IOW, anything that doesn't include the 2008/2009 cycle is skewed due to the long bull market, but my 2008 data is not representative due to a divorce settlement.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

james4beach said:


> 2017 rate of return (including all cash and stray amounts) was about 5.1%
> 
> Net worth, which includes savings from employment, is up 19% this year.


Our net worth is up 14%


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

gibor365 said:


> Our net worth is up 14%


Net worth is not a measure of 2017 investment performance as it is affected by net positive or negative contributions to the investment portfolio. Net worth is a measure of 'wealth creation' towards, for example, a retirement objective.


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

> Net worth is not a measure of 2017 investment performance


 to some degree it is, as it consist of income from all sources including investment performance


----------



## doctrine (Sep 30, 2011)

Looks like I had about 10% in my registered indexed accounts, and 14% in my all-Canadian stock portfolio. TSX returned about 8%, S&P 500 returned about 12.5% in Cdn dollars, so overall not too bad. I also have a big tax return coming as I had net capital losses within that 14%.

So hard to beat the S&P 500 - it was up about 20% in 2017 in USD! It is why I like it for all of my US exposure.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

gibor365 said:


> to some degree it is, as it consist of income from all sources including investment performance


Not really because spending also comes out of net worth. Some people could have a $200k salary and a $500k investment portfolio with a 10% return, for a total of $250k. What was the annual spend that came out of that for an aggregate Net Worth change?

It tells you NOTHING about investment performance? My net worth grew in 2017 despite a 6 digit net withdrawal of funds to support my cash flow needs. All that really tells me is I did not spend enough and/or it provides a reserve for a rainy day (recession year). Let's not derail the intent of this thread with anything other than true investment performance.


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

72% all TSX equities ,21% GIC/bonds,7%cash resulted in up 14.56%. Only around 4% of that was interest/dividends so the rest of the gain can instantly go poof. Actually the 4% went poof as well, squandered on beer & boats.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

AltaRed said:


> Let's not derail the intent of this thread with anything other than true investment performance.


Ok, I agree with you here. The useful number to compare is the rate of return / annual performance of just the investments. It should ignore cashflows in & out.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Eder said:


> 72% all TSX equities ,21% GIC/bonds,7%cash resulted in up 14.56%. Only around 4% of that was interest/dividends so the rest of the gain can instantly go poof. Actually the 4% went poof as well, squandered on beer & boats.


Wow that's a great performance from TSX equities, much better than the index. What kinds of things do you invest in?


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

james4beach said:


> Wow that's a great performance from TSX equities, much better than the index. What kinds of things do you invest in?


I hold 100% TSX equities only in 2 TFSAs, one gained 14.7%, second just 5.1%


----------



## Eder (Feb 16, 2011)

james4beach said:


> . What kinds of things do you invest in?


Haha I figured you already knew I like blue chip dividend stocks. Mostly banks,telecom,utility's and couple flyers like Premium Brands, Rocky Mountain Equipment etc.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Eder said:


> Haha I figured you already knew I like blue chip dividend stocks. Mostly banks,telecom,utility's and couple flyers like Premium Brands, Rocky Mountain Equipment etc.


I knew there were many banks and utilities but I didn't know the rest of it. Thanks! I'm glad to see that I'm not the only one who is heavily Canadian focused.


----------



## londoncalling (Sep 17, 2011)

My overall portfolio would be hard to determine as I have a 2 DB plans and 2 DC plans from current and previous employers which accounts for 50.7% of my portfolio. I DIY the rest of my portfolio through a mix of equities and fixed income through an RRSP, LIRA and TFSA. The current weighting of my DIY is 70% equities, 23% fixed and 7% cash.
Overall return of the portfolio is 10.7% for 2017. I was very fortunate with the most active account which happens to be the RRSP. It returned 18.2%. I know this was a year in which the market returned more than usual but am happy as my target is a total return of 6%. Glad to see that many here had good returns in 2017. Best wishes for a healthy and prosperous 2018.

Cheers


----------



## leeder (Jan 28, 2012)

My 2017 portfolio return, which consists of non-registered, TFSA and RRSP, came out to 11.05%. I think I under performed the market indices this year. My ideal weighting is to be 100% invested in equities, but realistically, I am about 79.5% equities and 20.5% cash as at Dec 31, 2017. Over the course of the year, I had a higher cash weighting. I only started making some purchases around late August. I really need to do a better job with committing to my weighting in the new year. The best call I made this year was to purchase USD around mid-September, so I'd like to at least give myself a pat on the back for that one. 

Happy 2018! All the best to our health (physically, mentally and financially) in the new year!


----------



## newfoundlander61 (Feb 6, 2011)

Right around 10% for the year in my TFSA.


----------



## redsgomarching (Mar 6, 2016)

2017: TFSA return: 16.82%
2017: RRSP return: 8.85% 
2017: Non registered return: 16.60%


----------



## birdman (Feb 12, 2013)

12.2% (including divies) on our all Cdn blue chip stocks with 50% in Cdn banks, plus BCE,T,FTS, IPL, etc. Fixed income mostly in GIC's and high int savings and returns were minimal. Unfortunately, a special severance package of $55,000. PA ran out a year ago which may have some effect on our lifestyle going forward but we managed ok this year despite funding a week to Mexico for our 2 children and their families, a special assessment of $14,000. on a recreational condo, and a $21,000. write off on a MIC. Total invested assets remained the same as last year. Have some needs coming up including switching furnace to natural gas ($13,000. due to difficult instal), and vehicles are showing their age. Also, our 50th anniversary is coming up in 2019 and my better half is talking about a Mediteranean cruise or ??. I sure miss not having the stability of being on the payroll but am confident that we have plenty to see us to 100 yrs. Will be interested to see how my taxes work out this year.


----------



## Karlhungus (Oct 4, 2013)

Are most people using XIRR or has anyone found a decent app that would spit out accurate ROI ? 9.6% for me all equities split about evenly between the 3 eseries funds.


----------



## Spudd (Oct 11, 2011)

My time-weighted returns over all accounts was 12.66%, with an allocation of 75% equities, 25% fixed income. I'm happy with it!


----------



## Ihatetaxes (May 5, 2010)

12.55 XIRR 
25% CDN equity XIC
25% US equity VTI (rsps), VUN (non-reg)
25% International XEF
25% Short term bonds XSB + GIC ladder


----------



## gibor365 (Apr 1, 2011)

I compare my returns with "index" 20% VSC, 40% XIC, 35% SPY, 5% VEA. This year my return was about 1% above this "index" (similar to last year)


----------



## scorpion_ca (Nov 3, 2014)

Based on brokerage account, my time-weighted returns are following - 

Cash - 9.47% (2017) and 14.28% (Since Inception) / ZPR & VCN
RRSP - 12.09% (2017) and 64.64% (Since Inception) / XEC, XEF & VUN
TFSA - 9.31% (2017) and 30.26% (Since Inception) / ZRE & ZAG

How should I calculate the overall returns of my all accounts? Is this the correct method? (9.47+12.09+9.31)/3=10.29% in 2017.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Needs to be money weighted. Arithmetic average only works if the funds in each of the 3 accounts is exactly the same.


----------



## scorpion_ca (Nov 3, 2014)

AltaRed said:


> Needs to be money weighted. Arithmetic average only works if the funds in each of the 3 accounts is exactly the same.


My brokerage provides time-weighted and personal rate of returns. Is money weighted similar to personal rate of return?

Based on brokerage account, my personal rate of returns are following - 

Cash - 9.39% (2017) and 19.99% (Since Inception) / ZPR & VCN
RRSP - 12.07% (2017) and 55.10% (Since Inception) / XEC, XEF & VUN
TFSA - 9.30% (2017) and 31.10% (Since Inception) / ZRE & ZAG

The account balances are different in three different accounts. What would be the easiest way of calculating overall returns of all accounts? Thanks!


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

I always have trouble figuring this out. My Itrade displays an annual performance graph and if I add the monthly returns for the past 12mths and subtract the months with losses I get

Non-reg +12.03%
RRSP +7.13%
TFSA +8.07%

I chart them against the S&P/TSX60 which is +7.05% for the same 12 month period Dec2016-Nov2017


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

scorpion_ca said:


> My brokerage provides time-weighted and personal rate of returns. Is money weighted similar to personal rate of return?
> 
> Based on brokerage account, my personal rate of returns are following -
> 
> The account balances are different in three different accounts. What would be the easiest way of calculating overall returns of all accounts? Thanks!


I assume you're with TDDI. The Personal Rate of return is equivalent to Money (Dollar) Weighted return. When you're on that screen you can pull down the Selected Account feature and select your different accounts, and at the bottom of that list is ALL ACCOUNTS. That will give you an overall Money Weighted return.

ltr


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Mechanic said:


> I always have trouble figuring this out. My Itrade displays an annual performance graph and if I add the monthly returns for the past 12mths and subtract the months with losses I get
> 
> Non-reg +12.03%
> RRSP +7.13%
> ...


iTrade Performance tab allows you to present results in many ways, e.g. by month, quarter, year, cumulative. It also allows you to show results by account, or combined in as many accounts as you wish. And you can apply a wide range of benchmarking. Plus you can save as many views as you wish and/or download them as PDFs. 

It does not yet include 2017 on a fourth quarter, or full year basis (December not yet included). That will likely be online within 10 days or so.

From iTrade


> The performance of your account is calculated using the Internal Rate of Return method which approximates the performance of your account(s) on a dollar weighted basis. Past performance is not a guarantee of future results.
> 
> The calculation takes into account growth in investments, dividends, and fees related to investments. It adjusts for cash flows (for example deposits, withdrawals, transfers in/out, federal & provincial taxes, withholding taxes, fees) as well as size and timing of cash flows to calculate the monthly total percentage return on your investments. Check the Help to see more details on Performance calculations. Performance reporting requires that the portfolio must remain invested (i.e. hold cash and/or investments) in order to calculate a percentage rate of return. During periods where the portfolio value is zero or less, a null value (-) is displayed. When a portfolio is re-funded with new cash and/or investments, the original “Since Inception” date will change to the start of the new, funded period.


----------



## scorpion_ca (Nov 3, 2014)

like_to_retire said:


> I assume you're with TDDI. The Personal Rate of return is equivalent to Money (Dollar) Weighted return. When you're on that screen you can pull down the Selected Account feature and select your different accounts, and at the bottom of that list is ALL ACCOUNTS. That will give you an overall Money Weighted return.
> 
> ltr


I see that feature. However, it does not include all three accounts. They provided same account number for Cash and RRSP accounts. But, TFSA has a different account number. Therefore, I will not be able to get overall returns of my all accounts.


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> iTrade Performance tab allows you to present results in many ways, e.g. by month, quarter, year, cumulative. It also allows you to show results by account, or combined in as many accounts as you wish. And you can apply a wide range of benchmarking. Plus you can save as many views as you wish and/or download them as PDFs.
> 
> It does not yet include 2017 on a fourth quarter, or full year basis (December not yet included). That will likely be online within 10 days or so.
> 
> From iTrade


Thanks. I did the year and selected Dec 2016 for the start, as it seems to default to 2013 which is when I began DIY with them. I selected my 3 accounts that I trade and also the index, then just added each months figures. It seems right, I made some pretty good gains in my non-reg, which is my largest account.


----------



## RussT (Jul 11, 2016)

I'm confused about the calculation of my returns. My situation is different than the example below, but I want to see if I understand a simple situation before adding in the complications of contributions and cash balances.

So to keep things simple, assume I have a TFSA containing three ETFs. No cash, no contributions and no withdrawals during 2017:

30% XIC
30% XAW
40% XBB

Trailing total returns according to Morningstar for 2017 were:
XIC 8.98
XAW 16.10
XBB 2.42

I calculate my total weighted return to be (.30 x 8.98)+(.30 x 16.10) +(.40 x 2.42) = 8.5%. This is a decent return, but far shy of what some people claim a balanced portfolio should have delivered.

Garth Turner claims a balanced portfolio should have returned 11% 2017 according to his 2018 predictions blog post yesterday:
"10. A middling, boring, pedestrian balanced portfolio, after doing 8.5% in 2016 and 11% in 2017, does peachy in 2018." By "boring" I presume he is talking about a conservative portfolio. I know Garth is sometimes a bit wacky, but he ought to get this close to right.

Any thoughts? Did I pick the wrong ETFs?


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Without context, Garth could be blowing smoke out of 'you know what'. Never trust pundits/talking heads without knowing the specifics. His definition of balanced could be almost any combination of FI type and equity type. 

Your ETF picks are entirely appropriate. Besides, why would you judge ANYTHING on a one year basis?


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

Mechanic said:


> Thanks. I did the year and selected Dec 2016 for the start, as it seems to default to 2013 which is when I began DIY with them. I selected my 3 accounts that I trade and also the index, then just added each months figures. It seems right, I made some pretty good gains in my non-reg, which is my largest account.


Why pick Dec 2016? The view I picked shows 4 bars on the chart, i.e. return for each of the CALENDAR years 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, but nothing for 2017 yet (since they don't have December data plugged in yet). You must have picked 12 month periods?

FWIW, I never rely on return data provided by others, especially the brokerages without knowing the specific assumptions, e.g. XIRR, forex rates as provided by Bank of Canada (by month at least, if not by day)


----------



## Mechanic (Oct 29, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> Why pick Dec 2016? The view I picked shows 4 bars on the chart, i.e. return for each of the CALENDAR years 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, but nothing for 2017 yet (since they don't have December data plugged in yet). You must have picked 12 month periods?
> 
> FWIW, I never rely on return data provided by others, especially the brokerages without knowing the specific assumptions, e.g. XIRR, forex rates as provided by Bank of Canada (by month at least, if not by day)


I picked Dec 2016 so I had 12 months, as Dec 2017 is not yet available. Then the data gave me a fractional % + or - for each month and I just added/subtracted them to give a 12 month total. I am going to dig out the actual $ figures for start of year and see if they agree. I think I actually did better on the year because this past month I made a few profitable trades in Dec 2017


----------



## Ihatetaxes (May 5, 2010)

RussT said:


> I'm confused about the calculation of my returns. My situation is different than the example below, but I want to see if I understand a simple situation before adding in the complications of contributions and cash balances.
> 
> So to keep things simple, assume I have a TFSA containing three ETFs. No cash, no contributions and no withdrawals during 2017:
> 
> ...


Mine did 12.55 but lower allocation to bonds. See specific holdings back a page. FI at 25% (a mix of short term bonds, GIC ladder and small % of cash).


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

I had every intention to ignore this thread, as I don't wish to insult any CMF posters, but I feel there may be some value in sharing an outlying opinion.

Previous posters, please accept my apology....

From my perspective, comparing returns has a vulgar component, like comparing penis length. I feel there is something destructive about it which appeals to the braggart in all of us.

Those who have made high gains proudly post while losers lick their wounds. Meanwhile, couch potatoes are likely to feel discouraged at their low returns when so many others are posting double digit yields.

Potatoes and ladders, please consider this sort of thread is a filter for the emboldened. While there is absolutely nothing wrong with this thread or sharing of returns, it is not an objective cross-section of the investment community.

Here is my perspective.

We made a lot of money on the equity markets in 2016. It was the first time we made more in equities than we did with our real estate in over a decade. In 2017, we made even more. This detail is of no relevance.

What we are proud of is having a set of methods that have been refined over the years for increased objectivity. Our ability to analyze and execute on R-E investments is well vetted and proven reliable. Our ability to analyze market investments is going well but has been less reliable in the last 35 years than R-E. Still, we are on a level of comfort that is sufficient for us to be delighted to start our retirement on this very day.

My advice is to forget the number. Look at it wholistically. Your analysis of your own position ought to include how much you believe in your process, how much you've been able to improve your process, and any effect it has had on your life.

Remember, the best return is the lottery player who invested $1 and got tens of millions in return.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

You can't improve what you don't measure.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

TomB16 said:


> I had every intention to ignore this thread ....




every year it's always the same

a torrent of + 5.36%, + 27.89%, everything in between, XIRR, net worth, modified dietz, i-don't-understand-my-broker's-performance-graph, i-just-take-broker's-performance-plus-i-add-all-distributions-&-dividends-&-then-i-subtract-net-losses-on-paper.

after all this, who could possibly go wrong ...

PS if you look for a couple years, you'll see the serious investors don't post these threads each:


.




.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I think it is good to benchmark one's performance so as to provide some enlightenment as to where one is going and their strategies in getting there. That said, the information is really only relevant to oneself, and any posting of results in these threads are just data points. The bigger issue is how individual investors interpret and respond to their own results.


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

We are in a position of having made more absolute gains than we've ever made in our life, by quite a margin. I'm humbled by the numbers. 2017 was also our second best yielding year across our entire portfolio.

Meanwhile, we're moving into retirement so what does this mean?

We've built a roof. It looks strong. We won't know if it will hold up through the next storm. All we can do estimate results but markets have transformed the last few years. I believe fundamental drivers have changed. I believe front runners and retail investors make a significant difference where they were irrelevant in the 1980s when I started investing.

The most important thing to me is not today's numbers but if we can make it through the next financial crisis we all know is coming.


----------



## humble_pie (Jun 7, 2009)

AltaRed said:


> I think it is good to benchmark one's performance



benchmark against what, though

these annual my-performance threads in cmf are always all over the map. Folks post any old performance modality higgledy-piggledy. XIRR. Modified dietz. Net worth. Broker figs, even though many broker performance analytics are hopelessly inaccurate. Some cmffers even post family net worth .:biggrin:

there is a "diary" section of the forum where numbers of mostly young people post chronicles of their progress. Everyone can see that these diaries are valuable, if only for the fact that they incentivize a young person to build a plan & then stick to it, meanwhile submitting it to public analysis every once in a while. 

nearly always, the diary threads have depth, substance, meaningfulness, direction, purpose. There are some pretty amazing young people carrying out some totally amazing projects in those threads. The forum should support them dearly, imho. Particularly the posters who undergo setbacks. They are to be hugely congratulated & praised for their courage & their honesty, imho. Meanwhile the elders of the forum should be calling upon the Great Spirit to right the imbalance & reward the discipline of these deserving but temporarily stung, in the end.

however, with respect to a thread like this, i for one fail to see how posting one figure - derived nobody knows how - once a year, with no situs or background, can offer any insight to anyone.


.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

I agree that these annual threads are not very useful. 

That said, every competent investor should be able to:

1. Calculate their time-weighted or/and money-weighted investment return. This is a simple task. If a person can't do even that, they should probably stick to a well-managed balanced fund like Mawer.

2. Figure out the right passive benchmark for their portfolio. What is "right" depends on the investment strategy and portfolio composition.

An investor who badly trails an appropriate passive benchmark on a 5 and 10 year basis should look in the mirror and ask some hard questions.

It's instructive that, of all the people who posted in this thread so far, AltaRed was the only one who shared his long-term numbers. That is a sign of a competent investor right there. But we already knew that.


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

I was moslty a couch potato for about 10 years. That period ended a few years ago.

I must admit that, at least in part, the effort to spool up on studying markets and equities again was spurred on by thoughts of my own extremely modest returns (Actually went a touch under 0% one year when markets were on the rise) and reports of others making good returns. So, thank you to those who have been gracious enough to share their personal information.

For now, however, I will continue to wear a Speedo when I go into the steam room.


----------



## james4beach (Nov 15, 2012)

Yeah, I think the diary threads are great. I have learned a lot from them and the longer term tracking is much more useful.

Being able to calculate returns is very worthwhile, though. I only started paying attention to my true performance a couple years ago.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

I agree with HP that most of this thread is rarely useful, and most often, highly misleading. But it is inevitable a thread like this happens every year, and in every forum I've ever participated in.

When a poster includes context, e.g. entire investment portfolio (not just one cherry picked account), what function is used (XIRR, time weighted, money weighted, etc) and some information on investing strategies such as active vs passive approach and/or asset allocation, some directional learnings can sometimes be taken from the material. I skip over pretty much everything else.

Example: If an investor is a Cdn equity stock picker, the least that person can/should do is compare their annual (and multi-year results) against the Total Return Composite Index. Some brokerage tools already provide that ability.

Added: I never remember who posted what anyway after I've gone past their post....


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

TomB16 said:


> My advice is to forget the number. Look at it wholistically. Your analysis of your own position ought to include how much you believe in your process, how much you've been able to improve your process, and any effect it has had on your life.


Hi Tom,

I found the above quote ironic, coming from you.

You recently started a thread on Scientific Method. There, you wrote:



TomB16 said:


> I've come to the realisation that some CMF folks either do not a basic understanding of the scientific method or they do not believe in it. This thread exists for the former group.
> 
> Notice, I've posted this in the Hot Button Discussions forum, as I am aware this thread will attract much criticism.
> 
> ...


How would you go about applying scientific method to DIY investing? Can you do it without measuring performance? I don't think you can.

Many (most?) investors think they are above average. This is a subjective perception. To test if this perception is true, you have to measure your performance against an appropriate benchmark. You are not being honest with yourself if you refuse to measure.


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

Hi Goldstone. 

My post in #38 was specific in speaking to potatoes and ladders. You may wish to read it a bit more closely.



TomB16 said:


> Potatoes and ladders, please consider this sort of thread is a filter for the emboldened. While there is absolutely nothing wrong with this thread or sharing of returns, it is not an objective cross-section of the investment community.


We were couch potatoes for years. We understood that we were trading safety and low time input for stable but low returns.

Friends and relatives were achieving higher yields than us during our couch potato period, however, this was a period during which we were mostly in real estate. I needed the time to renovate and manage our inventory.

I would contend that it isn't appropriate to compare a couch potato to a value investor or a GIC ladder investor. To do so is to compare stated returns (somewhat questionable, as Humble_pie has pointed out) with no regard to risk profile or appetite.

It's the old story. Everyone wants the 1500hp, fire breathing, race engine but they want perfect reliability and great fuel economy. To a real extent, this thread would be like my Mom, Don Garlits, Kyle Busch, and myself all comparing our 0 to 100 kph times.

Also, I hesitate to mention but feel I must, forum data is questionable. I suspect the data here has more integrity than other forums but forum "facts" frequently don't pass the smell test. How many diesel, 1 ton, 4x4, pickup trucks have had their injection pumps rebuilt and injection timing scrutinized under microscope because a bunch of forum posting truck owners claim to get 28 mpg while doing 75 mph in their massive trucks?

This latter point brings us back to the scientific method. If we don't know what the numbers mean specifically, through an open and published process, it's not good quality data and should be considered as such.

Always nice posting with you, Goldstone.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

TomB16 said:


> We were couch potatoes for years. We understood that we were trading safety and low time input *for stable but low returns*.


This is off-topic but sorry, I can't let this slide. 

1. Couch Potato strategy accepts *market* returns, not low returns.
2. Couch Potato moniker doesn't imply a conservative asset allocation. An aggressive couch potato can be 100% in equities.
3. Couch Potato returns were poor in the "lost decade for equities" (2000-2008). 
4. Couch Potato returns have been great in the post-GFC era.

Again, the strategy delivers *market* returns. _"Stable but low"_, as you put it, is not accurate.

-- end of nitpicking --




TomB16 said:


> I would contend that it isn't appropriate to compare a couch potato to a value investor or a GIC ladder investor. To do so is to compare stated returns (somewhat questionable, as Humble_pie has pointed out) with no regard to risk profile or appetite.


Agree. The right comparison is: your portfolio return vs. an appropriate passive benchmark.




TomB16 said:


> Also, I hesitate to mention but feel I must, forum data is questionable.
> 
> ...
> 
> This latter point brings us back to the scientific method. If we don't know what the numbers mean specifically, through an open and published process, it's not good quality data and should be considered as such.


Agree.


----------



## TomB16 (Jun 8, 2014)

GoldStone said:


> Again, the strategy delivers *market* returns. _"Stable but low"_, as you put it, is not accurate.


Couch potato does not deliver market returns. Market indexes return market returns.

Couch potato returns less than market returns due to bond dilution, MER overhead, and tracking error.

Check it out -> here




GoldStone said:


> The right comparison is: your portfolio return vs. an appropriate passive benchmark.


Sure, that might be right for you. It isn't right for us.

We are happy with our return and compare our market returns to our own calculation of inflation as a baseline and various other investment "options" (including 10 year AAA bonds and two market indexes).

I've also done my best to quantify the risk of our portfolio and also other options, with a calculated comparison. To this day, I don't know how this could be done objectively but I do my best.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

TomB16 said:


> Couch potato does not deliver market returns. Market indexes return market returns.
> 
> Couch potato returns less than market returns due to bond dilution, MER overhead, and tracking error.


Yes. I assumed that goes without saying.


----------



## AltaRed (Jun 8, 2009)

That 'cost' is not much with MERs in the 5-10bp range. Tracking error is not always negative and bond ETFs track the bond index as they are supposed too. 

I cannot imagine how anyone can be so negative towards passive investing. It is the right answer, as articulated by others including Buffett, for almost all retail investors... well, Canadian market a sometimes real life exception due to its skew to some sectors that often destroy shareholder value over the long term.


----------



## GreatLaker (Mar 23, 2014)

RussT said:


> I'm confused about the calculation of my returns. My situation is different than the example below, but I want to see if I understand a simple situation before adding in the complications of contributions and cash balances.
> 
> So to keep things simple, assume I have a TFSA containing three ETFs. No cash, no contributions and no withdrawals during 2017:
> 
> ...


Asset mix can have a large impact on returns for an indexed portfolio. For a portfolio with 25% XIC, 50% XAW and 25% XBB the return for 2017 based on M* numbers you provided would have been 10.9%. So Garth's 11% number is about right for a portfolio with 25% fixed income and less of a Canadian market bias than your example.

But the fixed income component is there to lower volatility, avoid drawdowns in bear markets and reduce sequence of return risk for investors withdrawing capital from a portfolio.

Avoid the temptation to do short term tweaks to a portfolio. Performance chasing is usually a losing move. Markets move in cycles. Just because the US market was strong for the last few years does not mean that will continue forever. In fact assets that have very strong returns often will be followed by poor returns because nothing can outperform forever. Study up on asset allocation at places like canadiancouchpotato.com, finiki.org, and the Rick Ferri's opus book All About Asset Allocation.

CCP's annual performance blog posts show how small changes in asset allocation and geographic allocations can impact performance, but are highly unpredictable year-to-year.
http://canadiancouchpotato.com/2017/01/06/couch-potato-portfolio-returns-for-2016/
http://canadiancouchpotato.com/2016/01/11/couch-potato-portfolio-returns-for-2015/


----------



## kelaa (Apr 5, 2016)

Averaged 11.8% across self-directed non-registered, TFSA, and RSP accounts. Holdings mostly Canadian large caps, with a sprinkling of mid and small caps, and a minor portion (4.5%) of US and international e-series funds.

Best performers: Air Canada, Veresen, Martinrea.
Worst performers: Enbridge, Altagas, Riocan, Clearwater Seafood.


----------



## ian (Jun 18, 2016)

Balanced. 10.1%


----------



## Franky Jr (Oct 5, 2009)

GoldStone said:


> That said, every competent investor should be able to:
> 
> 1. Calculate their time-weighted or/and money-weighted investment return. This is a simple task. If a person can't do even that, they should probably stick to a well-managed balanced fund like Mawer.
> 
> ...


HAHAHA YES!

anyways, XIRR 11.6%. My kids RESPs which is simple eseries 25% each scored 10.8%, so this Garth Turner person is pretty close.


----------



## Benting (Dec 21, 2016)

I think it is a great thread. It is a human nature to want to know how others did last year.

+15.1%, money weighted (I think) from all acc, RRIF, LIF, TFSA, RESP and unreg, that I calculated manually. 100% Canadian equities, no MF, ETF, bond and gic. A little fat added to prepare for the lean year(hope not, knock on wood) ahead that a lot of people have been speculated for the last few years.


----------



## Bill G (Jan 8, 2017)

My XIRR for 2017 was 10.19%. 

ETFs (~80%) and some D-series mutual funds (Asia-pacific, emerging markets, cdn small caps, and an income fund to park distributions).

Portfolio was (roughly) 25% Investment Grade Fixed Income (predominantly ZAG), 60% equities (split 40% US, 30% Canada, 30% EAFE/Emerging markets), and 15% risky income (about 1/3 high yield bonds (HYI), 1/3 REITs (ZRE) and 1/3 preferred shares (HPR). 

Will use PWL / Couch Potato postings for benchmark returns. Also compare with bank balanced mutual funds (with similar fixed income weighting) to gauge if I'm on the right track.


----------



## CPA Candidate (Dec 15, 2013)

XIRR was 11.7%.

Had some tremendous results with a few companies (Yangarra Resources 150%, Spin Master 65%, PLC 47%, GSY 58%) and few epic collapses (CRH Medical -43%, CPG -43%). 

Biggest regret was finally giving up on GM stock, which I sold for $34 and is now $10 higher.

Over the past 3 years my portfolio has performed better than the TSX with much less volatility, so I'm happy.


----------



## snowbeavers (Mar 19, 2013)

Couch potato portfolio returned 14.16% (plus dividends) in 2017. 
60%stocks 32.4% bonds and 7%REITs (balanced with CDN, US and global equities)


----------



## GalacticPineapple (Feb 28, 2013)

I slightly beat the indexes using a slightly modified CCP strategy with some Canadian options action.


----------



## Mookie (Feb 29, 2012)

Total return in 2017 across all accounts: 11.6%


----------



## larry81 (Nov 22, 2010)

Total return in 2017 across all accounts: 13.13% (including dividends)


----------



## Fain87 (Jan 20, 2018)

2017 Was 226.50%. 

YTD 2018: 13.24%
2017: 226.50%
2016: -31.81%
2015 -0.69% 
2014 32.09% 
2013 -1.42%


----------



## agent99 (Sep 11, 2013)

AltaRed said:


> I think it is good to benchmark one's performance so as to provide some enlightenment as to where one is going and their strategies in getting there. That said, *the information is really only relevant to oneself*, and any posting of results in these threads are just data points. The bigger issue is how individual investors interpret and respond to their own results.


Agreed. I just use a simple arithmetic return. Return=(change in value)/(Jan 1st value). (Change in value) is Dec31st-Jan1st + withdrawals-deposits. Mathematically unsophisticated, but I have done it this way for 15 years since retiring. It is a relevant benchmark to me. 

For 2017, our simple return was 7.75%. After withdrawals, Portfolio grew by 3.5% (at least better than inflation!). Our overall FI allocation for all 6 accounts has gone down below 40% - Partly due to gain in equities and drop in value of bonds as they approach maturity. Currently about 37% and needs to be rebalanced. 

Not unhappy. Our only income is from CPP/OAS plus investment income. RRIFs continue to grow despite taking the required annual withdrawal. Could have done better with more in US equities (we have zero). We do have some international exposure, and that has done quite well.


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

Fain87 said:


> 2017 Was 226.50%.
> 
> YTD 2018: 13.24%
> 2017: 226.50%
> ...


You underperformed S&P 500 in the 5 years from 2013 to 2017, despite your massive return in 2017. Sorry to tell you that. 

I don't like poking people in the eye but you kinda asked for it with your condescending posts in another thread.


----------



## OhGreatGuru (May 24, 2009)

They was fair-to-middl'n.


----------



## Blisken (Jan 30, 2018)

*2017 Was a good Run*

2017 resulted in an 11% total portfolio gain. US equity dominated the portfolio.


----------



## Fain87 (Jan 20, 2018)

GoldStone said:


> You underperformed S&P 500 in the 5 years from 2013 to 2017, despite your massive return in 2017. Sorry to tell you that.
> 
> I don't like poking people in the eye but you kinda asked for it with your condescending posts in another thread.


Check your math again. 5 year cumulative return for SPX on yesterdays close was 111.10%. Mine was 299.86%. I'm not asking you to solve cancer. Just some basic math. Sorry to tell you that. 


MTD QTD YTD 1 Year 3 Year 5 Year Since Inception
SPX 6.83% 6.83% 6.83% 26.84% 51.74% 111.10% 138.23%

MTD QTD YTD 1 Year 3 Year 5 Year Since Inception
Consolidated 18.38% 18.38% 18.38% 251.00% 192.63% 299.86% 203.12%


----------



## like_to_retire (Oct 9, 2016)

[quote="GoldStone]You underperformed S&P 500 in the 5 years from 2013 to 2017, despite your massive return in 2017.[/quote]

Yeah, if I do a quick calculation, I would say Fain87 did indeed come out ahead after 5 years (2013-2017) compared to the S&P500, although we have no mention of currency. You can see the math below.

Either way, I suspect you were dazzled by the incongruous roller coaster ride over that period. It's a problem with this type of thread. Regardless of the cornucopia of methods that people report their returns, there's also portfolio size that has a marked effect. Someone investing $10,000 can easily go-for-broke and bet it all on the dream of a 10 bagger, with the results every year that in no way resemble the market, but if they are eventually successful, the multi hundred percent return may make up for the previous failures. On the other hand, many of us here have multi million dollar portfolios, and this type of go-for-broke investing is reserved for a very small portion, such that the overall return results end in something that more closely resembles the index.

GoldStone, I'm sure you're quite good at math, but were dazzled by the roller coaster.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Calculation of Fain87 five years where the inputs are:
2013 -1.42% 
2014 +32.09%
2015 -0.69%
2016 -31.81%
2017 +226.50%

Cumulative Return:
=[(1+Return1) x (1+Return2) x (1+Return3) x (1+Return4) x (1+Return5)] - 1
=((1-0.0142)*(1+0.3209)*(1-0.0069)*(1-0.3181)*(1+2.265))-1
= 187.9%

Geometric Average Annual Total Return:
=[(1+Return1) x (1+Return2) x (1+Return3) x (1+Return4) x (1+Return5)]1/n - 1
= 23.6%

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Calculation of the S&P500 five years (including dividends) where the inputs are:
2013 +32.39%
2014 +13.69%
2015 +1.38%
2016 +11.96%
2017 +21.83%

Cumulative Return:
=[(1+Return1) x (1+Return2) x (1+Return3) x (1+Return4) x (1+Return5)] - 1
=(((1+0.3239)*(1+0.1369)*(1+0.0138)*(1+0.1196)*(1+0.2183))^(1/5))-1
= 108.1%

Geometric Average Annual Total Return:
=[(1+Return1) x (1+Return2) x (1+Return3) x (1+Return4) x (1+Return5)]1/n - 1
= 15.8%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ltr


----------



## Fain87 (Jan 20, 2018)

like_to_retire said:


> Yeah, if I do a quick calculation, I would say Fain87 did indeed come out ahead after 5 years (2013-2017) compared to the S&P500, although we have no mention of currency. You can see the math below.
> 
> Either way, I suspect you were dazzled by the incongruous roller coaster ride over that period. It's a problem with this type of thread. Regardless of the cornucopia of methods that people report their returns, there's also portfolio size that has a marked effect. Someone investing $10,000 can easily go-for-broke and bet it all on the dream of a 10 bagger, with the results every year that in no way resemble the market, but if they are eventually successful, the multi hundred percent return may make up for the previous failures. On the other hand, many of us here have multi million dollar portfolios, and this type of go-for-broke investing is reserved for a very small portion, such that the overall return results end in something that more closely resembles the index.
> 
> ...


I see TFSA accounts with 500k, 600k, over 1 million at my job. Some of which are being audited as a business because of excess gains and/or trading. You don't need to be a cowboy to have outsized returns in large portfolios. Although you need to do a **** ton of research. 

The previous was a money weighted return which has been mandated by the CSA to be shown on client statements. It may have been a cornucopia before but Money-Weighted is now industry standard for client reporting.

Time Weighted is below as of yesterday close. 

MTD QTD YTD 1 Year 3 Year 5 Year Since Inception
Consolodated 18.47% 18.47% 18.47% 209.27% 244.26% 421.24% 397.21%


MTD QTD D 1 Year 3 Year 5 Year Since Inception
SPX 6.83% 6.83% 6.83% 26.84% 51.74% 111.10% 138.23%


----------



## scorpion_ca (Nov 3, 2014)

Fain87 said:


> I see TFSA accounts with 500k, 600k, over 1 million at my job. Some of which are being audited as a business because of excess gains and/or trading. You don't need to be a cowboy to have outsized returns in large portfolios. Although you need to do a **** ton of research.
> 
> The previous was a money weighted return which has been mandated by the CSA to be shown on client statements. It may have been a cornucopia before but Money-Weighted is now industry standard for client reporting.
> 
> ...


Would you mind to share your holdings?


----------



## GoldStone (Mar 6, 2011)

like_to_retire said:


> Yeah, if I do a quick calculation, I would say Fain87 did indeed come out ahead after 5 years (2013-2017) compared to the S&P500, although we have no mention of currency. You can see the math below.
> 
> Either way, I suspect you were dazzled by the incongruous roller coaster ride over that period.


No, I made a data entry mistake when I transcribed the data into a spreadsheet. Mea culpa. My apologies to Fain87.


----------



## Fain87 (Jan 20, 2018)

scorpion_ca said:


> Would you mind to share your holdings?


IBKR, EQB.TO, EQB.PRC.TO,MOGO.TO, MOGO.DB.TO, NFLX, BNS, SU were the notable ones for 2017. Concentrated alot in Financials. 

My favorites picks remain IBKR, EQB.TO, and NFLX, 1H4.SI for 2018. 

No position yet in 1H4.SI.


----------



## indexxx (Oct 31, 2011)

RRSP #1- index funds: 21.3%
RRSP #2 Equities: 4.7% (took a couple of haircuts)
TFSA- equities: 42.7%
Property: 21%


----------



## Fain87 (Jan 20, 2018)

indexxx said:


> RRSP #1- index funds: 21.3%
> RRSP #2 Equities: 4.7% (took a couple of haircuts)
> TFSA- equities: 42.7%
> Property: 21%


Great gain for property! Does that include leverage? Some of the beauty of Real Estate is the leverage you get. 20% downpayment is basically leveraged 5 times. 

Sounds like you had a good year.


----------

