This is a report of the year-end results of a low-effort ‘lazy’ test portfolio I constructed on the 6th of January 2017 and reported in post no. 23990 dated 8th January. As I stated in that post,
“I have chosen the top eleven stocks Saul currently has in his portfolio since I cannot choose better ones myself. However, as the intention is not to mimic Saul’s portfolio I have assigned equal weight to these stocks. This is intended to be a LTBH portfolio except that a stop loss limit of 10% will be imposed on all the stocks to limit the downside. Additionally, if the ‘story changes’ substantially a stock will be liquidated no matter what the price is at the time. Hopefully such events will be few, if any, during the year. The proceeds of such liquidation will be divided equally between the three top performing stocks to buy additional shares. At the end of the year the performance will be compared with that of S&P 500 Growth ETF, VOOG or IVW.”
The test portfolio grew by 67.5% at the end of trading on 5th January 2018 if all stocks were treated as LTBH.
However, using the minimal changes proposed above, which had involved four occasions of stock replacement (described below) the growth was 75.9%.
For comparison, I worked out the percentage growth of a few popular ETFs during the test period and, included their growth in the calendar year 2016 in brackets:
FDN (83.60 – 114.01) 36.4% (11.7%)
VOOG (110.43 – 141.23) 27.9% (8.0%)
IVW (123.08 – 157.48) 28.0% (7.8%)
IJS, which grew by 32% in the 2016 calendar year managed 12.0% during the test period.
My two favorite technology ETFs, ARKK and ARKW, grew by 84.9% and 83.2% respectively during the year ending 5th January, 2018. These two do have some exposure to the Chinese market (6% and 12% respectively) and about 6% to Bitcoin Investment.
The Portfolio without any changes:
Ticker # of Shares Pur. Price($) Purchase Cost($) Current Value($) Gain(%)
AMZN 13 796.00 10,348 15,979 54.4
ANET 99 101.28 10,027 23,400 133.8
BOFI 347 28.85 10,011 10,441 4.3
HUBS 190 52.60 9,994 17,195 72.1
LGIH 337 29.63 9,985 26,094 161.3
PAYC 211 47.49 10,020 17,699 76.6
SBNY 66 150.50 9,933 9,343 -5.9
SHOP 213 46.90 9,990 23,554 135.8
SPLK 178 56.17 9,998 15,643 56.4
SSNI 764 13.09 10,001 12,443 24.2
UBNT 174 57.37 9,982 12,914 29.4
Total $110,289 $184,705 67.5%<
The portfolio after four changes as proposed:
Ticker # of Shares Cur.Value($)
AMZN 16 19,666
ANET 184 43,566
HUBS 190 17,195
LGIH 398 30,817
PAYC 261 21,893
SHOP 374 41,357
SPLK 222 19,509
Total $194,003
__Gain (194,003/110,289 -1.00)*100 = 75.9%.__
The four occasions when the price of a stock went at least 10% below the purchase price and remained there for 5 consecutive trading days (- this delay was used to eliminate short term market reactions) were:
(1) February 18 - Sold 174 UBNT. Bought 24 ANET, 47 SHOP and 44 SPLK.
(2) March 10 - Sold 764 SSNI. Bought 23 ANET, 50 PAYC and 44 SHOP.
(3) August 4 - Sold 347 BOFI. Bought 3 AMAZ, 22 ANET and 40 SHOP.
(4) November 5 - Sold 66 SBNY. Bought 16 ANET, 61 LGIH and 30 SHOP.
I will be the first to admit that no firm conclusion can be drawn from a single year’s performance, particularly because this test portfolio happens to consist only of Saul-type growth stocks which did extraordinarily well in 2017. I intend to retain this portfolio and monitor its performance in 2018. I also would like to conduct a similar exercise with a fresh selection of some 20 stocks which had experienced consistent high growth over the last 12 months, expect good revenue growth going forward, have low debt ratio and a few other criteria that can easily be accommodated in a Stock Screener program like that by FinViz or Fidelity. I will change the selling criterion to 10% drop from ‘the current price’ or ‘the purchase price’ whichever is greater. This way I can capture the gain (if any) a stock might have acquired at the time of the sale.
Wishing you all great investment success in 2018.
alphab