Sentences with phrase «greater than the market return»

Not exact matches

«Our job is to drive tangible return on the marketing investment of clients, and the work we're doing is having greater impact than ever before,» he says.

As part of a long - term strategy, EM equity funds offer investors the potential for greater returns than they might get if they invest exclusively in developed markets.

the market capitalization spectrum (small - cap stocks tend to have greater risk - return profiles than larger, more established companies);

A beta of 1.00 indicates that the fund's returns will, on average, be as volatile as the market and move in the same direction; a beta higher than 1.00 indicates that if the market rises or falls, the fund will rise or fall respectively but to a greater degree; a beta of less than 1.00 indicates that if the market rises or falls, the fund will rise or fall to a lesser degree.

The PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF is an actively managed fund that seeks to provide greater income and total return potential than money market funds by investing in ultra-short-term debt securities.

While there's a great deal of variation across individual market cycles, that's roughly the historical average for a 5.25 year market cycle: a 135 % gain, a 30 % loss, and a 65 % full - cycle return (about 10 % compounded annually, with the full - cycle return coming in at less than half of the bull market gain).

«The goal in investing is asymmetry: to expose yourself to return in a way that doesn't expose you commensurately to risk, and to participate in gains when the market rises to a greater extent than you participate in losses when it falls.

Do strategies that seek to exploit return volatility persistence by adjusting stock market exposure inversely with recent market volatility relative to some target (including exposures greater than 100 %) produce obvious benefits for investors?

Conclusion In general, the historical movement of inflation provides evidence that real rates of return on T - bills will revert closer to historical norms rather than what we experienced during the Great Bull Market.

Mar Vista Investment Partners has a really interesting research piece out The Price You Pay which has a great table outlining the benefit of an asymmetric return profile (i.e. having more market exposure during up markets than down markets).

Table 1 shows the excess returns for a number of valuation metrics within the U.S. Large Stocks universe, stocks trading in the U.S. with a market capitalization greater than average from 1964 to 2015.

Additionally, Qualcomm will likely return over $ 25 billion to investors over the next two years or greater than 22 % of its market cap.

In their world, the only way to earn a return greater than the market is to take more risk, and likewise, the consequence of taking less risk than the market is earning a lower return.

When it comes down to it, in a stock market that is feeling more uncertain and volatile than it has in several years, and when income vehicles are priced at a premium, there's a certain wisdom (or at least well - studied prudence) in considering a slightly lower dividend in exchange for the potential for greater stability and long - term return.

Time for some brutal honesty... this team, as it stands, is in no better position to compete next season than they were 12 months ago, minus the fact that some fans have been easily snowed by the acquisition of Lacazette, the free transfer LB and the release of Sanogo... if you look at the facts carefully you will see a team that still has far more questions than answers... to better show what I mean by this statement I will briefly discuss the current state of affairs on a position - by - position basis... in goal we have 4 potential candidates, but in reality we have only 1 option with any real future and somehow he's the only one we have actively tried to get rid of for years because he and his father were a little too involved on social media and he got caught smoking (funny how people still defend Wiltshire under the same and far worse circumstances)... you would think we would want to keep any goaltender that Juventus had interest in, as they seem to have a pretty good history when it comes to that position... as far as the defenders on our current roster there are only a few individuals whom have the skill and / or youth worthy of our time and / or investment, as such we should get rid of anyone who doesn't meet those simple requirements, which means we should get rid of DeBouchy, Gibbs, Gabriel, Mertz and loan out Chambers to see if last seasons foray with Middlesborough was an anomaly or a prediction of things to come... some fans have lamented wildly about the return of Mertz to the starting lineup due to his FA Cup performance but these sort of pie in the sky meanderings are indicative of what's wrong with this club and it's wishy - washy fan - base... in addition to these moves the club should aggressively pursue the acquisition of dominant and mobile CB to stabilize an all too fragile defensive group that has self - destructed on numerous occasions over the past 5 seasons... moving forward and building on our need to re-establish our once dominant presence throughout the middle of the park we need to target a CDM then do whatever it takes to get that player into the fold without any of the usual nickel and diming we have become famous for (this kind of ruthless haggling has cost us numerous special players and certainly can't help make the player in question feel good about the way their future potential employer feels about them)... in order for us to become dominant again we need to be strong up the middle again from Goalkeeper to CB to DM to ACM to striker, like we did in our most glorious years before and during Wenger's reign... with this in mind, if we want Ozil to be that dominant attacking midfielder we can't keep leaving him exposed to constant ridicule about his lack of defensive prowess and provide him with the proper players in the final third... he was never a good defensive player in Real or with the German National squad and they certainly didn't suffer as a result of his presence on the pitch... as for the rest of the midfield the blame falls squarely in the hands of Wenger and Gazidis, the fact that Ramsey, Ox, Sanchez and even Ozil were allowed to regularly start when none of the aforementioned had more than a year left under contract is criminal for a club of this size and financial might... the fact that we could find money for Walcott and Xhaka, who weren't even guaranteed starters, means that our whole business model needs a complete overhaul... for me it's time to get rid of some serious deadweight, even if it means selling them below what you believe their market value is just to simply right this ship and change the stagnant culture that currently exists... this means saying goodbye to Wiltshire, Elneny, Carzola, Walcott and Ramsey... everyone, minus Elneny, have spent just as much time on the training table as on the field of play, which would be manageable if they weren't so inconsistent from a performance standpoint (excluding Carzola, who is like the recent version of Rosicky — too bad, both will be deeply missed)... in their places we need to bring in some proven performers with no history of injuries... up front, although I do like the possibilities that a player like Lacazette presents, the fact that we had to wait so many years to acquire some true quality at the striker position falls once again squarely at the feet of Wenger... this issue highlights the ultimate scam being perpetrated by this club since the arrival of Kroenke: pretend your a small market club when it comes to making purchases but milk your fans like a big market club when it comes to ticket prices and merchandising... I believe the reason why Wenger hasn't pursued someone of Henry's quality, minus a fairly inexpensive RVP, was that he knew that they would demand players of a similar ilk to be brought on board and that wasn't possible when the business model was that of a «selling» club... does it really make sense that we could only make a cheeky bid for Suarez, or that we couldn't get Higuain over the line when he was being offered up for half the price he eventually went to Juve for, or that we've only paid any interest to strikers who were clearly not going to press their current teams to let them go to Arsenal like Benzema or Cavani... just part of the facade that finally came crashing down when Sanchez finally called their bluff... the fact remains that no one wants to win more than Sanchez, including Wenger, and although I don't agree with everything that he has done off the field, I would much rather have Alexis front and center than a manager who has clearly bought into the Kroenke model in large part due to the fact that his enormous ego suggests that only he could accomplish great things without breaking the bank... unfortunately that isn't possible anymore as the game has changed quite dramatically in the last 15 years, which has left a largely complacent and complicit Wenger on the outside looking in... so don't blame those players who demanded more and were left wanting... don't blame those fans who have tried desperately to raise awareness for several years when cracks began to appear... place the blame at the feet of those who were well aware all along of the potential pitfalls of just such a plan but continued to follow it even when it was no longer a financial necessity, like it ever really was...

Since the financial returns from self - publishing per book are so many times greater than the royalties paid by traditional publishers, I could easily cut the marketing firm in on the returns.

Yes, that money could be in the stock market instead I guess, but other than that you aren't going to find any investments making great returns right now and the stock market is pretty volatile.

Paying off your high - interest debt will earn you a greater return than investing in the stock market ever will.

In addition, under certain market conditions, the funds may accept greater volatility than would typically be the case, in order to seek their targeted return.

Basically, stocks with lower valuation (and smaller size) deliver greater than excess returns than the overall market.

As investors peer into the future and contemplate the potential for lower market returns, we see few options with greater versatility and more powerful risk - adjusted return potential than asset allocation products.

Secondly, under the efficient market hypothesis, no single investor is ever able to attain greater profitability than another with the same amount of invested funds: their equal possession of information means they can only achieve identical returns.

To give a sense of that, we recently did a global screen of nearly 5,800 non-financial companies with market values greater than $ 300 million, positive free cash flow over the past 12 months, at least an 8 % return on equity over the past 12 months, net debt to EBITDA of no more than 2.5 x and a trailing EV / EBIT multiple of no more than 8x.

When it comes down to it, in a stock market that is feeling more uncertain and volatile than it has in several years, and when income vehicles are priced at a premium, there's a certain wisdom (or at least well - studied prudence) in considering a slightly lower dividend in exchange for the potential for greater stability and long - term return.

This gives the cash account in VUL policies the potential for greater returns than a typical whole life policy by investing in equity - linked investments, but also makes them subject to greater risk due to the volatility associated with the stock market.

Though regular and tax exempt money market funds are offering relatively great returns, your money here isn't guaranteed by the FDIC; thus, you've got to live with a minuscule amount of risk when you're in such a fund — a risk that for many, may appear psychologically greater than usual.

Investors looking to aggressively grow their wealth are not well suited to money market funds and other highly stable products because the rate of return is often not much greater than inflation.

This is why we expect a greater return on stocks than bonds, of course; that's consistent with the capital asset pricing model and the efficient market hypothesis.

Do strategies that seek to exploit return volatility persistence by adjusting stock market exposure inversely with recent market volatility relative to some target (including exposures greater than 100 %) produce obvious benefits for investors?

In the U.S., stocks have consistently earned a greater return than bonds over the long term, despite many ups and downs in the stock market.

Similarly, within stocks, it's pretty clear that smaller companies and emerging markets are dicier propositions than blue chip companies, so it seems reasonable to expect some extra return — even if the extra return from small stocks isn't as great as history suggests.

For example, the total return for the bond market has not only beaten the total return for the stock market in the period, the risk - adjusted reward for investment grade bond ownership has been far greater than the risk - adjusted nominal gains in stocks.

The investment return and principal value of the Funds may fluctuate or deviate from overall market returns to a greater degree than other funds that do not employ these strategies.

Fixing broken portfolios begins with the realization that producing returns that are greater than the market is difficult while achieving the market return is relatively easy.

The expected monthly returns are 2 percentage points lower than expected in a bull market, while the standard deviation is 50 percent greater.

By limiting our universe to stocks with a market capitalization greater than $ 1.4 billion (as at December 31, 2011) the returns to our strategy will be reduced compared to the returns to other strategies that include smaller stocks.

He found, for instance, that between 1952 and 2003, returns for stocks with market caps of $ 100 million to $ 250 million averaged 16.4 % annualized; returns for those with market values between $ 500 million and $ 1 billion averaged 13.9 %; for those greater than $ 1 billion, 13.1 %.

Because reserve cash requires limited liquidity, it can be invested over a horizon of 6 — 12 months, thereby capturing incrementally higher yields and returns than money market funds, while taking on only slightly greater risk and keeping a focus on preservation of principal.

Therefore, you could earn a significantly greater return from investing in the market than the interest you will pay on the mortgage.

To get the most out of your money, select a savings account with a high rate of return like First IB's Money Market Savings account which earns a 0.90 % APY (annual percentage yield) on daily balances of $ 250,000 or less, and 1.16 % APY on balances greater than $ 250,000.

It's rare that a market delivers returns (12 % annual returns) greater than its volatility (11 % standard deviation).

Under certain market conditions, the fund may accept greater - than - typical volatility to seek its targeted return.

The first bone of contention the plaintiffs have is that the company offered the «microscopically low - yielding» Vanguard Prime Money Market Fund, rather than a stable value fund that would have provided better returns while preserving capital and liquidity without any greater increase in risk compared to money market investMarket Fund, rather than a stable value fund that would have provided better returns while preserving capital and liquidity without any greater increase in risk compared to money market investmarket investments.

An up market is one in which the market's quarterly (or monthly) return is greater than or equal to zero.

If the market capitalized Emerson's earnings at its historical normal P / E ratio of 17.2 the total annualized rate of return out to fiscal year - end 2017 would be greater than 15 % per annum.

All in all, in a market where banks have only recently returned to issue new leveraged loans, investors are poised to pick up the slack and achieve returns greater than a similar maturity mix of corporate bonds with less intermediate risk.

The PIMCO Enhanced Short Maturity Active ETF is an actively managed fund that seeks to provide greater income and total return potential than money market funds by investing in ultra-short-term debt securities.

Valuation - based market timing demonstrates greater potential to improve risk - adjusted returns for conservative long - term investors than given credit by Fisher and Statman (2006).

If the hedge fund manager choose these assets wisely, this means that the combined portfolio should be unaffected by market movements and that it would generate a return greater than a risk free asset with no risk.

Historically, common stocks have provided greater long - term returns and have entailed greater short - term risks than preferred stocks, fixed - income securities and money market investments.