HYP1 is 19

[88V8]

Interesting demo that non-tinker can work.
Thankyou for keeping it going.

I say 'can' rather than 'does' because it critically depends upon luck &/or judgement in selecting the original constituents.

V8

[Arborbridge]

In fairness to the deleted post, whilst strategy was discussed, the poster tried to make the post relevant to HYP1 and discussed rebalancing thereof.

In which case, he missed the whole point of a demonstration non-tinker portfolio! The post was rightly deleted in my view being way OT for the board let alone the thread.

Arb.

[MrFoolish]

Anyhow, it's cheery to see our old friend HYP1 continuing "to do the business" it was designed for.
Arb.

There was obviously a mix up with the dates or something. Does anyone know how HYP1 is doing in reality?

[Walrus101]

Anyhow, it's cheery to see our old friend HYP1 continuing "to do the business" it was designed for.
Arb.

There was obviously a mix up with the dates or something. Does anyone know how HYP1 is doing in reality?

Well it's basically a punt on the popularity of cigarettes outlasting your life. The younger you are the riskier the portfolio

[Arborbridge]

Anyhow, it's cheery to see our old friend HYP1 continuing "to do the business" it was designed for.
Arb.

There was obviously a mix up with the dates or something. Does anyone know how HYP1 is doing in reality?

Well it's basically a punt on the popularity of cigarettes outlasting your life. The younger you are the riskier the portfolio

Well, less than it was a couple of years back, when BATs accounted for an even higher percentage.
You are judging from a short period of time - but what of the future. Isn't that the interesting part? How will this portfolio evolve as time goes on, and that's why I find it a fascinating - and as far as I know, unique - experiment. Not many of us would have the persistence to contemplate sucj a think, but I'm glad Pyad did.
The really sad thing is that he didn't carry on with the other HYPs in the same way so we could have several examplars.

Arb.

[Lootman]

Not many of us would have the persistence to contemplate sucj a think, but I'm glad Pyad did. The really sad thing is that he didn't carry on with the other HYPs in the same way so we could have several examplars.

Survivorship bias? Perhaps after a while he decided to go with the one that was doing the best?

[Arborbridge]

Not many of us would have the persistence to contemplate sucj a think, but I'm glad Pyad did. The really sad thing is that he didn't carry on with the other HYPs in the same way so we could have several examplars.

Survivorship bias? Perhaps after a while he decided to go with the one that was doing the best?

Maybe, but more likely because he knew it would be a bit of a fag keeping them going for little reward. Since HYP1 had already been going longest, it was the logical one to continue. HYP4 wouldn't really have suited his purpose anyway as it was built up over time, and Pyad was always more interested in showing how a one-hit would behave. It could also be argued that whether or not he kept tallies of HYP2 and 3 would not prove much more than keeping just one going - there would always be some bright spark who would aruge they weren't valid for some reason: you know how it is.

My belief is that is was just the extra effort that put him off, no more. Survivorship bias can hardly come into it, unless you are saying he really kept the others going in secret for years but didn't declare the results.

Arb.