Gains and losses, one year.

[Arborbridge]

Dod's welcome report got me thinking tangentially. So as not to highjack his post, I'll post separately. The thought was, that I've noticed an awful load of HYP shares (well, my HYP shares!) clearly in a down trend on the charts for a year or two. So I thought I'd crudely go down the string of charts listing them as "increase" or "decrease" to see what the score was. Very crude, of course, as it does not take into account the degree of rise or fall. The columns below are hopefully self explanitory: additionally, the asterisked shares increased by more than the FTSE. There are 11 of these from the total of 39. There are 21 shares showing a decrease in price over one year, 18 showing increases. I'm sure the crucial thing would be that the falls will turn out the be more serious than the rises - often the case, I'm told. Which leads to the old adage that success is more about avoiding disasters than chalking up great gains - a piece of wisdom I think Dod may have quoted.
Interesting to note that when run over two years, Tesco and Morrisons show star quality for increase in price

Perhaps in an idle moment I ought to put in some numbers to show the extent of these ups and downs, but there's too much to do today. In any case, this is just a top of the head bit of Sunday morning fun.



Arb.

[tjh290633]

Arb, I'm at odds with you here. My record posted in the other thread shows BATS up 8.6%, BLND up 9.85%, and RB. up 0.48%. Those are the only discrepancies in the shares which we hold in common.

For the record, BATS started at 4621.5p and ended at 5018p; BLND started at 629.5p and ended at 691.5p, while RB. started at 6886p and ended at 6919p.

TJH

[Gengulphus]

I'll add a few things I've noticed to TJH's comments, that might help in producing a corrected version of the table:

* BATS and BLND (but not RB.) appear in both columns!

* Only 38 holdings are listed, not the claimed 39.

* There is however a blank line in the table between UBM and AZN, suggesting that a holding has possibly gone missing there.

Gengulphus

[Arborbridge]

Aha, folks! You saw my deliberate Christmastide teasers...

The result of too quickly rushing the editing of a table as Mrs Arb was calling me to do something much more inportant.

Yes, Bats and Blnd should only be in the "increased" list. RB should also, but I was eyeballing a one year chart and the "upness" is near enough neutral - still, up it was.

And the gap you spotted - in fact there ought to be two, I think - was probably IMB. HYPTUSS does not display its chart, and the same happend to Standar Life Aberdeen. I haven't checked into why this is so, having just discovered it, but no doubt it is some issue around the changes of name.

Thanks for being on the ball - it shows people actually read things!

What I should do, as I mentioned, is to produce a table a la TJH which percentages. However, my crude list does back up my general impression that despite all the talk of records highs etc, some HYP stocks (or once HYP stocks) are in down trends. Maybe I should count myself lucky that with excessive falls of IRV and CLLN, my unit price has suffered only a little.

[Wizard]

Aha, folks! You saw my deliberate Christmastide teasers...

The result of too quickly rushing the editing of a table as Mrs Arb was calling me to do something much more inportant.

Yes, Bats and Blnd should only be in the "increased" list. RB should also, but I was eyeballing a one year chart and the "upness" is near enough neutral - still, up it was.

And the gap you spotted - in fact there ought to be two, I think - was probably IMB. HYPTUSS does not display its chart, and the same happend to Standar Life Aberdeen. I haven't checked into why this is so, having just discovered it, but no doubt it is some issue around the changes of name.

Thanks for being on the ball - it shows people actually read things!

What I should do, as I mentioned, is to produce a table a la TJH which percentages. However, my crude list does back up my general impression that despite all the talk of records highs etc, some HYP stocks (or once HYP stocks) are in down trends. Maybe I should count myself lucky that with excessive falls of IRV and CLLN, my unit price has suffered only a little.

My bold.

Last I looked HYPTUSS was not updating the yield on Standard Life due to problems with the DigitalLook page, maybe that is causing the problem?

Terry.

[pendas]

Despite the stock market ending the year on a record high, I hold 18 out of a portfolio of 35 shares in a mature HYP that are valued at below their purchase price. Perhaps I need to sell rather than hang on to the likes of RBS

This year's top five capital losers, Provident, Carillion, Wood Group, Centrica and BT lost going on for twice as much as the top five winners gained unfortunately. Unilever, Ashmore, Diageo, Taylor Wimpey and Vodafone.

[Gengulphus]

Yes, Bats and Blnd should only be in the "increased" list. RB should also, but I was eyeballing a one year chart and the "upness" is near enough neutral - still, up it was.

And the gap you spotted - in fact there ought to be two, I think - was probably IMB. HYPTUSS does not display its chart, and the same happend to Standar Life Aberdeen. I haven't checked into why this is so, having just discovered it, but no doubt it is some issue around the changes of name.

To fill those gaps, IMB is down over the year - my source for that is the last year of the 5-year chart on ADVFN's financials page - it's a very convenient time of year to use that source, as the start of the relevant year is clearly visible on that chart!

SLA is more difficult, as it wasn't just a name change, but also a merger. So there are actually two charts, one for having held Aberdeen Asset management before the merger and the other for having held Standard Life - and since both were plausible HYP shares before the merger, neither can be eliminated. However, a look at the corresponding pages for the two tickers before the merger (ADN and SL.) says that both were up 10-20% from the start of the year until the chart flatlines at the date of the merger, and a look at the corresponding page for SLA says that it hasn't moved more than a few percentage points since the merger, so it's pretty clear that the answer is "up" regardless of which share you held before the merger.

So by my reckoning, counting the entries in the two columns of your original table and adjusting for those corrections, the counts should be 19 + 2 (RB. and SLA) = 21 "ups" and 21 - 3 (BATS, BLND and RB.) + 1 (IMB) = 19 "downs".

Gengulphus

[Arborbridge]

So by my reckoning, counting the entries in the two columns of your original table and adjusting for those corrections, the counts should be 19 + 2 (RB. and SLA) = 21 "ups" and 21 - 3 (BATS, BLND and RB.) + 1 (IMB) = 19 "downs".

Gengulphus

So, that makes a rather less depressing picture Except there are a couple of massive downs and no similarly massive ups!


But HYP is still delivering the goods for me and I'm, sure it will in 2018 too.

Thanks for the corrections, Gen.