Your Opinion: Who wins - The Tortoise or the Hare

I'd go with an aggressive tortoise .Someone with a portfolio more heavily in stocks than bonds who never goes too conservative .

Wow... I was going to say a 'slow hare'... but it is the same result...

don't do the exotic stuff, but do the mutual funds etc, save and save and don't trade... but 90 to 95% stock..
I vote Bunny with a pinch of Morlock....

Would it look something like this ?
I think that comparison confuses people personally. I would use a matrix of investing style, vs investing time/knowledge, and would like to know why this isn't the more common view.

Ranking investment success for an individual investor, investing their own money on average:

<<<<Least gains

4. Active/risky - little time/knowledge investing
3. Conservative - little time/knowledge investing
2. Conservative - more time/knowledge investing
1. Active/risky - more time/knowledge investing

>>>> Highest gains

Risky is higher downside AND higher upside.
Conservative strategy just dampens the highs and lows to some degree.

NOTE: This is personal investors, not large professional fund managers. Please keep it apples to apples.
If you think a fund manager who does worse than the S&P didn't do may forget that they probably got a cut of the total they invested already. They already won.
That, coupled with the fact that an individual investor that isn't investing billions, has a lot more flexiblity, a huge fund manager can't take advantage of the same opportunities.

Looks like the turtle is ahead by a thin margin.


  • race.jpg
    14.1 KB · Views: 2
clifp, if these are the portfolios:
Morningstar U.S. | News Archive

they are still 100% equities, correct?
(Just so the "tortoises" with index funds and bonds like the OPs example aren't sad about not making all those gains.)
I think that comparison confuses people personally...

The T and H investment styles was intended to be a little "tongue in cheek" description about a serious topic. :D You are correct, it is not terribly accurate about a style or technique, but I think most got the general idea. I gathered that from the humorous responses.

There was an implied motive and timing that I did not state: "During the Accumulation Phase" in preparation for Retirement.

Investing is kinda like fishing. People brag on the big win, but conveniently forget about all of the trips where they caught nothing.

You are correct on the risk versus reward trade-off. Most wind up with less reward! Of course, they often wind up with additional risk that they did not factor in to the equation when trying to employ extremely sophisticated techniques... [they do not really know what they are doing]. This is the mistake that many of us made somewhere in our investing history!!! Read a book or two (or worse yet a short magazine article) and jump in. Understanding the basic concept does not make one adept at employing the technique effectively.

Now for the clincher... Aesop's fable is just as applicable to individual investors saving for retirement as it is for teaching school children about important concepts. :cool:

I know, I know, my comment is obvious... :duh: Loosen up and have fun.
clifp, if these are the portfolios:
Morningstar U.S. | News Archive

they are still 100% equities, correct?
(Just so the "tortoises" with index funds and bonds like the OPs example aren't sad about not making all those gains.)

Yup 100% equity. The press release is quite old. I subscribe but I don't necessarily recommend it. Both portfolios are real money (started with a 100K) so unlike the Motley fool and some newletter M* is not cherry picking the results. Typically each portfolio has 20-25 stocks and about 2 transactions are made per quarter so a turnover of around 30%. The 32 page newsletter is good but because it covers both domestic value and growth stocks as well as some International stocks it is spread pretty thin.

In contrast M* Dividend investor which is concentrated exclusively on either stocks and MLPs with either growing dividends (Builder portfolio) or
high-yield (Harvest portfolio) I think is terrific source of info on dividend stocks.

But yes the OP definition of Tortoise and Hare and M* are very different.
If I was younger, say 20 or 21 and had like $25K - $50K to invest, I'd probably go "riskier", like all emerging markets, small caps, and international.

Then, as my portfolio grew to $500K+, or market conditions changed (i.e. the dollar is actually worth something again), I'd switch it up to something more conservative.

Couple years ago I was 23 with a $350K portfolio. I put HUGE (think $200K) bets on google options back when the GOOG was climbing. But, my company was making $1M+ a year in profits so I guess it wouldn't have been the end of the world if I had some huge losses. But, boy did it feel good making $250K in one day. Ended up gaining about $100K that year (about 25%). But, it was all taxable at ordinary income rates, which were about 40% for me that year. Looking back now, I realize that I took huge risks and didn't really beat the market that much.

So now I've learned, and have 98% of my money in broad market, low cost ETFs.

Every once in a while it sure is fun though to buy some puts and calls ($10K nowadays) and relive the good 'ol days.

Sorry about the to many beers.
Top Bottom