Not logged in Login 
 Home 
 Managers 
 Funds 
 Charting 
 Ebook 
 Admin   Login  
    Print
General Help
Consistency Methodology

The performance consistency ratings on this site are calculated using methodology developed by Bruce Cameron.

Performance Periods

The three-year consistency ranking is based on 12 rolling periods of one year each, and the five-year rating on 12 rolling periods of three years each. These periods are offset from each other by 3 months.

For example, if we were calculating the three-year ratings as at 31 Dec 2010, the periods involved would be:
1. 1 Jan 2010 to 31 Dec 2010
2. 1 Oct 2009 to 30 Sep 2010
3. 1 Jul 2009 to 30 Jun 2010
4. 1 Apr 2009 to 31 Mar 2010
5. 1 Jan 2009 to 31 Dec 2009
6. 1 Oct 2008 to 30 Sep 2009
7. 1 Jul 2008 to 30 Jun 2009
8. 1 Apr 2008 to 31 Mar 2009
9. 1 Jan 2008 to 31 Dec 2008
10. 1 Oct 2007 to 30 Sep 2008
11. 1 Jul 2007 to 30 Jun 2008
12. 1 Apr 2007 to 31 Mar 2008

Algorithm

Performance figures are generated for each of the above periods (NAV to NAV performance with dividends reinvested on payment date). Each fund's performance is then ranked within its category for each period and points are assigned depending on where the fund is ranked.

If the category has less than ten members the points are based on the quartile in which the fund falls.
Quartile: 1 Point, log(4)
Quartile: 2 Points, log(3)
Quartile: 3 Points, log(2)
Quartile: 4 Points, log(1)

The consistency of performance rating for a fund is the sum of the points for each of the twelve periods.

Interpretation

Funds with high consistency-of-performance ratings have performed consistently better than those in the same sector with lower ratings.

Note that the scores are not necessarily comparable across sectors (ie, they only have relative meaning within sectors).
Recently viewed
Watchlists
Portfolios