Best young investors

[shalab]

Who in your opinion is the best young investors around? The person has ( or is going to have soon) a vehicle that is accessible, under 50, financially independent...

 

A few names that come to mind:

 

Sanjeev & Alnesh

Sham Gad

Biglari

Gio ( if he opens up Gio holdings )

Packer(?)

 

 

 

[manualofideas]

I am definitely forgetting many, but here are a few:

 

 

Sahm Adrangi

Jeremy Deal

Daniel Gladis

Phil Ordway

Jake Rosser

Dan Sheehan

Rahul Saraogi

Isaac Schwartz

Todd Sullivan

Glenn Surowiec

Josh Tarasoff

[premfan]

Who in your opinion is the best young investors around? The person has ( or is going to have soon) a vehicle that is accessible, under 50, financially independent...

 

A few names that come to mind:

 

Sanjeev & Alnesh

Sham Gad

Biglari

Gio ( if he opens up Gio holdings )

Packer(?)

 

 

 

 

Bruce Flatt.  Great track record and proven.

 

 

 

[Parsad]

LOL!  Alnesh and I are neither young, nor the best! 

 

But we won't ever truly f**k up because of that as well.  Cheers!

[matjone]

I asked a similar question once and got some responses.  If you believe that returns go down as AUM go up, it wouldn't make sense to answer this question.

[matjone]

http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/general-discussion/small-investment-funds/

[DukeCrow]

Kevin Byun, Denali Investors

[Palantir]

Michael Burry?

 

[peter1234]

Michael Burry?

 

Certainly.

 

Does he have a new fund now? There have been rumors but have not heard that he is open for business again.

[no_thanks]

I am definitely forgetting many, but here are a few:

 

 

Sahm Adrangi

Jeremy Deal

Daniel Gladis

Phil Ordway

Jake Rosser

Dan Sheehan

Rahul Saraogi

Isaac Schwartz

Todd Sullivan

Glenn Surowiec

Josh Tarasoff

 

Would love to hear more about Jeremy Deal's track record.

 

 

[peter1234]

I am definitely forgetting many, but here are a few:

 

 

Sahm Adrangi

Jeremy Deal

Daniel Gladis

Phil Ordway

Jake Rosser

Dan Sheehan

Rahul Saraogi

Isaac Schwartz

Todd Sullivan

Glenn Surowiec

Josh Tarasoff

 

Would love to hear more about Jeremy Deal's track record.

 

Apparently 30% gross, 22% net since inception in October 2011.

;)

[Guest]

I am definitely forgetting many, but here are a few:

 

 

Sahm Adrangi

Jeremy Deal

Daniel Gladis

Phil Ordway

Jake Rosser

Dan Sheehan

Rahul Saraogi

Isaac Schwartz

Todd Sullivan

Glenn Surowiec

Josh Tarasoff

 

Would love to hear more about Jeremy Deal's track record.

 

Apparently 30% gross, 22% net since inception in October 2011.

;)

 

That doesn't really seem that good. That's not too much better than the market.

[peter1234]

I am definitely forgetting many, but here are a few:

 

 

Sahm Adrangi

Jeremy Deal

Daniel Gladis

Phil Ordway

Jake Rosser

Dan Sheehan

Rahul Saraogi

Isaac Schwartz

Todd Sullivan

Glenn Surowiec

Josh Tarasoff

 

Would love to hear more about Jeremy Deal's track record.

 

Apparently 30% gross, 22% net since inception in October 2011.

;)

 

That doesn't really seem that good. That's not too much better than the market.

 

Just to clarify, these are annual returns.

[Guest]

I am definitely forgetting many, but here are a few:

 

 

Sahm Adrangi

Jeremy Deal

Daniel Gladis

Phil Ordway

Jake Rosser

Dan Sheehan

Rahul Saraogi

Isaac Schwartz

Todd Sullivan

Glenn Surowiec

Josh Tarasoff

 

Would love to hear more about Jeremy Deal's track record.

 

Apparently 30% gross, 22% net since inception in October 2011.

;)

 

That doesn't really seem that good. That's not too much better than the market.

 

Just to clarify, these are annual returns.

 

Right, that's close to the market (depending on the actual inception date). If we start as of 9/30/2011, SPY was at $113.15.

 

Today the SPY is at $197.34.

 

That works out to roughly 24.8% average return (the S&P 500 returns are actually better than this since I'm running it as if it's a full 3 years). And in another 2.2% or so for dividends (average anyway) and that brings us to about 27%

 

Even worse when compared to for IWM which comes in a little less than 28%. Now, unless this guy has had a big cash load during this entire time, I see good but not outstanding performance.

 

30% sounds great...but we also must realize how tremendous the market has been the past couple years.

 

[peter1234]

30% sounds great...but we also must realize how tremendous the market has been the past couple years.

 

Agreed.

;)

 

I get market cagr around 20% the following way:

For SPY (197/113)^(1/3) = 1.74^(1/3) = 1.20 or 20% cagr.

 

Add in dividends as you point point out and you would be right around his net returns.

 

[Guest]

I just went with the arithmetic mean:

 

$197.34- $113.5

 

= $83.84 / $113.5 = 73.86% / 3 years = 24.6% (plus dividends).

[yadayada]

You have to take compounded. Einstein did not called it a world wonder for nothing.

 

Also it depends on your style, but some investors with big outperformance do not outperform much during bull markets. They outperform if the market goes down. I think this was the case in Buffett's partnership days.

[frugalchief]

Ryan Morris of Meson Capital

[valueseek]

On 8/17/2014 at 4:12 AM, manualofideas said:

I am definitely forgetting many, but here are a few:

 

 

Sahm Adrangi

Jeremy Deal

Daniel Gladis

Phil Ordway

Jake Rosser

Dan Sheehan

Rahul Saraogi

Isaac Schwartz

Todd Sullivan

Glenn Surowiec

Josh Tarasoff

Bumping up this thread. Had been thinking about which investors did well over the last 10 years or so and was much of it identifiable. And if they succeeded (or not) was the reason focus, or being in right names/style at right time, or something else.

Of the lot I know Josh did have good numbers, although I am not privy to them. I may have missed a couple or so more.

But seems like of the list above, some closed operations, and not many had a great run relative to the markets. 

If anyone has thoughts here (and the idea of this exercise to identify higher potential funds/individuals for next 5-10 years), would be interesting to hear.

[berkshiremystery]

4 hours ago, valueseek said:

Bumping up this thread. Had been thinking about which investors did well over the last 10 years or so and was much of it identifiable. And if they succeeded (or not) was the reason focus, or being in right names/style at right time, or something else.

Of the lot I know Josh did have good numbers, although I am not privy to them. I may have missed a couple or so more.

But seems like of the list above, some closed operations, and not many had a great run relative to the markets. 

If anyone has thoughts here (and the idea of this exercise to identify higher potential funds/individuals for next 5-10 years), would be interesting to hear.

 

I am back,... to this message board, just reading this. 

 

Its unbelievable to me, that this board has not discovered the worlds most desirable, YES !!! THE No. 1 snowball in the world, compounding its intrinsic value at hyper speed.

 

The snowball was started with a few millions, now worth only about $15 billion 2 years ago, and now accelerating at supersonic speed, $100 billion instrinsic value, like when Buffett changed from his partnership after 13 years [1956-1969] and converted his compounding skills into a public entity, Berkshire. While it was small in 1969/70, it now has a valuation of $1 Trillion.

 

I would think, not even 1 person ^^, not even 0.1 % of the board members here have digged deep enough, like the recursion of logic, Kurt Gödel. The future already existing Snowball is NOT in anything comparable to Berkshire, Buffett or Munger. NOT in anything comparable, period !!! Not comparable with Buffett or Munger,... the future Berkshire is already now  autistic management  

 

Buffett + Munger compounded in insurance + finance, the float of insurance in a value investing + accounting landscape, that it insufficient, if we go to Mars.    On Mars you will not compound like Buffett, serious. Compounding in the matrix of the simulation of the gamified economy.

 

Like VISA card ($12 Trillion transaction volume), + Master card ($7 Trillion transaction volume), compound a fraction of the commission volume.  

 

Compounding the $100 Trillion global economy from earth to soon mars, the moat of the matrix 

 

the late 

Jim Simons understood it. 

the matrix is powered by a monopoly  KERNEL engine of logic.

The philosophy of self is the study of the concept of the self at a conceptual level

 

 

 

I digged deep in the rabbit hole of Jim Simons, and I am being proud after his death in May of this year, to be associated with one of his beloved compounders outside of Renaissance.

 

800% return in 2 years, annualized around ´~200% even with exponential to the mean  return

 

I think only a small group of maybe 20-30 people, public amateur Graham+Dodd investors have spotted this asymmetric super-nova opportunity of a snowball. Got in tough with the founders personally, requested to acquire knowledge, buy like Amazon in 2000, after the dot com bubble drop 90% buy all-in. and wait and see.

 

If you understand risk, verses opportunity of the logic., it´s like MIT blackjack.

I know everyone went ALL-In 50% to 90%

 

One billionaire founder compounded his net worth 97% annually for over decades. Yup, faster than the late Jim Simons himself. I think it was the only compounding engine Jim was proud to be associated besides Renaissance.  

 

There are so few hidden gems,  Berkshire 1970´s opportunity, Apple´s 2007 opportunity,... nobody follows black-swan opportunities here at this message board, what a pity.

 

This board has a diversity of value investing knowledge, but its not focused on the 0.1% black swans occurring in front of their eyes. Because very few value investors try to gather extrem knowledge like the Armageddon oil drillers.

 

I think there will be in 10 years more like — David “Sandy” Gottesman style accidentally razor sharp minded value hunters, having gotten All-in, into the ¨next¨Berkshire style super compounder, that is unlike Berkshire, totally autistic, contradicting tractional value investing. 

 

I am proud to be associated with them,  2022, a black swan super compounder for the next decades

 

if you see a once in a life time opportunity, Berkshire 1970´s, 1980´s, 1990´s, its was for me time to go ALL-IN 2022  after I notice that worldly people bet $100M $25M or $5Million style amounts, very wealthy individuals going all-in, betting 50% or 90% of their net worth into the same single bet, that a tiny group of about 10 amateur value investors discovered,  it feels like a rare opportunity, the Michael Burry style, which only a few others followed. 2 years later it feels great to have made this bet, being up 800% and this is just the beginning, buying over the months into a crash of -90%, buying, buying autistic into the ¨next¨Berkshire¨snowball compounder. 

 

Berkshire itself will be sucked into the supernova black swan compounder, without it, Berkshire will not be able to exist in 10 years from now.  Things can happen like GE, after Buffett is gone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited Thursday at 01:10 AM by berkshiremystery

[Red Lion]

12 hours ago, berkshiremystery said:

 

I am back,... to this message board, just reading this. 

 

Its unbelievable to me, that this board has not discovered the worlds most desirable, YES !!! THE No. 1 snowball in the world, compounding its intrinsic value at hyper speed.

 

The snowball was started with a few millions, now worth only about $15 billion 2 years ago, and now accelerating at supersonic speed, $100 billion instrinsic value, like when Buffett changed from his partnership after 13 years [1956-1969] and converted his compounding skills into a public entity, Berkshire. While it was small in 1969/70, it now has a valuation of $1 Trillion.

 

I would think, not even 1 person ^^, not even 0.1 % of the board members here have digged deep enough, like the recursion of logic, Kurt Gödel. The future already existing Snowball is NOT in anything comparable to Berkshire, Buffett or Munger. NOT in anything comparable, period !!! Not comparable with Buffett or Munger,... the future Berkshire is already now  autistic management  

 

Buffett + Munger compounded in insurance + finance, the float of insurance in a value investing + accounting landscape, that it insufficient, if we go to Mars.    On Mars you will not compound like Buffett, serious. Compounding in the matrix of the simulation of the gamified economy.

 

Like VISA card ($12 Trillion transaction volume), + Master card ($7 Trillion transaction volume), compound a fraction of the commission volume.  

 

Compounding the $100 Trillion global economy from earth to soon mars, the moat of the matrix 

 

the late 

Jim Simons understood it. 

the matrix is powered by a monopoly  KERNEL engine of logic.

The philosophy of self is the study of the concept of the self at a conceptual level

 

 

 

I digged deep in the rabbit hole of Jim Simons, and I am being proud after his death in May of this year, to be associated with one of his beloved compounders outside of Renaissance.

 

800% return in 2 years, annualized around ´~200% even with exponential to the mean  return

 

I think only a small group of maybe 20-30 people, public amateur Graham+Dodd investors have spotted this asymmetric super-nova opportunity of a snowball. Got in tough with the founders personally, requested to acquire knowledge, buy like Amazon in 2000, after the dot com bubble drop 90% buy all-in. and wait and see.

 

If you understand risk, verses opportunity of the logic., it´s like MIT blackjack.

I know everyone went ALL-In 50% to 90%

 

One billionaire founder compounded his net worth 97% annually for over decades. Yup, faster than the late Jim Simons himself. I think it was the only compounding engine Jim was proud to be associated besides Renaissance.  

 

There are so few hidden gems,  Berkshire 1970´s opportunity, Apple´s 2007 opportunity,... nobody follows black-swan opportunities here at this message board, what a pity.

 

This board has a diversity of value investing knowledge, but its not focused on the 0.1% black swans occurring in front of their eyes. Because very few value investors try to gather extrem knowledge like the Armageddon oil drillers.

 

I think there will be in 10 years more like — David “Sandy” Gottesman style accidentally razor sharp minded value hunters, having gotten All-in, into the ¨next¨Berkshire style super compounder, that is unlike Berkshire, totally autistic, contradicting tractional value investing. 

 

I am proud to be associated with them,  2022, a black swan super compounder for the next decades

 

if you see a once in a life time opportunity, Berkshire 1970´s, 1980´s, 1990´s, its was for me time to go ALL-IN 2022  after I notice that worldly people bet $100M $25M or $5Million style amounts, very wealthy individuals going all-in, betting 50% or 90% of their net worth into the same single bet, that a tiny group of about 10 amateur value investors discovered,  it feels like a rare opportunity, the Michael Burry style, which only a few others followed. 2 years later it feels great to have made this bet, being up 800% and this is just the beginning, buying over the months into a crash of -90%, buying, buying autistic into the ¨next¨Berkshire¨snowball compounder. 

 

Berkshire itself will be sucked into the supernova black swan compounder, without it, Berkshire will not be able to exist in 10 years from now.  Things can happen like GE, after Buffett is gone.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Have you considered writing clickbait for the motley fool? 

[coc]

1 hour ago, Red Lion said:

Have you considered writing clickbait for the motley fool? 

 

Don't tell me you don't believe in his asymmetric super-nova opportunity??

[Spooky]

a black swan super compounder for the next decades!

[thowed]

Black-swan opportunities.

 

Asymmetric super-nova.

 

There are a whole load of great indie band names in that post.

[giulio]

WTF did I just read? @berkshiremystery are you looking for the microstrategy thread?