|Day Low/High||122.99 / 124.75|
|52 Wk Low/High||75.12 / 154.18|
Both, actually. But the one who came out way ahead might surprise you.
With a month to go for these portfolios, the Active version is outperforming the Passive one, though both are crushing their Russell kindred.
Six of the eight active names are in positive territory.
Since the last update, both portfolios are up about 9%, keeping the performance gap at about 1700 bps.
While Fitbit is still the best performer, other names are beginning to carry their weight.
While this experiment is still inconclusive, it's still nice to see both groups of triple nets outperforming.
The two portfolios, one active and the other passive, have sagged with the broader market but still are outperforming a pair of Russell value indices.
Can an active approach outperform a passive approach in small, deeper value names?
These companies are trading between 2x and 3x net current asset value, and with a market cap in excess of $100 million.
One thing is certain: Triple-nets are not a common investment hunting ground, but some may be the recipe for the next ETF.
Luxury wine producer Crimson Wine Group is among them, as are a handful of manufacturers.
I will be tracking 48 stocks in the coming year, and will make that list of names available.
Smith & Wesson is looking to diversify, the company announced on Tuesday during an investor presentation at an industry trade show in Las Vegas.
I just don't understand the logic behind holding and pushing short positions overnight.
I have two simple rules for stock picking, but they're just a starting point.
A screen I ran for profitable, small-cap value companies last year has turned up 19 prospects for 2012.