Search Bob Brinker Blogs

Saturday, May 9, 2009

Bob Brinker Wrong on Bear and Missed the Bull

Bob Brinker was very bullish as the mega-bear market began:
January 2008 Marketimer with S&P500 @ 1468.36: Dollar Cost Average. Lump sum mid 1400's Pg 3: “In summary, the Marketimer stock market timing model indicates that conditions are favorable for the market as we enter 2008. We expect the S&P Index to achieve new record highs this year and to reach the 1600’s range in the process. We continue to rate the market attractive for purchase on any weakness into the S&P 500 Index mid-1400’s range. Above this range we prefer a dollar-cost-average approach for new purchases. All Marketimer model portfolios remain fully invested as we enter 2008."
After mistakenly calling several market bottoms in 2008, Brinker was looking for another one when the market began a 30%+ rally. March 5, 2008, Brinker removed all lump sum new-money buys and dollar-cost-averaging. Now he is trying to make it appear that he was bullish at the market bottom of 677 in March. That is not true. Some pertinent comments:

Pen-name "bss4brinker" said:

".........The market went from the 600s to the 900s without a buy signal or DCA from Brinker in the 600s.

Bob Brinker had buys all the way down to the mid 800s. The market fell to the 600s and Brinker capitulated on the buy signals just before the biggest rally of the bear. Brinker went silent with no DCA or buy level in his newsletter and nobody here is "chirping" about it."

Anonymous newslettercheat said... [LINK]

Thanks for the info.

Now we know that Brinker is totally clueless and that Marketiming krap he claimed to be able to do was just the parlor game that many of us and Jack Bogle saw it to be.

He was clueless about the worst bear market since the great depression. Indeed he denied it happened until very recently and was bashing "false prophets" and "cassandras" when they were bearish at S&P 1400 plus. TOTALLY CLUELESS as a marketimer is not too strong a word for that.

And as you point out after calling his last of many many "go all in" calls at 850 or so, Brinker then "got cautious" and claimed he was looking for another bottoming process--ironically within a few days of the very bottom from which the market has to this point rebounded like a coiled spring.

Thus we know that Bob Brinker was totally clueless at the bottom and totally clueless at the top. How much more evidence does one need about his lack of ability to time the market?

Now what is almost funny beyond belief, it seems that the Brinkers who now share the exact same name publish fixed income only newsletters.

One would think that losing huge amounts in the equity portfolios in Brinker's failed stock market timing strategies might possibly be offset by their fixed income only advice.

Indeed on that score they were even worse. As I see it--on the equity portfolios they for the most part lost about what the indexes did and just showed what many of us knew--they couldn't accurately time the market.

On the other hand; from the data I have seen in the fixed income portfolios they VASTLY UNDERPERFORMED the Total Bond Index or CDs while subjecting portfolios to more unnecessary risk.

Those fixed income advisor figures are a disaster to someone who one would guess is a conservative investor looking for capital preservation and perhaps living off the income. DISASTER!

I see that a new marketing plan for his marketiming experise is underway with some bizzare bragging about how fortunate he feels being in the market now (same guy that has been in the market from 1565 all the way down while calling buying opportunities every 100 points or so decline) . I assume some will believe that he made some really prescient call near the bottom to "get in the market". Those paying for the advice for the last year will not be fooled.

Neither will those who jumped on board the fixed income rag with the guy who does Money Talk's name on it but whose website says that a different guy runs-- QQQuite confusing. But there is no confusing that whether in fixed income or trying to time the equity market, the Brinker name of late has been a big LOSER.

Is Hulbert still rating both Marketimer and the Fixed Income advisor?

Blogger Honeybee said...


As you said, the Bob Brinker's are now sharing the same name on the internet. No distinguishing initials or addendums to differentiate between them -- the initials ARE different. QQQQuite curious, huh?

You asked if Mark Hulbert was still rating Marketimer and the Fixed Income Advisor, which as you said, bears Brinker's name. When you dig deep, you discover that the fixed income letter is published by the computer technician, rather than the radio talk show host. (This fact is NEVER pointed out in the ads that run on Moneytalk.)

Yes, Hulbert jumped on the Brinker fixed income newsletter when it was brand new like a hen on a June bug. 8~)

But the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. Brinker didn't post his 2008 performance numbers on his Marketimer website, and "Brinker" didn't post his 2008 performance numbers on his website.

That is where Hulbert's Financial Digest came in handy. Here are the numbers calculated by Kirk Lindstrom:


"Mark Hulbert says Brinker's "Fixed income only" portfolio in Marketimer lost 2.1% last year.

Mark Hulbert says Brinker's "fixed income advisor" model portfolio #1 lost 21.7% last year.

Mark Hulbert says Brinker's "fixed income advisor" model portfolio #2 lost 11.5% last year.

Mark Hulbert says Brinker's "fixed income advisor" model portfolio #3 lost 5.2% last year.

I repeat, the Total Bond Index Fund at Vanguard made 5.1% last year.

ALL FOUR of Brinker's fixed income ONLY portfolios for ALL your money (not just a high risk part) lost money in an up year for fixed income.".

Honeybee market comment: Will GLD break out next week? [CHART]


Top Rated Newsletter

Timer Digest Features
Kirk Lindstrom's Investment Letter
on its Cover

Cick to read the full page article!