We really should keep score.
Was watching the biz news this morning, and some talking head was paraded in front of the panel to give his prediction for the market. (I’ve been that talking head, btw, so I’m specifically not dissing those kind of segments.)
It struck me, though, that I had no idea what kind of track record the fellow had. I mean if I’m watching the Nationals play, I know a fellow’s batting average as soon as he steps to the plate. And if I’m really hard core, I can find out how he hits against right-handers, left-handers, and even that specific pitcher.
And with sports commentators, we normally get well-established, track record kind of guys. I know a Digger Phelps or Jon Gruden has some merit because they have a solid resume.
But, with financial guys? Well, we never really know unless he manages a mutual fund and we can look up the fund’s performance.
Seems to me, every time a market guru gives his opinion, there should be a subtitle below his name giving at least his year-to-date performance. Even better, I guess, would be his lifetime performance. That would allow me to put his prediction in some kind of context.
That’s not to say gurus bring nothing to the table even if they had a terrible track record. Most political commentators bat less than .500 when predicting election results, but I listen to what they say because they help sort out things I may not be able to grasp.
That’s the same kind of thing we try to do on Bulls & Bears, for example, even if our personal batting average may not be too spiffy.
Still, it’d be interesting to see some kind of performance stat. Just not sure I’d like to see mine.