In order not to clutter my returns page, I'll just note here that in 1997 I borrowed a little from my account. I paid it back over four years, so from 1997 to 2000 inclusive the percent change in account value will be contaminated by these pay-backs. For instance that 29% change in value for 1999 looks great, butpart of it is due to repayments.
For this reason the numbers for 2001-2-3-4 are more representative. They show a steady 17-18-19% increase, with my contributions remainingfairly steadyat 1/3 of the total.
The dollar-value of my contributions has changed over time, and of course my G-F-C-S-I fund allocations have changed too, but the percentages remain fairly steady, don't they. Interesting.
At home I have a graph showing the account over time. Using basic curve-fitting techniques I have derived equations for three different time periods, the early middle and recent domains. Theseshow the linearchange, althoughexpressed in raw dollars sonot includedhere.To "sanitize" them, I will have to re-scale ornormalize them.
I hit The Wall in 2010 which is my planned retirement year. I extrapolated my line of best fit to that time to arrive at an estimate of the value of the account, under the present return scenario. (This compares closely with the result I get at the TSP returns calculator.) Then I constructed a "high" scenario which would intercept 2010 at a higher value, and carried it back to the present. The slope of this new line represents the returns I must get in order to achieve that "high" result.
Given the returns of the last two years, if continued, I will cross over to the "High Line" within two more years (2007), and hence exceed the "High" result by 2010.This sort of calculation shows me I am on a very good track and I should be happy with my 18%.
Dave



LinkBack URL
About LinkBacks




Reply With Quote


Bookmarks