Actually this is a really good example of clarifying what people have been struggling with with this 5 going to 10 years thing.
It confirms what I thought and I thank you for pointing it out .
BIM had reported the results in 2001 when they became compliant for the periods 1996-2000 . Now when CC joins BIM in 2006 , he proposes dropping periods 1996-2000 because they sucked , and only showing 201-2005 which were stellar.
That’s a no-no per the above rule of 5 going to 10 .
You can only ever do the 5 year rule ONCE in your composite history . After that you keep reporting until you have 10 years , rolling off 1 year each year above 10.
Once you have 10 years , you can never go below 10 for that composite. That’s an absolute no-no , intended to hide some underperformance . So Mr CC must wait until 2007 to roll off 1996 ( i.e.not show 1996 ) , then 2008 to roll off 1997 and so on excruciatingly slowly until the grand year of 2010 when all the bad history 1996-2000) is finally and GIPS-legally gone forever from the fixed income composite performance history.