present at least 5 years of annual performance that meets GIPS; must present additional annual performance up to a minimum of 10 years. is that equivalent to persent at least 10 years of annual performance that meets GIPS?? Thanks.
no. min.5 unless the firm or composite has been around for less than 5. But you have to add a year so you have at least 10 years
so if a composite exists since 1999. it has to present annual performance that meet GIPS for 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006 and one extra number for 2001-2010 annualized return? Am confused.
if composite exists since 99, it has to report EACH yrs data.
ok, you mean 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, right? but is that “at least 10 years or since inception?” I am trying to understand why “min.5 unless the firm or composite has been around for less than 5. But you have to add a year so you have at least 10 years” is not the same as “at least 10 years or since inception” Can you kindly give me an counter example? Thanks.
yes that is correct. the composite has been around since 99 therefore it MUST show 10 yrs. If the composite or firm was formed in 2008, then it would have to show 2008,9,10,11. Dont overthink it its that simple.
chen36051 Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ok, you mean 2010, 2009, 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, > 2004, 2003, 2002, 2001, right? but is that “at > least 10 years or since inception?” > I am trying to understand why “min.5 unless the > firm or composite has been around for less than 5. > But you have to add a year so you have at least 10 > years” is not the same as > “at least 10 years or since inception” Can you > kindly give me an counter example? Thanks. If the company was established in 1999. But it got GIPS compliant in 2011. Then it should show data for the last 5 years (from 2006-2010). And then build 10 years data going forward. If the company was established in 1999. But it got GIPS compliant in 1999. Then it should show data for the last 10 years (from 2001-2010). These links will give you a better idea: http://www.analystforum.com/phorums/read.php?13,1252924,1252967 http://www.analystforum.com/phorums/read.php?13,1264024,1264055
I got it now. Thank you so much!!