<p> Slow down you are getting way way ahead of yourself Yes I was comparing “Investment” totals both publically traded and other securities on the respective balance sheets from their 990’s… Perhaps the Schedule D attachment number would be better… That is a different argument.
BUT Before you go any further… you are comparing apples to oranges. So you simply cannot leap to conclusions about risk taking or portfolios based on the numbers you are looking at. </p>
<p>**Andover, Exeter, St. Paul’s, Groton and most schools I am familiar with use a 6/30 Year-end. Deerfield uses an 8/31 year-end. **
So what difference does it make? Well…</p>
<p>Between 6/30/08 and 6/30/09 the [size=+1]DJIA declined 31% <a href=“from%2012,255%20to%208,438”>/size</a> All Schools But Deerfield.
Between 8/31/08 and 8/31/09 the [size=+1]DJIA declined only 17%<a href=“from%2011,543%20to%209,544”>/size</a> Deerfield’s filing period.</p>
<p>So any schools on a 6/30 year-end will indicate a much much larger decline than Deerfield who uses an 8/31 year-end. Deerfield’s apparently better results simply reflect different time frames in a very turbulent period in the market. Watch the apples and oranges. You can compare schools with identical year-ends, but then I will have to post again about portfolio valuations for thinly traded securities or untraded partnership interests. Investments are my field and they are wonderfully complicated.</p>
<p>Absit invidia</p>