Subject: Re: 15 year comparison - BRK vs S&P
taxes were not a concern, what would the account look like today?
Only Jim can make an estimate & ...

Probably much like my result: the more you invested in other stuff, the worse your overall portfolio performance! Over time the the average person isn't going to do better picking individual securities. Had the taxes not stayed your hand in reallocating some Berkshire money to other things, my guess is that you'd have done worse overall. So, yeah, I'll vote for the "blessing in disguise" theory.

I have done extremely well on my Berkshire stuff both because of and in spite of my active trading habit, in the vicinity of 25%/year average return on average dollars at risk for 24 years. But that has to be tempered with the observations that (a) I have done a lot worse on average with my other stuff, so I can confirm non-Berkshire stuff is hard (b) I used a lot of leverage (primarily uncallable leverage in calls) that others wouldn't feel comfortable with, and (c) no doubt some large portion is luck. My habit of buying low and selling high has worked on average, but it might not have. And Berkshire has done wonderfully for ages, but that was not the certain foregone conclusion that I and many others wagered it would be.

Jim