No. of Recommendations: 0
Update: Jim, looking closer why our charts deviate I think you made two mistakes:
- BRK-A price in 2000 in your chart is 100000, a price it reached only 7 years later. Neglectible, as absolute prices are not interesting in this context.
-
take that WMA and multiply by 1.50. Why 1.50? I looked for the multiple that gave the best fit to price data ......The best fit result was a multiple of 1.5004 times the weighted moving average of real book.Jim, I think you used not 1.5 but 1.7. Why? Because contrary to the chart resulting when using 1.5 (see the link I posted in my previous post) if using 1.7 my curve now indeed closely resembles yours (apart from mine being updated until 1.April 2024, the currently last quarterly data point):
Google: File D 1orBMiXDlV5qRliy WnnHVntK0PpDVCZlSo BRK's price correlates best with 1.7x the greater of "Real BV" and "90% of Peak Real BV".
