People that study a great amount of past data often believe that they can predict future outcomes, often not the case. Its true that hes modestly outperformed the sp500 since inception but he was incredibly fortunate with his timing and the last 10 have been horrible. Will hussman have as good of a result going forward starting at a shiller pe of 24 instead of the 43 that it was in 2000? Time will tell
One concept behind the fund has been that hedging would add value but so far its been a great value detractor that has only been bailed out by pretty good stockpicking.
I'm just wondering why a guy who thinks the market will be 45% higher in 10 years is convinced it has to drop by 40% now. It doesn't compute. I get that he's mad about missing the rally but I don't understand why he's fooling himself like this.