In the early 1980s, I became convinced that performance measurement related to market values was  not giving  trustees sufficient information. Worse, I felt the results  were positively misleading. The essential point is that trustees normally have a very much longer planning timeframe than other investors.

As a simple example, suppose that two consecutive TWRs (market related time  weighted returns, the   statistic normally published) are 20 % pa and -10 % pa, respectively. Ignoring compounding, the average return is 5 % pa. The first year's statistic was a poor   indicator of what was to  come.

Among others, JB Marshall has argued against the use of TWRs (TFA 245,296). Briefly, he  suggests that  trustees should be happier with poor performance  than they are  because of the implications for the investment of new money.

A sports analogy may be helpful. In advising trustees, I think investment managers tend to play  basketball,  very close to the net, which is all they  see. Trustees need advisors who play rugby, with the posts in the far distance, with conversion the eventual aim.

This website is intended to offer some guidance as to how we might do better. Feel free to  challenge anything stated!