Newsletter Subject

The Bubble Should Have Busted in 2017

From

profitableinvestingtips.com

Email Address

admin@profitableinvestingtips.com

Sent On

Tue, Mar 14, 2023 05:04 AM

Email Preheader Text

‘Only when the tide goes out do you discover who’s been swimming naked.’ Warren Buffe

‘Only when the tide goes out do you discover who’s been swimming naked.’ Warren Buffett In 2017, the S&P 500 Index was up almost four-fold from its March 2009 low. Eight years of relatively steady appreciation is rare. The Roaring Twenties bubble took around six years to inflate. The dotcom bubble was five years in the making. The US housing bubble only took a little over four years. By historical measures, in 2017, the US market was living on borrowed time. The only thing we didn’t know was when, not if, this latest episode of exuberance and excess would end. Using John Hussman’s Margin Adjusted P/E (MAPE) model as context on the value proposition offered by the S&P 500 in 2017, we can see it was a whisker below the US market’s two most infamous bubble peaks. With hindsight, we know a never-before-seen speculative mania gripped market participants and took overvaluation to a whole new level. Source: Hussman Strategic Advisors [Click to open in a new window] The reason for highlighting 2017? This was the year I wrote How Much Bull can Investors Bear?. Concerned we were on the cusp of yet another capital-destroying moment, the book was my way of trying to alert people to the dangers of the myths the industry perpetuates in the UP phase of the cycle. Unfortunately, the longer a market stays on the UP, the easier it is to dismiss calls for caution as the ramblings of ‘the boy who cried wolf’. In reality, the more a market rises, the more dangerous it becomes, and the more investors should heed the advice to act with restraint. History is littered with stories of those who have said after the event, ‘if only I had known’. For the greater good of society, the bubble should have busted in 2017. Far less damage would have been done. And a lot less people would have been able to make obscene amounts of money at the expense of the many. The tide is going out, the ARK has run aground On 9 March 2023, the Financial Times published this article: Source: FT [Click to open in a new window] Here’s an edited extract from the article (emphasis added): ‘Cathie Wood’s Ark Investment Management has earned more than $300mn in fees on its flagship exchange traded fund since its inception nine years ago, while wiping out almost $10bn of investors’ cash in the same period. ‘This year it has brought in an average of roughly $230,000 in fees a day as ARKK’s value recovered slightly, rising by a quarter. “Investment fees have provided ARK and Cathie Wood a very good living,” said Elisabeth Kashner, director of global funds, research and analytics at FactSet. “Her investors haven’t been so lucky.”’ Chapter six in How Much Bull Investors Can Bear? is titled ‘Passive versus Active Management — The Tortoise and the Hare’. If we compare the performance of Cathie’s actively managed ARKK (since the fund’s inception) with the passive Invesco QQQ (an exchange-traded fund that tracks the Nasdaq-100 Index with an expense ratio of just 0.2% per annum), we can see in the UP phase of the cycle, ARKK floats a lot higher in 2020 after the Fed pumped massive amounts of liquidity into the system: Source: Yahoo! Finance [Click to open in a new window] Then, the inevitable happens. Out-performance on this scale cannot be maintained. But during the boom, investors flock in on the belief it can and will continue to disconnect forever and a day. No amount of warning can stop the lemmings. As boom turns to bust, Cathie’s ARKK has run aground. The tortoise (the low-fee index fund) has outperformed AND please take note of this, the BUST is only in its infancy. The real downside action is yet to come. The tide is going out and Cathie is swimming naked. But with US$300 million in fees, I’m pretty sure she’ll be able to buy herself a fine pair of bathers…not so sure about her investors though. As an added extra for today’s Daily Reckoning Australia, here’s what I what I wrote in 2017 about hedge funds in chapter six of How Much Bull Investors Can Bear?…it was as true then as it is today. The cycle ALWAYS repeats: ‘The psychology of winners and losers ‘Understanding, or at least appreciating, the game that goes on between our ears is crucial to improving the odds of being classified as a “successful long-term investor”. ‘Get to know the inner you…the one you’ll be fighting against. ‘Our thought processes control our emotions and actions. We choose (consciously or subconsciously) to act rationally or irrationally to circumstances based on emotion. Which is why it’s often suggested you count to 10 before doing anything. ‘Here are a couple of psychological conditions that relate to investing: ‘Metacognition: The less competent you are at a task, the more likely you are to overestimate your ability to accomplish it well. Competence in a given field actually weakens self-confidence. ‘Dunning-Kruger effect: Dunning-Kruger is a cognitive bias in which unskilled people make poor decisions and reach erroneous conclusions, but their incompetence denies them the metacognitive ability to recognise these mistakes. ‘Starting my career in financial planning in 1986 (with negligible investment experience), I felt the pressure to “know it all”; if I didn’t, then clients would perceive me as incompetent. A classic case of metacognition. ‘Years of being chewed up and spat out by the market taught me a great deal about humility, and my own limitations. On balance, these experiences have made me more competent and definitely more cautious (weakened self-confidence). Even though I’m much older and wiser than I was in 1986, I continually question and re-assess my assumptions. ‘In 1984, Bennett W Goodspeed wrote “The Tao Jones Averages: A Guide to Whole-Brained Investing”. ‘The Tao reference in the title relates to the Taoist philosophy of “balance”. ‘A topic Goodspeed discussed was the power of the “articulate incompetent” to influence public thinking (there are a few politicians that fit this category). ‘Goodspeed identified the following characteristics of the “articulate incompetents” in the investing world: ‘The more self-confident an expert appears, the more likely TV viewers will believe them…but the worse their track record is likely to be. ‘So-called expert forecasters do no better than the average member of the public. ‘Forecasters who predict a single outlier correctly are more likely to underperform the rest of the time. ‘Whereas: ‘Experts who acknowledge that the future is inherently unknowable and unpredictable are perceived as being uncertain and, ironically, less trustworthy. ‘The takeaway from these observations is that the majority want to be led, even if the charismatic but clueless leader is taking them down the road to ruin. The faces of a few central bankers, professional managers and CEOs I have known come to mind as I write this. ‘Apparently, most people do not want qualified, cautious advice — and definitely want no part of “boring”. ‘The purpose of providing a historical perspective and psychological profiling is to explain why, through the centuries, we can be our own worst enemies when it comes to investing. ‘Ignorance. Gullibility. Overconfidence. Greed. Fear. All of these play a role in producing poor outcomes. ‘Knowing and accepting the contribution these factors make to investment failure is half the battle. The other half is having a disciplined strategy to minimise the risk of falling off the wagon and being caught up in the social mood created by the next crisis or bubble. ‘And throughout the battle you have to understand industry spin. ‘The investment industry knows investor psychology better than anyone. Which is precisely why they design the products the way they do…with lots of promise. ‘The industry goes to great lengths to make investments sound “sexy and alluring” — using terms like “absolute return funds”, “tax effective”, “alternative investments”, “private equity”, “special opportunities” and so on. ‘Sexy sells. And in the investment business, the very highly-priced hedge funds are definitely portrayed as sexy. ‘Hedge funds are perceived as the masters of the investment universe. These funds (apparently) employ only the best and brightest individuals who take positions that are designed to outperform the market…irrespective of whether it is rising or falling. ‘Absolute returns (no negative results over a stipulated period of time) are another promise offered by some hedge funds. ‘If the aura of hedge funds makes them sound too good to be true, it’s because, in reality, most are. ‘Unfortunately, far too many investors fail to apply this cynical approach and actually believe the “hype” — as we know they are wired to do. ‘When the founder of the world’s largest hedge fund, Ray Dalio, was asked, “How many hedge funds are worth investing in?”, his response was, “There are about 8,000 planes in the air and 100 really good pilots.” ‘Many a true word is said in jest. ‘The following table compares the annual performance of the HFRX Global Hedge Fund Index (since 1998) to other benchmarks… Source: Enterprising Investor [Click to open in a new window] ‘Over the longer term — 1998 to 2016 — the Hedge Fund Index has slightly underperformed. ‘However, when you take the 1998-2003 performance away from the hedge funds, they have produced dismal performance since 2004. ‘Initially, the small and nimble hedge fund players did add significant value for their excessive fee structure — a 2% annual management fee plus a performance fee of 20% on gains achieved above a base return, or “hurdle” rate. ‘The late phase of the dotcom boom in the 1990s provided the hedge fund industry with a lot of low-hanging fruit to profit from. The obscene amounts of fees extracted from the hedge fund pioneers resulted in nearly every man and his dog hanging out their hedge fund shingle. The result of this overcrowding in the hedge fund marketplace is demonstrated in the post-2004 performance of this sector. ‘With so many managers looking to get on the fee gravy train, it means the small universe of undervalued investment opportunities is well and truly trawled over by the hedge fund herd. ‘Since 2004, the hedge fund average has seriously under-performed the S&P 500. ‘However, as the hedge funds, in recent years, have outperformed the cash rate (a measly 0.25%), some have still been able to pay themselves their performance fee (in addition to the annual management fee). ‘Industry insider Simon Lack shone the light on the inequity of the hedge fund fee structure in his 2011 book The Hedge Fund Mirage: ‘From 1998–2010, hedge fund managers earned $379 billion in fees. Over the same period, the investors in their funds earned only $70 billion in gains. ‘Managers retained 84% of investment profits while the investors, who put up the capital, received a paltry 16%. ‘To make matters worse, up to one-third of the hedge funds are only accessible via feeder funds or a fund of funds approach. This adds a further layer of administration fees to be absorbed by investors. Simon Lack estimates the additional administration fees are approximately $61 billion. When you account for the additional fees, investors actually received $9 billion ($70 billion less $61 billion), and the industry raked in $440 billion ($379 billion plus $61 billion). The final split: hedge funds 98% and investors 2%. ‘Despite what you may have been led to believe, hedge funds are not in the investment business. They are in the fee-capturing business. ‘Sure, some hedge funds are worth their weight in gold. But which ones? ‘Picking the outperformer in advance is random luck, and failure to do so (which is where the majority end up) comes with a hefty price tag. ‘In classic “don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story” tradition, the industry knows that, when it comes to sexy versus matronly, investors are wired for the former.’ Regards, Vern Gowdie, Editor, The Daily Reckoning Australia The post The Bubble Should Have Busted in 2017 appeared first on Daily Reckoning Australia. [Image] Here are Some More Investing Tips and Resources. Enjoy! Sponsored [How He Bagged One Of The Top Trading Records…]( A reclusive millionaire has been quietly racking up winning trade after winning trade. Despite avoiding most headlines, he’s become one of the most successful traders around - over the last 8 years, he’s banked a 97% win rate. How does he do it? He sat down for a rare interview where he revealed it all. [Click HERE to see how he’s done it…]( [Privacy Policy/Disclosures]( [The Bubble Should Have Busted in 2017]( ‘Only when the tide goes out do you discover who’s been swimming naked.’ Warren Buffett In 2017, the S&P 500 Index was up almost four-fold from its March 2009 low. Eight years of relatively steady appreciation is rare. The Roaring Twenties bubble took around six years to inflate. The dotcom bubble was five years in the making. The US housing bubble only took a little over four years. By historical measures, in 2017, the US market was living on borrowed time. The only thing we didn’t know was when, not if, this latest episode of exuberance and excess would end. Using John Hussman’s Margin Adjusted P/E (MAPE) model as context on the value proposition offered by the S&P 500 in 2017, we can see it was a whisker below the US market’s two most infamous bubble peaks. With hindsight, we know a never-before-seen speculative mania gripped market participants and took overvaluation to a whole new level. Source: Hussman Strategic Advisors [Click to open in a new window] The reason for highlighting 2017? This was the year I wrote How Much Bull can Investors Bear?. Concerned we were on the cusp of yet another capital-destroying moment, the book was my way of trying to alert people to the dangers of the myths the industry perpetuates in the UP phase of the cycle. Unfortunately, the longer a market stays on the UP, the easier it is to dismiss calls for caution as the ramblings of ‘the boy who cried wolf’. In reality, the more a market rises, the more dangerous it becomes, and the more investors should heed the advice to act with restraint. History is littered with stories of those who have said after the event, ‘if only I had known’. For the greater good of society, the bubble should have busted in 2017. Far less damage would have been done. And a lot less people would have been able to make obscene amounts of money at the expense of the many. The tide is going out, the ARK has run aground On 9 March 2023, the Financial Times published this article: Source: FT [Click to open in a new window] Here’s an edited extract from the article (emphasis added): ‘Cathie Wood’s Ark Investment Management has earned more than $300mn in fees on its flagship exchange traded fund since its inception nine years ago, while wiping out almost $10bn of investors’ cash in the same period. ‘This year it has brought in an average of roughly $230,000 in fees a day as ARKK’s value recovered slightly, rising by a quarter. “Investment fees have provided ARK and Cathie Wood a very good living,” said Elisabeth Kashner, director of global funds, research and analytics at FactSet. “Her investors haven’t been so lucky.”’ Chapter six in How Much Bull Investors Can Bear? is titled ‘Passive versus Active Management — The Tortoise and the Hare’. If we compare the performance of Cathie’s actively managed ARKK (since the fund’s inception) with the passive Invesco QQQ (an exchange-traded fund that tracks the Nasdaq-100 Index with an expense ratio of just 0.2% per annum), we can see in the UP phase of the cycle, ARKK floats a lot higher in 2020 after the Fed pumped massive amounts of liquidity into the system: Source: Yahoo! Finance [Click to open in a new window] Then, the inevitable happens. Out-performance on this scale cannot be maintained. But during the boom, investors flock in on the belief it can and will continue to disconnect forever and a day. No amount of warning can stop the lemmings. As boom turns to bust, Cathie’s ARKK has run aground. The tortoise (the low-fee index fund) has outperformed AND please take note of this, the BUST is only in its infancy. The real downside action is yet to come. The tide is going out and Cathie is swimming naked. But with US$300 million in fees, I’m pretty sure she’ll be able to buy herself a fine pair of bathers…not so sure about her investors though. As an added extra for today’s Daily Reckoning Australia, here’s what I what I wrote in 2017 about hedge funds in chapter six of How Much Bull Investors Can Bear?…it was as true then as it is today. The cycle ALWAYS repeats: ‘The psychology of winners and losers ‘Understanding, or at least appreciating, the game that goes on between our ears is crucial to improving the odds of being classified as a “successful long-term investor”. ‘Get to know the inner you…the one you’ll be fighting against. ‘Our thought processes control our emotions and actions. We choose (consciously or subconsciously) to act rationally or irrationally to circumstances based on emotion. Which is why it’s often suggested you count to 10 before doing anything. ‘Here are a couple of psychological conditions that relate to investing: ‘Metacognition: The less competent you are at a task, the more likely you are to overestimate your ability to accomplish it well. Competence in a given field actually weakens self-confidence. ‘Dunning-Kruger effect: Dunning-Kruger is a cognitive bias in which unskilled people make poor decisions and reach erroneous conclusions, but their incompetence denies them the metacognitive ability to recognise these mistakes. ‘Starting my career in financial planning in 1986 (with negligible investment experience), I felt the pressure to “know it all”; if I didn’t, then clients would perceive me as incompetent. A classic case of metacognition. ‘Years of being chewed up and spat out by the market taught me a great deal about humility, and my own limitations. On balance, these experiences have made me more competent and definitely more cautious (weakened self-confidence). Even though I’m much older and wiser than I was in 1986, I continually question and re-assess my assumptions. ‘In 1984, Bennett W Goodspeed wrote “The Tao Jones Averages: A Guide to Whole-Brained Investing”. ‘The Tao reference in the title relates to the Taoist philosophy of “balance”. ‘A topic Goodspeed discussed was the power of the “articulate incompetent” to influence public thinking (there are a few politicians that fit this category). ‘Goodspeed identified the following characteristics of the “articulate incompetents” in the investing world: ‘The more self-confident an expert appears, the more likely TV viewers will believe them…but the worse their track record is likely to be. ‘So-called expert forecasters do no better than the average member of the public. ‘Forecasters who predict a single outlier correctly are more likely to underperform the rest of the time. ‘Whereas: ‘Experts who acknowledge that the future is inherently unknowable and unpredictable are perceived as being uncertain and, ironically, less trustworthy. ‘The takeaway from these observations is that the majority want to be led, even if the charismatic but clueless leader is taking them down the road to ruin. The faces of a few central bankers, professional managers and CEOs I have known come to mind as I write this. ‘Apparently, most people do not want qualified, cautious advice — and definitely want no part of “boring”. ‘The purpose of providing a historical perspective and psychological profiling is to explain why, through the centuries, we can be our own worst enemies when it comes to investing. ‘Ignorance. Gullibility. Overconfidence. Greed. Fear. All of these play a role in producing poor outcomes. ‘Knowing and accepting the contribution these factors make to investment failure is half the battle. The other half is having a disciplined strategy to minimise the risk of falling off the wagon and being caught up in the social mood created by the next crisis or bubble. ‘And throughout the battle you have to understand industry spin. ‘The investment industry knows investor psychology better than anyone. Which is precisely why they design the products the way they do…with lots of promise. ‘The industry goes to great lengths to make investments sound “sexy and alluring” — using terms like “absolute return funds”, “tax effective”, “alternative investments”, “private equity”, “special opportunities” and so on. ‘Sexy sells. And in the investment business, the very highly-priced hedge funds are definitely portrayed as sexy. ‘Hedge funds are perceived as the masters of the investment universe. These funds (apparently) employ only the best and brightest individuals who take positions that are designed to outperform the market…irrespective of whether it is rising or falling. ‘Absolute returns (no negative results over a stipulated period of time) are another promise offered by some hedge funds. ‘If the aura of hedge funds makes them sound too good to be true, it’s because, in reality, most are. ‘Unfortunately, far too many investors fail to apply this cynical approach and actually believe the “hype” — as we know they are wired to do. ‘When the founder of the world’s largest hedge fund, Ray Dalio, was asked, “How many hedge funds are worth investing in?”, his response was, “There are about 8,000 planes in the air and 100 really good pilots.” ‘Many a true word is said in jest. ‘The following table compares the annual performance of the HFRX Global Hedge Fund Index (since 1998) to other benchmarks… Source: Enterprising Investor [Click to open in a new window] ‘Over the longer term — 1998 to 2016 — the Hedge Fund Index has slightly underperformed. ‘However, when you take the 1998-2003 performance away from the hedge funds, they have produced dismal performance since 2004. ‘Initially, the small and nimble hedge fund players did add significant value for their excessive fee structure — a 2% annual management fee plus a performance fee of 20% on gains achieved above a base return, or “hurdle” rate. ‘The late phase of the dotcom boom in the 1990s provided the hedge fund industry with a lot of low-hanging fruit to profit from. The obscene amounts of fees extracted from the hedge fund pioneers resulted in nearly every man and his dog hanging out their hedge fund shingle. The result of this overcrowding in the hedge fund marketplace is demonstrated in the post-2004 performance of this sector. ‘With so many managers looking to get on the fee gravy train, it means the small universe of undervalued investment opportunities is well and truly trawled over by the hedge fund herd. ‘Since 2004, the hedge fund average has seriously under-performed the S&P 500. ‘However, as the hedge funds, in recent years, have outperformed the cash rate (a measly 0.25%), some have still been able to pay themselves their performance fee (in addition to the annual management fee). ‘Industry insider Simon Lack shone the light on the inequity of the hedge fund fee structure in his 2011 book The Hedge Fund Mirage: ‘From 1998–2010, hedge fund managers earned $379 billion in fees. Over the same period, the investors in their funds earned only $70 billion in gains. ‘Managers retained 84% of investment profits while the investors, who put up the capital, received a paltry 16%. ‘To make matters worse, up to one-third of the hedge funds are only accessible via feeder funds or a fund of funds approach. This adds a further layer of administration fees to be absorbed by investors. Simon Lack estimates the additional administration fees are approximately $61 billion. When you account for the additional fees, investors actually received $9 billion ($70 billion less $61 billion), and the industry raked in $440 billion ($379 billion plus $61 billion). The final split: hedge funds 98% and investors 2%. ‘Despite what you may have been led to believe, hedge funds are not in the investment business. They are in the fee-capturing business. ‘Sure, some hedge funds are worth their weight in gold. But which ones? ‘Picking the outperformer in advance is random luck, and failure to do so (which is where the majority end up) comes with a hefty price tag. ‘In classic “don’t let the facts get in the way of a good story” tradition, the industry knows that, when it comes to sexy versus matronly, investors are wired for the former.’ Regards, Vern Gowdie, Editor, The Daily Reckoning Australia The post The Bubble Should Have Busted in 2017 appeared first on Daily Reckoning Australia. [Continue Reading...]( [The Bubble Should Have Busted in 2017]( And, in case you missed it: - [Are We ‘Too Negative’?]( - [CRISPR Therapeutics Announces Transition of Chief Financial Officer]( - [Avid Bioservices Reports Financial Results for Third Quarter Ended January 31, 2023, and Recent Developments]( - [T2 Biosystems Announces Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2022 Financial Results]( - [TScan Therapeutics to Participate in the Barclays Global Healthcare Conference]( - FREE OR LOW COST INVESTING RESOURCES - [i]( [i]( [i]( [i]( Sponsored [This Trade Has Paid Out 99.1%]( We’ve made THIS simple trade over and over again… for years. The result? It’s cashed in winning trades 99.1% of the time. We call it the “310F Trade.” Getting into this “rinse and repeat” trade each Tuesday… could double your money by Friday. Sound too good to be true? [See how we’ve done it, week after week...for YEARS]( [Privacy Policy/Disclosures]( - CLICK THE IMAGE BELOW FOR MORE INFORMATION - [i]( Good Investing! T. D. Thompson Founder & CEO [ProfitableInvestingTips.com]() ProfitableInvestingTips.com is an informational website for men and women who want to discover investing and trading products and strategies to educate themselves about the risks and benefits of investing and investing-related products. DISCLAIMER: Use of this Publisher's email, website and content, is subject to the Privacy Policy and Terms of Use published on Publisher's Website. Content marked as "sponsored" may be third party advertisements and are not endorsed or warranted by our staff or company. The content in our emails is for informational or entertainment use, and is not a substitute for professional advice. Always check with a qualified professional regarding investing and trading guidance. Be sure to do your own careful research before taking action based on anything you find in this content. If you no longer wish to receive our emails, click the link below: [Unsubscribe]( Net Wealth Consultants 6614 La Mora Drive Houston, Texas 77083 United States (888) 983-9123

EDM Keywords (286)

yet years year wrote write worth worse world women wiser wired wiping winners whisker whether well weight week way warranted warning want wagon unpredictable underperform uncertain two trying true trade tracks tortoise took today time tide throughout thing terms task taking takeaway take sure substitute subject subconsciously strategies stories stop still staff sponsored spat sound society small seriously see sector sat said ruin role road risks risk rising rinse revealed result rest response relate recognise receive reason reality rare ramblings put purpose publisher psychology providing promise profit products pressure predict precisely power post politicians play phase period performed performance perceived people pay participate part paid overestimate overcrowding outperformer outperformed outperform open one odds observations never myths money missed minimise mind men means may masters many making maintained made lots lot longer living little littered liquidity link limitations likely light let lemmings led layer known know jest irrationally investors investing inner informational information inflate infancy inequity incompetent inception improving image hype humility hindsight heed headlines hare half guide good gold going goes get game future fund founder fit find fighting felt fees falling failure factset faces exuberance explain experiences expense event endorsed emotions emotion emails educate easier ears earned done discover designed design demonstrated definitely day dangers dangerous cusp crucial couple count contribution continue context content competent compare company comes come click classified classic chewed charismatic ceos centuries caution caught cathie cashed case career call buy busted bust bubble brought boy boring book better best benefits believe belief becomes bear battle bathers banked balance average aura assumptions assess asked arkk ark apply apparently anything anyone analytics amount air advice advance adds addition actions act acknowledge account accomplish accepting absorbed able ability 300mn 2020 2017 2016 20 1986 10

Marketing emails from profitableinvestingtips.com

View More
Sent On

22/03/2024

Sent On

21/03/2024

Sent On

20/03/2024

Sent On

19/03/2024

Sent On

18/03/2024

Sent On

15/03/2024

Email Content Statistics

Subscribe Now

Subject Line Length

Data shows that subject lines with 6 to 10 words generated 21 percent higher open rate.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Words

The more words in the content, the more time the user will need to spend reading. Get straight to the point with catchy short phrases and interesting photos and graphics.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Number of Images

More images or large images might cause the email to load slower. Aim for a balance of words and images.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Time to Read

Longer reading time requires more attention and patience from users. Aim for short phrases and catchy keywords.

Subscribe Now

Average in this category

Subscribe Now

Predicted open rate

Subscribe Now

Spam Score

Spam score is determined by a large number of checks performed on the content of the email. For the best delivery results, it is advised to lower your spam score as much as possible.

Subscribe Now

Flesch reading score

Flesch reading score measures how complex a text is. The lower the score, the more difficult the text is to read. The Flesch readability score uses the average length of your sentences (measured by the number of words) and the average number of syllables per word in an equation to calculate the reading ease. Text with a very high Flesch reading ease score (about 100) is straightforward and easy to read, with short sentences and no words of more than two syllables. Usually, a reading ease score of 60-70 is considered acceptable/normal for web copy.

Subscribe Now

Technologies

What powers this email? Every email we receive is parsed to determine the sending ESP and any additional email technologies used.

Subscribe Now

Email Size (not include images)

Font Used

No. Font Name
Subscribe Now

Copyright © 2019–2024 SimilarMail.