Why? Because analyzing performance metrics is hard. There are too many numbers to choose from, and most people don’t know which ones actually matter.

But when it comes to building a strong portfolio or investment model, the most powerful metric is relative performance—how much you’re outperforming (or underperforming) the S&P annually.

📉 The average investor underperforms the S&P by 5% per year.
📈 The best ETF over the past 10 years has outperformed by 9% per year.
🚀 The best version of the Stars model has outperformed by up to 19% per year.

And yes, performance varies with market type. But over time, the compounding of those percentage points matters. A lot.

Here’s the kicker:
The average investor loses 24% per year in opportunity cost by not being in the Stars model.

Over five years, that’s a 120% loss.
And no amount of market timing can make that up.
💡 Maybe it’s time we focused less on returns—and more on relative performance.