There is no doubt that retail punters lose big time to costs and this makes up the lion's share of the Dalbar "gap" I would say, though Dalbar do not themselves try and split out the costs gap from the bad behaviour gap. Maybe the answer to the conundrum is that collective retail investors simply induce a windfall plus for all other sectors with no particular sector having a systematic claim. Colm, Pfau is a Professor, in the same league as David McWilliams, how can you speak so disparagingly of him He claims that Dalbar would calculate the 20 year yield on, say, level cash flows as follows. Let's say 1 p.a. for 20 years grows to 30 then that is a profit of 10. Dalbar divide 10 by the 20 invested to get a 50% return which they then convert to an annualized return. Now that is sheer nonsense but the surprising thing is that Mr Dalbar in his tirade of a response did not deny the accusation. The problem is that Dalbar do not tell us just how their methodology works.