I just checked, and a portfolio of just the sp500 absolutely destroys the prime rate.
unless we are talking about two different things (what is the best thing to invest in to get the most returns over the long run), either you missed interpreted what the course was trying to teach you or its just factually wrong.
I took historic data from 1950 till now and matched it with the prime rate. I even gave you the benefit of the doubt by taking the max prime rate of the given year.
even if you invested at the peak of the dotcom bubble in 1999, you would have done better (100$=>255$ vs 246$)
unless we are talking about two different things (what is the best thing to invest in to get the most returns over the long run), either you missed interpreted what the course was trying to teach you or its just factually wrong.
I took historic data from 1950 till now and matched it with the prime rate. I even gave you the benefit of the doubt by taking the max prime rate of the given year.
even if you invested at the peak of the dotcom bubble in 1999, you would have done better (100$=>255$ vs 246$)