Yes, it has. Though I don't really buy the argument that DCA'ing is a rational choice to counter the stress of market volatility*.TokyoBoglehead wrote: ↑Mon Oct 17, 2022 12:32 pm Vanguard has a great study, it's been linked in this forum a few times. https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source= ... GhqX28B0ce
Statically speaking LSI beat DCA the majority of the time. The future is unknowable, so LSI is the "on paper" rational choice. However, if it's too much stress, then DCA is right for you.
People need to understand that volatility is inevitable concomitant of stock market investing. Numerically speaking, there is no difference between a bear market wiping 50% off the value of a portfolio two months after a lump sum investment, or two months after a DCA period finishes. In both cases, you end up 50% poorer from a position where you previously were.
Yes, DCA lowers the consequence of any downwards volatility over the initial period. But after that, the game is the same.
Rationally investors should instead be accepting upfront that a) volatility is an unavoidable hazard, and b) that it needs to be managed appropriately by choosing an equity investment percentage that suits their circumstances and risk tolerance.
The equity ratio can increase over time, of course. But conflating this point with DCA means many new investors aren't thinking properly about the amount of volatility they can sustain, I feel. Certainly a DCA-style ramp up of exposure from low to max volatility over 6 months to a year is probably too fast a rate for many new or uneasy investors.
*Note I'm not saying this what you believe, @TokyoBoglehead, just rambling on from my soapbox