Besides reviewing Cramer's portfolio performance, the study also compared such results to the

S&P 500 index. For the above graphic, we also included total returns of the IFA Index Portfolio
100, which tracks an all-equity global portfolio. (This data is presented net of IFA's highest
annual investment management fee of 0.90%.)

Under such a microscope, Cramer's stock picks lost luster. The Wharton researchers found that
his AAP portfolio produced an annualized 4.08% return in the 16-plus years reviewed. At the
same time, the S&P 500 gained 7.07% and the IFA Index 100 returned 9.29% per year.

When applying an efficient frontier analysis -- where raw returns are judged relative to how
much market risk is being injected into a portfolio -- the study's results raised even more red
flags during this period reviewed. For example, Cramer's AAP portfolio generated annualized
standard deviation of 17.65 and a Sharpe ratio of 0.16.

In finance, the Sharpe ratio measures the performance of an investment compared to a risk-free
asset, after adjusting for its risk. Meanwhile, standard deviation is a statistical metric that can be
used to quantify portfolio volatility against a market index.

By contrast, our analysts estimated the IFA Index Portfolio 100 during this 17-plus year period
produced an annualized standard deviation of 17.24 and a Sharpe Ratio of 0.47. (Lower standard
deviation translates into less exposure to market volatility while greater Sharpe numbers indicate
better risk-reward characteristics.)

The S&P 500 index in this timeframe had standard deviation of 14.16 and a Sharpe Ratio
of 0.41. In other words, Cramer's AAP portfolio was not only providing its investors with
significantly lower annualized returns, but also a bumpier ride in delivering such lagging
performance.

To be fair, the study's authors pointed out that as a charitable trust, the AAP portfolio can suffer
as it gathers dividends and distributions to make future donations. During periods when stocks
are rallying, Hartley and Olson find that such a cash drag has proved problematic to keeping up
with market returns. (Note: IFA's portfolio management process stresses a "fully" invested
strategy as part of implementing each client's holistic financial plan.)

In studying Cramer's AAP portfolio over such an extended timeframe, Hartley and Olson
uncovered a management trend during this period of tilting to smaller market capitalization
stocks and those considered as more growth-styled. They also found a propensity to bet on shares
of companies with "low earnings quality." (It's worth noting that IFA's equity strategy favors
small caps, value and funds that screen for profitability.)

"We also find that over the portfolio's entire history, Cramer's AAP portfolio exposures are
primarily driven by underlevered exposure; i.e., low-beta with respect to market returns in every
specification, which has heavily contributed to underperforming the S&P 500 in the post-
financial crisis years," the study summarized.