Investment firm Gerstein Fisher suggests that “blending Growth and Value [approaches to investment] even in a simple 50/50 split generally offers more stable returns than either a 100% Growth or 100% Value portfolio.” They note that value has clearly outperformed over a 90-year time-horizon and that growth has provided significantly better returns over the last 9 years, while also drawing on behavioral finance literature to remind readers that “investor attempts to time markets and cycles are far more likely to be harmful than beneficial to long-term wealth accumulation.” Given that human investors don’t have a 90-year time horizon, they explore the relative returns of pure growth, pure value, and a 50/50 split over shorter time horizons. Their analysis shows that underperformance of either pure approach when out of favor tends to be more severe than that of a 50/50 approach, thus suggesting the 50/50 approach may be the least volatile and most likely to reap satisfactory returns over usual human time periods.