BloodHorse.com

Search Blood-Horse.com

Fast Facts -- What Is the Comparable Index (CI)?

The Comparable Index (CI) measures the average earnings of progeny produced from the annual book of mares bred to a sire, when those same mares were bred to other sires. In other words, CI indicates the producing quality of the mares bred to a stallion. 

To understand CI, you must first be familiar with the Average Earnings Index (AEI). The CI for a stallion can be thought of as a composite AEI for the progeny of all of the mares in his stud book for a given year. If those mares' previous  foals by other sires have collectively won three times the average annual earnings of all Thoroughbreds in their individual classes, the sire's CI for that year's book would be 3.0. And if the mares in his book are poor producers -- say, they earn half of the average in their sex/age groups -- the stallion's book would be a 0.5 CI.

Reviewing the CI, breeders will often note that a particular stallion "improves" his mares, while another stallion might breed mares that improve him. What these breeders are doing is making a simple comparision of the stallion's AEI and CI figures. The AEI-to-CI ratio indicates how well a stallion's progeny have performed on the racetrack (straight earnings) compared to how well those foals' half-siblings fared in the same time period.  A high AEI-to-CI number means that the stallion's colts and fillies are outperforming their dams' other foals and is considered proof that the stallion improved his book of mares.


Because of CI, the September issue of The Blood-Horse MarketWatch is one of the more popular editions of this professional newsletter.  In that month, MarketWatch presents a Quality of Dams feature that analyzes stallions by the strength of the book they've attracted. (I won't confuse the issue here, but the feature looks at other factors -- including Class Performance Index, or CPI -- as well as CI.)  While stallion farms are interested to see where their studs land in the rankings, the charts are most anticipated by broodmare owners.

In my mind, last year's stallion CI standout was Perfect Soul (IRE) (SRO). Despite standing for only $15,000, his 3.06 CI for foals born in 2008 beat every stallion up to a $100,000 stud fee except for one (his fellow Northern Dancer-line stallion Dixieland Band).  If I were a commercial breeder or even a pinhooker, I would take notice.  Here's why:  it's fair to assume that the Perfect Soul foals of 2008 will be standout runners in 2011.  (While he's unlikely to throw extreme precocity and therefore might not have top juveniles in 2010, his own talent and the fact that his mares are proven producers mean that we should expect a solid crop of talented sophomores a year later.)  I'd be willing to gamble that some big wins in early 2011 would increase demand for Perfect Soul 2-year-olds in the spring and for yearlings in the summer and fall. So a mare owner in the recent breeding season might have been smart to consider sending a commercially-bred mare to Perfect Soul for a 2010 foal (i.e., a 2011 yearling).  Similarly, a pinhooker in 2010 might keep that in mind and give special attention to 2010 yearling bargains that would be resold as racing prospects during 2011.

7 Comments:

I'll stick with performance, conformation and a little line breeding (oops, I forget, in TB's it's all inbreeding) and the tail-female line top and bottom...my 4 stallions entering their freshman year were (honest) Birdstone, Candy Ride, M'D'oro and Peace Rules...

I also knew Tiznow would be an enormously valuable stud.

All 5 were super bargains in their first year(s).

da3hoss 29 Jul 2009 6:28 PM

Good point about Perfect Soul...

The CI does offer us some useful information, but one should be careful not to overestimate its value. CI is flawed, and here are a few examples:

We are attempting to assign a number for a mare's true genetic worth. Mares, unlike many stallions, have a relatively limited number of offspring. Their overall production records are, therefore, of less statistical "significance" (less of an accurate measure of their true genetic worth) than are the records for many stallion (much larger data base of offspring)...A mare's CI is also a reflection of the stallions to whom they were bred. Imagine all those mares who were sent to Bold Ruler (had a very high AEI). Bold Ruler, cumulatively, raised the CIs of those mares bred to him ( a mare of similar genetic value bred to most other stallions would not have produced an offspring of such high A.E.I.)...Lastly, while it may be obvious to many, it is worth noting that many stallions who "improve" their mares are far inferior to those where the effect is opposite (this can easily be demonstrated mathematically).    

sceptre 29 Jul 2009 9:06 PM

Sceptre makes a great point.  The CI really needs to be adjusted for the AEI of the stallions who sired the other foals.  For example, if two stallions have a CI of 2.00, but stallion A's mates had all their other foals sired by Storm Cat and A.P. Indy, while stallion B's mates had all their foals sired by Charismatic and Real Quiet, then clearly the mares bred to stallion B are superior to those bred to stallion A, since collectively their foals have overperformed their sires, while the foals of stallion A's mates have underperformed.

This was recognized by the USDA in their dairy bull proofs at least 35 years ago, but for some reason no one seems to want to do the same level of statistical analyses of horses as they do of dairy cattle.

LanceS 30 Jul 2009 9:19 AM

Don't you just love the "prophets" who tell you they forecast the future long after it happened.

Suuuuuuure you did, da3hoss.

Funny how you missed Trippi....

Lmaris 30 Jul 2009 1:50 PM

       Scot, You must have been reading my mind,because I wanted to ask you a question on this very subject ! Thanks for the information ! I find the AEI and the CI very useful !

Pedigree Shelly 30 Jul 2009 10:47 PM

Just a quick note to clarify some of what I said, and LanceS' suggestion ("The CI needs to be adjusted for the AEI of the stallions who sired the other foals"). I've mulled this over long ago, and concluded that there was little to be gained by factoring in the AEIs of the stallions to whom the mares were bred. For example, one can also see flaws in those as well. It's possible to continue that zig-zag process (with its inherent flaws) down the generations. Would such an exercise yield, in the end, a more "accurate" number?- I doubt it would accomplish much. There are just too many variables to consider, let alone the difficulty in assigning weights for each.  

sceptre 31 Jul 2009 12:27 PM

Pingback from  Perfect Soul’s third book may keep him off the ‘bomb’ list «  Sid Fernando + Observations

Perfect Soul’s third book may keep him off the ‘bomb’ list « Sid Fernando + Observations 16 Aug 2009 12:39 PM

Leave a Comment

All comments are moderated and must be approved before they are posted. The blog author reserves the right to edit or omit any comment.

  (Appears with your comment) (required)
  (Will not be published) (required)
  (required)

The Five-Cross Files

News

  • Pedigree Newsletter:
    The Five-Cross Files will be featured in a new Pedigree Analysis newsletter from BloodHorse.com. To sign up for this free weekly email -- or any other newsletters from The Blood-Horse -- just click here.
Click Here to download BloodHorse.com Widgets!