WoV stock portfolio
Most updated list.
1% YNDX 29.95
1% FB 68.01
1% AR 60.92
2% CELG 151.85
2% MA 77.63
2% DIS 81.35
1% CSCO 21.53
1% MO 36.39
4% VDE 123.97
1% SVA 6.43
2% ILMN 160.42
1% TD 46.50
1% BMO 65.61
1% COST 113.85
1% GTAT 17.34
1% SCTY 75.00
1% RBL 21.7
1% MM 7.22
5% BRK.B 123.54
1% WWE 30.53
3% AAPL 528.20
1% TSLA 234.93
5% IYY 94.65
2% FEU 38.59
2% AOA 44.81
10% TWCUX 34.55
RBL was my own pick... a Russia ETF
AAPL was a friend's choice....
MM is initials of a friend....
My son's girlfriend had lunch with Warren Buffet recently... I have a picture... so BRK.B
I actually watch pro wrestling... WWE
IYY is just a total market ETF with low expenses
FEU is a Europe ETF... my other accounts have basically very little exposure to Europe..
I'll try for CMG tomorrow but kept typing in CNG so never found it.....
For whatever reason, when I tried to buy CBIS, NTEK, and IPPLF, I kept getting a message saying something like the funds hadn't cleared yet.... so I will try for those again tomorrow. At present I am not being charged any transaction fees, and have a gazillion more free trades available, probably over the next month or so.
Thank you all who made suggestions!
Quote: CoolMikeEdit: a poster above me had the same idea : )
I think you don't know what SPXS is! It is an 'anti' S & P 500 fund. I may buy a gold stock or two, but won't buy any other 'bear' type funds. I own a lot of SPY in another account, and don't want to bet against myself that way... kind of like the doey-don't.
Quote: SOOPOO
For whatever reason, when I tried to buy CBIC, NTEK, and IPPLF, I kept getting a message saying something like the funds hadn't cleared yet.... so I will try for those again tomorrow.
You did type in CBIS, right?
Quote: AcesAndEightsQuote: SOOPOO
For whatever reason, when I tried to buy CBIC, NTEK, and IPPLF, I kept getting a message saying something like the funds hadn't cleared yet.... so I will try for those again tomorrow.
You did type in CBIS, right?
Yes.... I just edited my previous post to reflect that. Thanks though...
Quote: AcesAndEightsIf the stock market crashes, he will look like a genius :).
I've seen people look like geniuses if they did what they claimed in cashing out [like late 2007]. Then, generally, they look like fools for not getting back in. And many times they claim they got out early, but it was in fact some really bad time to do so in 2008/9.
Quote: AcesAndEightsWOW, this is some genuinely terrible investing advice. Sounds like a recipe for buying high, selling low, and eating up your return in trading fees.
Yes, it can be bad advice, but it depends. At some point some of the dogs have to go. If you have a mutual fund or ETF either one, they are doing that for you.
Quote: SOOPOOI think you don't know what SPXS is! It is an 'anti' S & P 500 fund. I may buy a gold stock or two, but won't buy any other 'bear' type funds. I own a lot of SPY in another account, and don't want to bet against myself that way... kind of like the doey-don't.
I'm fairly sure that CoolMike knows what the SPXS is……I'm also fairly sure you don't know that you don't know that your portfolio's Delta is way out of whack……look up Delta and report back:-)
Quote: s2dbakerHot stuff! GTAT waited for you to buy in to take off today. Here is to hoping that past result are indicative of future performance.
Nice, but not as good as YNDX or SVA. :-)
Quote: treetopbuddyI'm fairly sure that CoolMike knows what the SPXS is……I'm also fairly sure you don't know that you don't know that your portfolio's Delta is way out of whack……look up Delta and report back:-)
Actually.... Cool Mike's post was initially a paragraph or two basically saying I should buy something like SPY or something.... then he edited the whole thing after he saw the other poster's spxs post..... so I think I was correct..... but it doesn't matter.....
As far as this particular portfolio's delta.... it is just a part of my overall retirement portfolio, so it really can't be viewed by itself that way......
I have another that is split equally between VPL and VTI.....
And another that is solely in FUSEX....
If you look at those individually you would think I have no idea what I am doing.......
(And maybe you would be right?)
By the way, thanks to all the suggestions....... since this is a decades long thing it doesn't really matter... but day one and two were great!
Quote: AcesAndEightsWhat? Any ETF's fees are disclosed via the expense ratio, which you can compare right along side the mutual funds as well. In addition, most brokerage accounts allow you to trade in their "branded" asset-class ETFs with no trading fees.
WOW, this is some genuinely terrible investing advice. Sounds like a recipe for buying high, selling low, and eating up your return in trading fees.
Like you broker doesn't do this?
My point is the costs of managing your account.
The brokers and financial advisors all want you to by ETF's, mutual funds, or to be "advised" by them. So that they can charge you more fees.
SOOPOO is asking for some stocks to buy for a portion of his IRA account. He will have to pay a transaction cost to buy into those individual stocks, with TDAmeritrade, that direct cost at that time can be pretty low.
After that, what is his cost to have that stock in his portfolio?
What is the cost to have an ETF? Yes, its fee's are listed in its prospectus. And It can be pretty low. Less than 1%....
What about mutual funds? Another fee. It is disclosed as well. But it is still a fee.
Remember, the ones collecting the fee are the ones telling you to pay it.
And where did I say that you are Buying High and Selling Low? I stated to review your portfolio and sell the losers. (And you get to define what losers you have in your portfolio...by whatever means) And then buy better companies. And your fees are FIXED right then. This is what it cost you to make that trade, no further expenses as long as you hold that stock.
If SOOPOO buys all the stocks on his list, and comes back one year from now, and stays put on everything, I would have to presume that each stock was worth keeping at that point. But if Stock XYZ was up 30% and its P/E was 50, maybe it is time to sell. Or not. But if a stock was down 30%, maybe it is time for it to go. The point is to LOOK and then make a decision.
SFB
Quote: SFBQuote: AcesAndEightsWhat? Any ETF's fees are disclosed via the expense ratio, which you can compare right along side the mutual funds as well. In addition, most brokerage accounts allow you to trade in their "branded" asset-class ETFs with no trading fees.
WOW, this is some genuinely terrible investing advice. Sounds like a recipe for buying high, selling low, and eating up your return in trading fees.
Like you broker doesn't do this?
My point is the costs of managing your account.
The brokers and financial advisors all want you to by ETF's, mutual funds, or to be "advised" by them. So that they can charge you more fees.
I only buy mutual funds and ETFs that track an index. Yes, there are fees to manage their operation, but there is no hot-shot hedge fund manager picking stocks...the funds track an index. The expense rations are generally under 0.5%. I don't pay any advisers or financial managers.
Quote:SOOPOO is asking for some stocks to buy for a portion of his IRA account. He will have to pay a transaction cost to buy into those individual stocks, with TDAmeritrade, that direct cost at that time can be pretty low.
Yes, I understand transaction costs/trading fees. These are the fees I'm talking about when you're frequently changing positions in your portfolio. But I can buy and sell Schwab-branded ETFs and mutual funds fee-free in my Schwab account; most other online brokers offer the same service.
Quote:After that, what is his cost to have that stock in his portfolio?
What is the cost to have an ETF? Yes, its fee's are listed in its prospectus. And It can be pretty low. Less than 1%....
What about mutual funds? Another fee. It is disclosed as well. But it is still a fee.
Remember, the ones collecting the fee are the ones telling you to pay it.
And where did I say that you are Buying High and Selling Low? I stated to review your portfolio and sell the losers. (And you get to define what losers you have in your portfolio...by whatever means) And then buy better companies. And your fees are FIXED right then. This is what it cost you to make that trade, no further expenses as long as you hold that stock.
If SOOPOO buys all the stocks on his list, and comes back one year from now, and stays put on everything, I would have to presume that each stock was worth keeping at that point. But if Stock XYZ was up 30% and its P/E was 50, maybe it is time to sell. Or not. But if a stock was down 30%, maybe it is time for it to go. The point is to LOOK and then make a decision.
Okay, you're correct that I mis-attributed how you were picking the losers and winners in your portfolio. If it were just based on price, that's where my buy-high, sell-low comment came from.
Past that, I'm not really sure what we're arguing about. There are costs involved in putting your capital to work, yes. The goal should be to make sure those costs are as small a percentage as possible of your expected long-term return. Buying low-cost index funds and ETFs on your way to following an appropriate asset class allocation strategy for your goals is a good way to do that. Picking individual stocks and constantly swapping them in and out of your portfolio is not a sane investment strategy. You are not smart enough to beat the indexers. Even Warren Buffet, the greatest investor of all time, agrees with this point.
Quote: soxfanShrewd cats should be loading up on mining exploration plays, hey hey.
Serious resistance yet on those plays. Lots of cats waiting to be made whole. Shrewd cats are laying in the bush waiting for a breakout.
Quote: SFBMy point is the costs of managing your account.
I finally see what you mean.
However, I don't agree that this rules out ETFs, which have little cost. Take a look at the kind of diversification you get with Funds in general. In the prospectus the biggest holding might be 2% or something. I value diversification very highly and you can't duplicate it on your own.
Soopoo's diversification in his allocations looks good, but in no way is this a like a fund.
ETFs? pay the fees and quit grumbling. Mutual Funds? Observe some caution, go with Vanguard or similar, the wrong fund can eat you alive with costs. [with all funds there is the need to avoid goofball ideas, like an etf that only invests in , I dunno, pickle factories or somesuch - there are some weird ones out there]
The cost of managing this account will essentially approach zero. The hidden costs in ETFs I'll have to bear.
For whatever its worth, this account used to be part of a pension that we paid a manager 0.6% fee. He put it into a variety of DFA mutual funds which of course had their own internal fees, and individual bonds, which have fees for buying and selling, as well as the 'spread' you pay when you buy or sell. Due to the nature of the account and certain requirements, it was 60% bonds and 40% mutual funds. So I am very happy to 'freely' manage my own funds now...
That begs the question, how did we do today?Quote: SOOPOOSo I am very happy to 'freely' manage my own funds now...
Quote: s2dbakerThat begs the question, how did we do today?
The picks from the members and my few on my own outperformed the market hugely. Up around 2%. Overall market up 1%. I think 5 individual issues were up 5% or more which is ridiculous positive variance. I'll edit in a minute with the top performers.
Rounded..... YNDX 7%
SVA 6%
RBL 6%
GTAT 5%
MM 4%
AR 4%
Quote: SOOPOOThe bigger ETFs have expense ratios around 0.2%. But remember... you are paying that 0.2% every year until you liquidate the position.
Yeah I just checked my spreadsheet and most of my ETFs/index funds are in the .10-.20% range for net expense ratio. A few up around 0.5%, and a single one that sits at 1.05% because it's my only option for exposure to a certain asset class in my company's 401(k) plan (blast).
Quote:For opening this account they are not charging me transaction fees for now. So buying a lot of different stocks doesn't really cost me anything now.... if I start trading a lot later its around $10 a trade.
The cost of managing this account will essentially approach zero. The hidden costs in ETFs I'll have to bear.
That's a very nice setup. Especially for this crazy experiment wherein you are picking up many many individual stocks.
Quote:For whatever its worth, this account used to be part of a pension that we paid a manager 0.6% fee. He put it into a variety of DFA mutual funds which of course had their own internal fees, and individual bonds, which have fees for buying and selling, as well as the 'spread' you pay when you buy or sell. Due to the nature of the account and certain requirements, it was 60% bonds and 40% mutual funds. So I am very happy to 'freely' manage my own funds now...
Definitely an upgrade.
"Soon" it'll be legal everywhere...
Quote: SOOPOOToday was the day...
1% YNDX 29.95
1% FB 68.01
1% AR 60.92
2% CELG 151.85
2% MA 77.63
2% DIS 81.35
1% CSCO 21.53
1% MO 36.39
4% VDE 123.97
1% SVA 6.43
2% ILMN 160.42
1% TD 46.50
1% BMO 65.61
1% COST 113.85
1% GTAT 17.34
1% SCTY 75.00
1% RBL 21.7
1% MM 7.22
5% BRK.B 123.54
1% WWE 30.53
3% AAPL 528.20
1% TSLA 234.93
5% IYY 94.65
2% FEU 38.59
2% AOA 44.81
10% TWCUX 34.55
These I added since the first day
1% NTEK 0.09
7% DVY 72.25
1% CBIS 0.1835
1% ERUS 17.62
10% Callable CD that is paying 3.25% and goes up after 7 years, term 15 years, but most likely will be called after 10 years. If it lasts til year 15 it pays 9% then. FDIC insured.
That's about 3/4 of the portfolio. The other 1/4 is still in cash, awaiting more ideas.....
Quote: steeldcoSVA, alone, will make your portfolio a world beater in a couple of years..........
Damn it's too bad the option chain only goes out to Oct 14 on SVA……211 days. It's a shame that LEAPS aren't offered ……you could be rich in a couple years.
Quote: steeldcoSVA, alone, will make your portfolio a world beater in a couple of years..........
Its up 25% since I got in, but remember, its around 1% of the portfolio. It gets balanced out by SCTY, down around 10% over the last few days.
Im going to buy GAF for around 2%, and IWM for around 10%, so I still have room for a few suggestions today....
Quote: SOOPOOI still have room for a few suggestions today....
I'm betting on the Japanese stock market today ... some folks that were bullish are now retreating ... IMO *if* it was a good bet in the first place, and not over-exposed [I'm not] then worth buying now. I expect the Yen situation to continue to help.
I like the ETF:
NKY PRECIDIAN ETFS TR MAXIS NIKKEI 225 INDEX FD
Risky. News about company profits in the 225 turning some people into doubters, at least enough to limit exposure.
Quote: odiousgambitI'm betting on the Japanese stock market today ... some folks that were bullish are now retreating ... IMO *if* it was a good bet in the first place, and not over-exposed [I'm not] then worth buying now. I expect the Yen situation to continue to help.
I like the ETF:
NKY PRECIDIAN ETFS TR MAXIS NIKKEI 225 INDEX FD
Risky. News about company profits in the 225 turning some people into doubters, at least enough to limit exposure.
I bought NKY and IWM today. I was trying to buy GAF, but as of now not a single share has traded and the difference between the bid and ask prices is huge.
IPPLF, which was on the initial list, is on the grey market in Canada, and would require me to really guess on a bid price, and then pay an 'extra' commission possibly as high as $100. So I opted out of buying it. I also didn't buy CMG (up around 4% from when I made that decision!), as I personally like Moe's better, as a similar restaurant.
1% NKY 16.75
10% IWM 119.78
DUBLIN, Jan. 29, 2014 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Trinity Biotech plc. (TRIB) today announced it has obtained the CE mark (i.e. European approval) for its Meritas, high sensitivity Troponin I (hsTnI) product. With its unrivalled precision, it is now the only point-of-care product capable of meeting all of the guidelines stipulated by the world's leading cardiac organisations for detection of heart attacks.
Troponin market
Troponin is the leading marker used in the detection of heart attacks or myocardial infarctions (MI). The worldwide market for Cardiac Troponin testing is estimated to be $1.2bn, growing at a rate of 12% per annum. Of this market, approximately $350m represents point-of-care testing carried out in the Emergency Room (ER) with the remainder being laboratory based testing. Historically, laboratory based testing has demonstrated significantly greater accuracy, albeit in a much slower timeframe. Typically, laboratory testing takes approximately 90 minutes versus the 15 minutes which can be achieved in the point-of-care environment. Speed is a crucial factor in the diagnosis and treatment of heart attack patients.
So we now are on the verge of having equipment that is just as accurate as costly lab testing equipment. Get results in 15 minutes instead of 90 minutes.
Less costly equipment, NO 90 minutes of costly lab time, and more lives saved.
Who do you think will get the lion's share of that $1.2 billion market?
Quote: steeldcoTo expound on this a bit....
So we now are on the verge of having equipment that is just as accurate as costly lab testing equipment. Get results in 15 minutes instead of 90 minutes.
Less costly equipment, NO 90 minutes of costly lab time, and more lives saved.
Who do you think will get the lion's share of that $1.2 billion market?
If this is public knowledge, an efficient market has priced it in. You might bet that the market is not acting efficiently, let's say unfounded concerns that claims are exaggerated are lowering the price. I have found you can be late to the party. In other words, speculation can hit something hard early - excessive interest.
I know nothing about this particular stock, and don't recommend one way or the other. But there isn't much point in wondering if it is a good product they are touting; the needed information is whether there have been cold feet up till now, or some hot-to-trot folks.
Quote: odiousgambitIf this is public knowledge, an efficient market has priced it in. You might bet that the market is not acting efficiently, let's say unfounded concerns that claims are exaggerated are lowering the price. I have found you can be late to the party. In other words, speculation can hit something hard early - excessive interest.
I know nothing about this particular stock, and don't recommend one way or the other. But there isn't much point in wondering if it is a good product they are touting; the needed information is whether there have been cold feet up till now, or some hot-to-trot folks.
Given steeldco's sports betting and investing activities, I would say he feels he is capable of outsmarting the market. Or at least he is willing to bet on it :).
Quote: odiousgambitIf this is public knowledge, an efficient market has priced it in.
There's the rub. I do not believe that the markets are efficient. Too may factors at play with a bunch of people who think that they can look at pictures (charts) and determine which way a stock is headed.
Quote: AcesAndEightsGiven steeldco's sports betting and investing activities, I would say he feels he is capable of outsmarting the market. Or at least he is willing to bet on it :).
So AcesAndEights, do you think that you can do as well, or better, than the stats shown below? Or would you rather just call it a 9+ year run of luck?
| RETURNS | S&P500 RETURNS | RETURNS VS S&P500 | |||
| Last Week | 8.29% | Last Week | 1.38% | Last Week | 6.91% |
| Last Month | 12.89% | Last Month | 2.25% | Last Month | 10.65% |
| Last 3 Months | 25.08% | Last 3 Months | 3.19% | Last 3 Months | 21.89% |
| Last 6 Months | 47.02% | Last 6 Months | 10.31% | Last 6 Months | 36.72% |
| Last 12 Months | 80.66% | Last 12 Months | 23.32% | Last 12 Months | 57.34% |
| Last 2 Years | 113.92% | Last 2 Years | 39.00% | Last 2 Years | 74.92% |
| Last 3 Years | 82.67% | Last 3 Years | 53.98% | Last 3 Years | 28.69% |
| Last 5 Years | 389.76% | Last 5 Years | 170.21% | Last 5 Years | 219.55% |
| Since March 13, 2005 | 146.96% | Since March 13, 2005 | 88.02% | Since March 13, 2005 | 58.94% |
| (Annualized) | 10.53% | (Annualized) | 7.24% | (Annualized) | 3.29% |
Quote: AcesAndEightsGiven steeldco's sports betting and investing activities, I would say he feels he is capable of outsmarting the market. Or at least he is willing to bet on it :).
You forgot his daily horse racing picks
Quote: steeldcoSo AcesAndEights, do you think that you can do as well, or better, than the stats shown below? Or would you rather just call it a 9+ year run of luck?
RETURNS S&P500 RETURNS RETURNS VS S&P500 Last Week 8.29% Last Week 1.38% Last Week 6.91% Last Month 12.89% Last Month 2.25% Last Month 10.65% Last 3 Months 25.08% Last 3 Months 3.19% Last 3 Months 21.89% Last 6 Months 47.02% Last 6 Months 10.31% Last 6 Months 36.72% Last 12 Months 80.66% Last 12 Months 23.32% Last 12 Months 57.34% Last 2 Years 113.92% Last 2 Years 39.00% Last 2 Years 74.92% Last 3 Years 82.67% Last 3 Years 53.98% Last 3 Years 28.69% Last 5 Years 389.76% Last 5 Years 170.21% Last 5 Years 219.55% Since March 13, 2005 146.96% Since March 13, 2005 88.02% Since March 13, 2005 58.94% (Annualized) 10.53% (Annualized) 7.24% (Annualized) 3.29%
I can say without hesitation you've had a 9+ year run of luck if in fact those are your returns. Your fundamental analysis is comical…….you actually believe you know where a stock is going……which is a dead giveaway that you have not a clue.:-)
Now, what fundamental analysis did I provide to you that was comical, and why?
Quote: steeldcotreetopbuddy, I'm ok with your calling it luck. I'd rather have it than not.
Now, what fundamental analysis did I provide to you that was comical, and why?
Your fundamental analysis is fine…..I guess what I'm saying is that your belief that fundamental analysis somehow reveals future stock prices is misguided. Millions of eyeballs are looking at what your looking at……..
Your record keeping for your stock picks, sports picks and horse racing picks is impressive…..I haven't balanced a check book in 30 years.
As Gordon Gekko would say…."tell me something I don't know"…….need the inside scoop. Another Gekko quote…."if your not on the inside your on the outside"
Have you ever tracked unusual option action?
Quote: treetopbuddyYour fundamental analysis is fine…..I guess what I'm saying is that your belief that fundamental analysis somehow reveals future stock prices is misguided. Millions of eyeballs are looking at what your looking at……..
Your record keeping for your stock picks, sports picks and horse racing picks is impressive…..I haven't balanced a check book in 30 years.
As Gordon Gekko would say…."tell me something I don't know"…….need the inside scoop. Another Gekko quote…."if your not on the inside your on the outside"
Have you ever tracked unusual option action?
It's all about reasonably forecasting the future impact of a current known event, or data.
I gave up on options in the 80's. I never made anything with them.
Quote: steeldcoSo AcesAndEights, do you think that you can do as well, or better, than the stats shown below? Or would you rather just call it a 9+ year run of luck?
RETURNS S&P500 RETURNS RETURNS VS S&P500 Last Week 8.29% Last Week 1.38% Last Week 6.91% Last Month 12.89% Last Month 2.25% Last Month 10.65% Last 3 Months 25.08% Last 3 Months 3.19% Last 3 Months 21.89% Last 6 Months 47.02% Last 6 Months 10.31% Last 6 Months 36.72% Last 12 Months 80.66% Last 12 Months 23.32% Last 12 Months 57.34% Last 2 Years 113.92% Last 2 Years 39.00% Last 2 Years 74.92% Last 3 Years 82.67% Last 3 Years 53.98% Last 3 Years 28.69% Last 5 Years 389.76% Last 5 Years 170.21% Last 5 Years 219.55% Since March 13, 2005 146.96% Since March 13, 2005 88.02% Since March 13, 2005 58.94% (Annualized) 10.53% (Annualized) 7.24% (Annualized) 3.29%
Hey, thanks for showing your numbers. I wouldn't be able to beat it no, because my results would look very close to the S&P500 column. However, I would like to see your numbers up against a yearly re-balanced portfolio of
*15% domestic large cap (S&P500)
*15% domestic small cap (Russel 2000)
*15% REIT
*15% International large-cap
*15% International small-cap
*15% Emerging Markets
*10% Intermediate term bonds
All using low-cost index funds and ETFs. That is in fact what my long-term retirement portfolio looks like. It's very aggressive and a bit non-traditional (most people would more heavily weight the domestic portion).
But I also spend a fraction of the amount of time that you do on investing. It's basically set it up, check in every once in a while, rebalance as necessary (less often if in a taxable account). Not a lot of research other than finding the vehicles with the lowest expense ratios that meet one's allocation needs.
I would post my numbers but it would be a huge pain in the ass because my biggest account has been rolled over through 3 investing companies as I've changed jobs. Even now I have a depressingly complex setup just due to life. A traditional IRA with Schwab (401(k) rollover), a Roth IRA with Schwab (Roth 401(k) rollover plus additional contributions), a taxable account with Schwab, my current 401(k) which is with a small provider with limited fund choices, and an HSA investment account with Chase. So each of those accounts has a slightly different asset class allocation based on what's available. Gives me a headache just thinking about it, but nothing to be done about it... In addition I've only been in "the game" so to speak since 2006, since that's when I began full-time employment.
Anyway, lastly, I'm not going to come out say that you've been lucky (treetopbuddy already did that for me LOL). But even 9 years is a pretty small sample size in the investing world. But let it be known that I give you mad props.
My pension will cover most of my expenses, and my wife is still working, so I am not cash strapped right now.
I have 25% of my retirement in a Roth 401k, and the rest in a 401k.
Since I was not really planning on retiring until 2017, I need to make sure I preserve my 401k balance. A down year in the market with my retirement this year would be deadly. For that reason, and because I feel the current bull market is over done and ripe for a pull back, I have moved 100% of my funds into an Interest Income Fund.
I have a crude spreadsheet that shows that if I make 2% per year on my 401k funds, my 401k money would last to age 88 (no inflation adjustments though). My SS and pension would still be covering my expenses, and I would still own my house, which is $400k today
At 3% a year earnings on my 401K, my 401k money will last well into my 90s.
Given these facts, is it still stupid for me to be in a 100% cash equivalent portfolio at this point?
I am a gambler by nature, but to me, the damage a downturn in the market would do to me in my first year is way too big a risk to take, given today's market conditions.
I am open to other view points on this.
Quote: RaleighCrapsAs I have mentioned, I was given my walking papers this month. I can retire, but I am between 55-60.
My pension will cover most of my expenses, and my wife is still working, so I am not cash strapped right now.
I have 25% of my retirement in a Roth 401k, and the rest in a 401k.
Since I was not really planning on retiring until 2017, I need to make sure I preserve my 401k balance. A down year in the market with my retirement this year would be deadly. For that reason, and because I feel the current bull market is over done and ripe for a pull back, I have moved 100% of my funds into an Interest Income Fund.
I have a crude spreadsheet that shows that if I make 2% per year on my 401k funds, my 401k money would last to age 88 (no inflation adjustments though). My SS and pension would still be covering my expenses, and I would still own my house, which is $400k today
At 3% a year earnings on my 401K, my 401k money will last well into my 90s.
Given these facts, is it still stupid for me to be in a 100% cash equivalent portfolio at this point?
I am a gambler by nature, but to me, the damage a downturn in the market would do to me in my first year is way too big a risk to take, given today's market conditions.
I am open to other view points on this.
Nah you're good man.
Quote: steeldcoThere's the rub. I do not believe that the markets are efficient. Too may factors at play with a bunch of people who think that they can look at pictures (charts) and determine which way a stock is headed.
My first success with stocks was realizing 100% on my own that when Staples was new it might be a good idea and a good stock. I actually called somebody in the company somewhere and talked to them, don't remember who, but an ordinary Joe. He said the stock price was depressed because bean-counters were worried that expanding into California was risky. Expansions can kill companies if they expand too fast, so I didn't laugh, but I took the plunge and did very well in no time.
That's not me anymore, I want diversity, not individual stocks.
But , if you are the kind of guy that can sniff this stuff out about individual companies, you do indeed have good chances.
As far as the 9 year comment goes, I've only shown the period for which I had readily available data. I'd have to go back to the early 80's to make it complete and that would also take forever, if I even still have the records. I would think that the period from 1980 and thru 1990 would not be very good as far as my performance is concerned. However, if I were to post how I did between 1999 and 2003, it would be so good that everyone would call me a liar. I even sometimes think that it was just a dream........
Thanks and good luck!
Quote: odiousgambitMy first success with stocks was realizing 100% on my own that when Staples was new it might be a good idea and a good stock. I actually called somebody in the company somewhere and talked to them, don't remember who, but an ordinary Joe. He said the stock price was depressed because bean-counters were worried that expanding into California was risky. Expansions can kill companies if they expand too fast, so I didn't laugh, but I took the plunge and did very well in no time.
That's not me anymore, I want diversity, not individual stocks.
But , if you are the kind of guy that can sniff this stuff out about individual companies, you do indeed have good chances.
odiousgambit, as the old saying goes, there's many ways to skin a cat. Everyone has their own methodology. Some succeed, some don't and all probably use similar methods. I can tell you this though, if one can earn 300%, 400%, 500% gains on an issue over a year then the market is not only not efficient, it is in some cases very terribly inefficient.
Quote: steeldcoAcesAndEights, if I could go back and do as you suggested, I would. But I can't without spending a whole bunch of time on it. However, would it also leave you around the same return as the S&P 500? Maybe not.....I don't know.
As far as the 9 year comment goes, I've only shown the period for which I had readily available data. I'd have to go back to the early 80's to make it complete and that would also take forever, if I even still have the records. I would think that the period from 1980 and thru 1990 would not be very good as far as my performance is concerned. However, if I were to post how I did between 1999 and 2003, it would be so good that everyone would call me a liar. I even sometimes think that it was just a dream........
Thanks and good luck!
AcesAndEights, I need to add that it hasn't all been great. The period from 2003 til 2005 was horrendous for me. I gave back many of the gains that I had made, both parents passed, and I was physically feeling like crap (diagnosed later with cancer and given small chance to survive). Hellish years for me....
Quote: RaleighCrapsGiven these facts, is it still stupid for me to be in a 100% cash equivalent portfolio at this point?
I am a gambler by nature, but to me, the damage a downturn in the market would do to me in my first year is way too big a risk to take, given today's market conditions.
I am open to other view points on this.
I somehow missed this earlier.
Quote:if I make 2% ...last to age 88... At 3% ... money will last well into my 90s.
But a cash equivalent will not get you 2%/3% per year anymore. Beware of any that claim they can. [bonds I do not consider cash equivs]
If you are someone who never reacted well to ups and downs in stocks, then you probably should be conservative now for sure. But there is no need to be *that* cautious. If you fear a total breakdown of the country Mad Max/Thunderdome style, then you should not even have cash. Your money should be spent on gold coins and Survival training and tactics. Seriously.
Otherwise just keep in a very diversified allocation some conservative amount in stocks. You can go by history, for example. There are many, many 5 year periods where stocks lose money, and I mean the non-inflation-adjusted principle, and some 10 year periods too. But there are no 15 year periods, including the last melt-down. This is especially true if the money has been put into stocks in a staggered fashion, rather than picking the worst case of the worst day all in one lump sum. For 20 years, stocks have always beat any and all other investments.
And the 2%? Stocks earn that pretty much in dividends. So for, say, the last melt-down '07/'08, where the principle lost money in stocks for about a 12 year period, those stocks still were paying dividends.
I'd say keep something like 40% ... certainly 30% ... in stocks for the most conservative allocation; diversified though. You shouldn't have to touch those stocks for 15 years or so, and the risk to them losing money should be gone.
Gamble a little! If you reach 90, I still wouldn't have 100% in cash. I don't plan to ever have less than maybe 15% even when clearly on my last legs.
Your situation and mine have some similarities. I'll try to get a private message to you later.
Quote: RaleighCraps
because I feel the current bull market is over done and ripe for a pull back, I have moved 100% of my funds into an Interest Income Fund.
I have a crude spreadsheet that shows that if I make 2% per year on my 401k funds, my 401k money would last to age 88 (no inflation adjustments though).
Given these facts, is it still stupid for me to be in a 100% cash equivalent portfolio at this point?
.
I'm no expert, but to have a plan that does NOT take into account inflation is foolhardy. It would be like saying I have a plan that will beat baccarat if you just don't count the commission on dealer....
If you really believe that there will be a 'pullback', then there are multiple options to use your money to take advantage of that, rather than just have it sitting in neutral.
I also agree that there are no cash equivalents earning 2% a year now. Any fund that advertises as such, is using bonds as an underlying force. Those bonds can and do go down in value when interest rates rise.
A few pages earlier I mentioned my brother in law has the same feeling you do, and he has moved his positions to all cash. I'm not smart enough nor active enough to do that. I never know when a stock, or 'the market', is overvalued, or undervalued. Any investment advisor would tell me I am grossly overweighted in stocks. Given your age and circumstances, I would guess a professional would have you in something like 1/2 stocks, 2/5 bonds, and 1/10 cash.
