WoV stock portfolio
Quote: SOOPOOUp a 3rd day in a row despite the ‘surprise’ speech. End of March got boatloads of dividends…. all plowed into my MMA making a measly 3.5%.
Those better at this than me must have made a killing on this volatility.
link to original post
Yuh like all those asians playing choppy shoes at bac they must KNOW something....
My managed portfolio is up 4.7% over the last 24 hours. Not because of any technical aspect or some tech breakthrough. It's still below when Trump started dropping bombs, but Wall St seems to enjoy a steady diet of tacos.
Saudi Arabia has quietly abandoned the agreement, even as the US is deploying anti-missile batteries to protect its territory. Saudi Arabia is now selling oil to China for Yuan, in violation of the agreement.
We literally are at war to protect Saudi Arabia's right to sell oil to our adversaries. The President is threatening China with 50% tariffs while deploying multi-billion dollar weapons systems to protect oil bound for China.
It's week six of a war that costs a billion dollars a day. Total costs are approaching 50 billion dollars, while the new budget proposes cutting the SNAP program to under 75 billion next year.
Quote: billryanIt really annoys me that forty years of hard work can be so affected by the ramblings of a madman.
My managed portfolio is up 4.7% over the last 24 hours. Not because of any technical aspect or some tech breakthrough. It's still below when Trump started dropping bombs, but Wall St seems to enjoy a steady diet of tacos.
link to original post
Now you know that's politics and doesn't belong here. If you think someone who speaks publicly can control the markets with his speech, why aren't you listening to that speech and exploiting its information? That's like seeing a hole card and not playing to that information, out of some warped sense of self-righteousness. Inexcusable!
I've been making money hand over fist in recent market conditions, just by paying attention and recognizing that there are some people who know more than me, and many, many more who know less. Everyone who is being honest knows how this is going to end: with a different, less aggressive and more humane group of goat lovers in charge because the old guard got beaten up and their pants pulled down in the schoolyard and no one is afraid of them anymore. There is enough global money and power dependent on the Persian Gulf that nobody in the world who isn't Russian is going to tolerate it being messed with for very long, which is why even those who oppose US actions are doing it with a "strongly worded letter" rather than significant deeds. Nobody wouldn't rather see the Persian Gulf and its navigation managed by a benign US-supported petrostate than a greedy and violent theokleptocracy. So those are the conditions in which we will find our long-term target prices, not the hyperventilations of pundits intent on exploiting human emotions for their own profit.
Quote: AutomaticMonkey. Everyone who is being honest knows how this is going to end: with a different, less aggressive and more humane group of goat lovers in charge
Yuh Jeb UMerica ALWAYS wins except in Afghanistan, Iraq, Vietnam.....everyone knows this, except people capable of opening a book on recent military history....
Quote: 100xOddsQuote: 100xOddsQuote: 100xOddsDow hovering at 49k for a few weeks.
I sold to cash at 47k.
39k (20% drop) below that would be nice for me to buy back in
link to original post
and a month later, dow back at 47k.
50% buying back in at 42k and the rest at 39k.
or 50% buying at 42k then the rest into microstrategy when bitcoin drops to $10k
link to original post
Dow now 45k.
Unless someone comes up with a brilliant feasible plan to reduce oil prices, i can see it sliding into Recession territory by tax time. (20% below the 50k high)
link to original post
It’s tax time. Dow not ‘sliding into recession territory’. Quite the contrary, it’s soaring up! WoV portfolio now up 237%. Close to ATH again! Despite war, high gas prices, global uncertainty, etc…. It’s around 48,500. That’s up 7% from the time of your post.
Quote: SOOPOOQuote: 100xOddsQuote: 100xOddsQuote: 100xOddsDow hovering at 49k for a few weeks.
I sold to cash at 47k.
39k (20% drop) below that would be nice for me to buy back in
link to original post
and a month later, dow back at 47k.
50% buying back in at 42k and the rest at 39k.
or 50% buying at 42k then the rest into microstrategy when bitcoin drops to $10k
link to original post
Dow now 45k.
Unless someone comes up with a brilliant feasible plan to reduce oil prices, i can see it sliding into Recession territory by tax time. (20% below the 50k high)
link to original post
It’s tax time. Dow not ‘sliding into recession territory’. Quite the contrary, it’s soaring up! WoV portfolio now up 237%. Close to ATH again! Despite war, high gas prices, global uncertainty, etc…. It’s around 48,500. That’s up 7% from the time of your post.
link to original post
I always look for a dip myself around April 15th (stocks, crypto, everything else) because people need USD to pay taxes. But that didn't seem to happen this year.
AI is still the most disruptive force on the markets. Wars have somewhat predictable outcomes, but people are still figuring out what the LLMs are capable of and how to use it.
Put those two thoughts together and maybe there's this- what would happen if I uploaded all my financials to Claude and told it to compose an optimized tax return for me? That's another industry obsoleted by it- tax preparation.
Quote: billryany. Total costs are approaching 50 billion dollars, while the new budget proposes cutting the SNAP program to under 75 billion next year.
I think the simple answer is to send the SNAP recipients to war since we are already paying them.
Quote: DRichQuote: billryany. Total costs are approaching 50 billion dollars, while the new budget proposes cutting the SNAP program to under 75 billion next year.
I think the simple answer is to send the SNAP recipients to war since we are already paying them.
link to original post
You think like the Prez. He figures since he's already paying those Marines and flyboys, he might as well use them. There is a flaw in your thinking.
Quote: billryan. There is a flaw in your thinking.
You must be mistaken.
Quote: DRichQuote: billryan. There is a flaw in your thinking.
You must be mistaken.
link to original post
58% of SNAP recipients are female, and roughly 40% are under 18. Then you have about 10% who are permanently disabled. Of the subset that's left, what percent is over forty, obese, or incapable?
Right now, about half a percent of our population is voluntarily employed in our armed forces. Why would you want to replace them?
Quote: billryan
Right now, about half a percent of our population is voluntarily employed in our armed forces. Why would you want to replace them?
Cost cutting. Old people, obese people, and even women can be in the military. A minority of military personnel are in combat roles.
TSLA up a lot today.
Their earnings are now 1/5 of Toyota’s
Their market cap is now 5 times that of Toyota.
That’s a TWENTY FIVE fold difference in P/E ratio!
it's strange to me - I'm referring to the stock market rally over the past couple of weeks
it seems unrealistic
there are obvious potential problems which should be weighing on stocks
the market is thought by many to accurately reflect economic reality but in this instance imo it is just way, way off the mark
I'm expecting a correction - not that I wll sell - buy and hold is my mantra - thru thick and thin
what is causing this unrealistic jubilation - ?
my guess is that it is the result of many new and inexperienced investors buying stocks based on inaccurate statements from various U.S. Government sources
"AI Overview
As of April 17, 2026, the Nasdaq Composite has indeed achieved a historic, 13-day consecutive winning streak, marking its longest rally since 1992 and a significant recovery from previous lows."
.
Quote: lilredrooster.
it's strange to me - I'm referring to the stock market rally over the past couple of weeks
it seems unrealistic
there are obvious potential problems which should be weighing on stocks
the market is thought by many to accurately reflect economic reality but in this instance imo it is just way, way off the mark
I'm expecting a correction - not that I wll sell - buy and hold is my mantra - thru thick and thin
what is causing this unrealistic jubilation - ?
my guess is that it is the result of many new and inexperienced investors buying stocks based on inaccurate statements from various U.S. Government sources
"AI Overview
As of April 17, 2026, the Nasdaq Composite has indeed achieved a historic, 13-day consecutive winning streak, marking its longest rally since 1992 and a significant recovery from previous lows."
.
link to original post
Have you considered the possibility that you might have it all backwards- that there was never any real reason for the market to decline to begin with, but various sources in the media have been pretending there is, for the purpose of manipulating public opinion, and the public has smartened up and rejected it?
Yahoo Finance has a lot of data on it, but good God, looking at the endless stream of FUD articles on the front page over the last few weeks- what the heck is this and where in China are they actually being written? It reads like Mao-era propaganda, where everything they don't like has to have a disparaging adjective or adverb attached to it in case the reader isn't sure how they are supposed to feel about it. Any emotional content in financial writing- that's a warning sign to experienced investors that they are trying to sell something that isn't really there.
Quote: AutomaticMonkeyQuote: lilredrooster.
it's strange to me - I'm referring to the stock market rally over the past couple of weeks
it seems unrealistic
there are obvious potential problems which should be weighing on stocks
the market is thought by many to accurately reflect economic reality but in this instance imo it is just way, way off the mark
I'm expecting a correction - not that I wll sell - buy and hold is my mantra - thru thick and thin
what is causing this unrealistic jubilation - ?
my guess is that it is the result of many new and inexperienced investors buying stocks based on inaccurate statements from various U.S. Government sources
"AI Overview
As of April 17, 2026, the Nasdaq Composite has indeed achieved a historic, 13-day consecutive winning streak, marking its longest rally since 1992 and a significant recovery from previous lows."
.
link to original post
Have you considered the possibility that you might have it all backwards- that there was never any real reason for the market to decline to begin with, but various sources in the media have been pretending there is, for the purpose of manipulating public opinion, and the public has smartened up and rejected it?
Yahoo Finance has a lot of data on it, but good God, looking at the endless stream of FUD articles on the front page over the last few weeks- what the heck is this and where in China are they actually being written? It reads like Mao-era propaganda, where everything they don't like has to have a disparaging adjective or adverb attached to it in case the reader isn't sure how they are supposed to feel about it. Any emotional content in financial writing- that's a warning sign to experienced investors that they are trying to sell something that isn't really there.
link to original post
I don't consider these facts to be propaganda as you are suggesting
I also don't think they are unimportant
and there are many other potential negative issues re the current conflict
I have faith that intelligently chosen investments are always great for the long term - but may not perform well in the short term
you have a different point of view - good luck to you - I'm not always right - I would love it if I'm wrong - again - I'm not selling - I never sell unless I need funds for some reason and that is quite rare
.
"AI Overview
Oil prices have surged significantly since the conflict with Iran began on February 28, 2026, with U.S. crude oil rising by roughly 25% and gasoline prices increasing by over 30% to national averages exceeding $4 per gallon.
Brent crude peaked above $119 per barrel in March, driven by supply fears,
Diesel: Increased by roughly 40-49%
Economic Impact: The energy spike has caused fears of renewed inflation, with U.S. diesel reaching $5.62 per gallon in late March.
While prices dropped in mid-April, they remain substantially higher than pre-war levels, and analysts suggest the increased prices are likely to persist for some time. "
many countries, particularly smaller countries have been hurt by this conflict much worse than our country - but their pain may eventually impact us here
"AI Overview
Yes, economic pain in smaller countries can significantly affect the U.S. economy, primarily through supply chain disruptions, decreased demand for U.S. exports, and broader financial market instability. While smaller nations have limited direct trade with the U.S., their distress often ripples through global production networks, increasing costs for American companies and reducing overall global growth.
Key Impacts on the U.S. Economy:
Supply Chain Disruptions: As seen in sectors like manufacturing and technology, smaller countries often produce specific components. Economic pain there can cause shortages of goods, such as medical devices or electronics.
Reduced Export Demand: Economic instability in other countries leads to fewer purchases of American-made goods, directly affecting U.S. companies reliant on international customers.
Inflationary Pressures: Trade disruption, particularly when linked to tariff-driven economic pain, can cause price increases on imports, raising costs for U.S. consumers.
Increased Financial Risk: If small countries default on debts or face massive currency devaluations, it can cause ripple effects in international banking, impacting U.S. financial stability. "
again, I really hope I'm wrong - there's no joy in being right on this issue
.
Quote: SOOPOONew ATH. +241%. I didn’t expect such a rapid upturn.
TSLA up a lot today.
Their earnings are now 1/5 of Toyota’s
Their market cap is now 5 times that of Toyota.
That’s a TWENTY FIVE fold difference in P/E ratio!
link to original post
Does Tesla own a part of Spacex? Just wondering if that is part of their valuation?
Quote: johncrashIt is almost like you could google it in 5 seconds other one of 5 sad losers who still post on this dead site.
They own 0.16% of spacex. So no it is not meaningful dogshit for brains.
link to original post
Sounds quite a bit like my ex-wife, I didn't know she was a member here.
Quote: lilredrooster.
it's strange to me - I'm referring to the stock market rally over the past couple of weeks
it seems unrealistic
there are obvious potential problems which should be weighing on stocks
the market is thought by many to accurately reflect economic reality but in this instance imo it is just way, way off the mark
I'm expecting a correction - not that I wll sell - buy and hold is my mantra - thru thick and thin
what is causing this unrealistic jubilation - ?
my guess is that it is the result of many new and inexperienced investors buying stocks based on inaccurate statements from various U.S. Government sources
"AI Overview
As of April 17, 2026, the Nasdaq Composite has indeed achieved a historic, 13-day consecutive winning streak, marking its longest rally since 1992 and a significant recovery from previous lows."
.
link to original post
Retail investors can barely move the needle on Wall St. Most of the trading is done by programs that don't read the latest propaganda.
Quote: DRichQuote: johncrashIt is almost like you could google it in 5 seconds other one of 5 sad losers who still post on this dead site.
They own 0.16% of spacex. So no it is not meaningful dogshit for brains.
link to original post
Sounds quite a bit like my ex-wife, I didn't know she was a member here.
link to original post
My source says Tesla owns less than 1% of SpaceX but could potentially triple its stake, leaving it with less than 3%.
how bad is the situation right now - ? - really bad - futures - oil up , stocks down after the U.S. seizes one of Iran's cargo ships
many statements have been made by U.S. Government sources falsely claiming that a conclusive deal is near - Iran has consistently stated otherwise
these false statement are the main cause of the recent stock market rally
Iran has indicated it may not attend the upcoming peace talks - they are giving contradictory signals - whether they will or not is unclear at this time
from the link:
"On Saturday night, the president briefly spoke to reporters on Air Force One, explaining that if Tehran failed to accept his demands, “unfortunately we’ll have to start dropping bombs again.”
On Sunday morning, Trump published another online statement, also threatening to target Iran’s domestic infrastructure — a move widely recognized as a war crime — writing, “We’re offering a very fair and reasonable DEAL, and I hope they take it because, if they don’t, the United States is going to knock out every single Power Plant, and every single Bridge, in Iran. NO MORE MR. NICE GUY!”
Around the same time, the Republican told Fox News, in reference to Iran, “We’re preparing to hit them harder than any country has ever been hit before.”
If you believed Trump’s boasts on Friday about resolving the crisis in Iran, I have some very bad news for you."
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-iran-policy-stumbles-after-premature-victory-lap
from one other link:
"By year’s end, in the most dire projections by the United Nations and others, millions across Asia could be pushed into poverty.
“The impacts are so rapid and deep,” said Phillip Cornell, a senior fellow at the Atlantic Council’s Global Energy Center who is based in Sri Lanka. “Just from a magnitude perspective, this is really very, very, very large.”
The war’s damage, so quick and deep across the Asia-Pacific, will not be easy to contain. Even if the United States and Iran reach a lasting peace, the forces of scarcity and inflation have gained momentum and are on the move.
“You’ve seen tsunamis — they go across the ocean very, very fast,” said Mr. Cornell from the Atlantic Council. “I find it breathtaking to see the degree to which American policymakers think that they are insulated.”
unfortunately this link is behind a paywall
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/20/world/asia/asia-pacific-iran-war-oil.html
.
Quote: lilredrooster.
how bad is the situation right now - ? - really bad - futures - oil up , stocks down after the U.S. seizes one of Iran's cargo ships
many statements have been made by U.S. Government sources falsely claiming that a conclusive deal is near - Iran has consistently stated otherwise
these false statement are the main cause of the recent stock market rally
Iran has indicated it may not attend the upcoming peace talks - they are giving contradictory signals - whether they will or not is unclear at this time
from the link:
...
https://www.ms.now/rachel-maddow-show/maddowblog/trump-iran-policy-stumbles-after-premature-victory-lap
from one other link:
...
https://www.nytimes.com/2026/04/20/world/asia/asia-pacific-iran-war-oil.html
.
link to original post
When you have to go to non-serious sources like Rachel Maddow and the New York Times to find validation for a position, doesn't that suggest to you that the position might not have the value you thought it did?
Quote: AutomaticMonkey
When you have to go to non-serious sources like Rachel Maddow and the New York Times to find validation for a position, doesn't that suggest to you that the position might not have the value you thought it did?
link to original post
I read these news sources every day:
New York Times
Washington Post (now owned by Jeff Bezos and very different than what it used to be - much more conservative)
MS Now
Cnn
Google News (which doesn't report news but reprints news from many different sources)
are they 100% objective-?
of course not
but imho they are objective enough that you can tell the difference between what are facts and what are just opinions which I often don't agree with
I form opinions based on what I believe to be facts
could I be wrong - ? - of course - but the opinions I form are based on a great deal of reading which includes conservative voices
at least 2 hours of reading news every single day from many different sources
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: AutomaticMonkey
When you have to go to non-serious sources like Rachel Maddow and the New York Times to find validation for a position, doesn't that suggest to you that the position might not have the value you thought it did?
link to original post
I read these news sources every day:
New York Times
Washington Post (now owned by Jeff Bezos and very different than what it used to be - much more conservative)
MS Now
Cnn
Google News (which doesn't report news but reprints news from many different sources)
are they 100% objective-?
of course not
but imho they are objective enough that you can tell the difference between what are facts and what are just opinions which I often don't agree with
I form opinions based on what I believe to be facts
could I be wrong - ? - of course - but the opinions I form are based on a great deal of reading which includes conservative voices
at least 2 hours of reading news every single day from many different sources
.
link to original post
No it's not a matter of being conservative. None of those sources you mention offer what I consider legitimate news, and especially not financial news. Their "financial news" is targeted for the kind of people who go get a Jackson-Hewitt Special at Walmart and pay someone to fill out the short form for them so they can get their EIC. Cheap, reaping the sheep, leaving them in a heap.
Here's an example of a legitimate financial site: https://seekingalpha.com It has a diversity of opinion, both bulls and bears, and that's how it should be. Most stock transactions take place between a bull and a bear, and we wouldn't have much trading without that diversity.
The articles are full of numbers, rather than feeeeeelings. And there is very little political language. You will have to do a lot of scrolling before you read the name of the President of the United States. When I go to the establishment media sites and it seems like every article is insinuating that I should blame and despise one person, type of person, party, or political ideology- I get that creepy feeling like I'm reading an English translation of Pravda, or God help us, Der Angriff, and I know I am being deceived.
Empirically, my portfolio is at ATH and that's something I have to take seriously. Most of it is in income funds managed by people who really know what is going on and not only are the funds appreciating, their income performance is steadily increasing. That is not random or accidental.
Quote: AutomaticMonkeyEmpirically, my portfolio is at ATH. Most of it is in income funds
just about everybody's portfolio is at an ATH - if they haven't made poor decisions
you could have made much, much more if your portfolio was mostly in stocks, not in income funds
the risk would have been greater - but only short term - not long term
my portfolio, also at an ATH, is almost all in stocks, and will stay that way even if there is a downturn as my strategy is based on the long term, not the short term
I don't accept your view of what is and what isn't quality news reporting
here's a top featured story this morning from seekingalpha.com (the headline) -
"Markets will see ‘one of the best periods in our life’ in the next 1.5-2 years – Fundstrat’s Tom Lee"
no thanks - I'm all in on stocks - but I don't want to read biased reporting such as that
almost every story on seekingalpha.com this morning was positive news about the markets
news sources that are focused only on financial markets are typically biased in favor of bullishness -
they give their readers what they want - positive feedback
.
Quote: billryanI My income portfolio produces 25% income, My long-term portfolio is at its ATH but yields only about 3% a year.
that's remarkable
income funds are typically very conservative but there are exceptions
please name the investment(s) that you own that produce 25% income - thanks
and what is the total return including the price movement of the stock - ?
when you say 3% a year I'm thinking you mean 3% in addition to the 25% income - correct - ?
it that is the way it is that is absolutely fantastic
I did a little reseach with google and yahoo finance but couldn't find any income funds with a total return anywhere near that high
I found a couple that had very high dividends but not a very high total return (including movement of stock price) over several years
.
Quote: lilredroosterQuote: billryanI My income portfolio produces 25% income, My long-term portfolio is at its ATH but yields only about 3% a year.
that's remarkable
please name the investment(s) that you own that produce 25% income - thanks
The main player in my income portfolio is FEPI.
and what is the total return including the price movement of the stock - ?
I don't care about total return but I looked and FEPI is up about 14% for the year, not counting payouts. Last year, it was down about 10%
when you say 3% a year I'm thinking you mean 3% in addition to the 25% income - correct - ?
Not correct. My income portfolio produces 25% income. with little to no growrh My main portfolio produces 3% dividends and has captial appreciation..
it that is the way it is that is absolutely fantastic
It would be fantastic if such results were guaranteed long-term, but much of my income could disappear if market conditions change.
I strive for the best of all worlds. I need income, and desire future growth so rather than blend both options into a single portfolio, i split my portfolios so a small portion covers my income needs and the rest can grow untouched.
CEPI has cut its monthly payout from over $1.50 a share to just over $1.00 so the income from it is only 2/3rds of what it was.
I did a little reseach with google and yahoo finance but couldn't find any income funds with a total return anywhere near that high
I found a couple that had very high dividends but not a very high total return (including movement of stock price) over several years
.
link to original post
Quote: lilredrooster...
I don't accept your view of what is and what isn't quality news reporting
here's a top featured story this morning from seekingalpha.com (the headline) -
"Markets will see ‘one of the best periods in our life’ in the next 1.5-2 years – Fundstrat’s Tom Lee"
....
.
link to original post
Maybe it wasn't clear what that article is representing. That is one opinion from an interview with one analyst who also happens to be a real player in the market; he manages funds. He has a stake in the market and an effect on the market with his work. He gives his reasoning and you can accept that, reject it, or use it to inform your own reasoning.
Contrast that to an article from Yahoo Finance or Google or Apple, where some little girl who earned her reputation as a Tumblr blogger writing about alien furries torches up, then tells ChatGPT "Write an article about today's S&P 500 performance that makes [a government leader] look bad" and that's today's "financial news."
Quote: AutomaticMonkeyQuote: lilredrooster...
I don't accept your view of what is and what isn't quality news reporting
here's a top featured story this morning from seekingalpha.com (the headline) -
"Markets will see ‘one of the best periods in our life’ in the next 1.5-2 years – Fundstrat’s Tom Lee"
....
.
link to original post
Maybe it wasn't clear what that article is representing. That is one opinion from an interview with one analyst who also happens to be a real player in the market; he manages funds. He has a stake in the market and an effect on the market with his work. He gives his reasoning and you can accept that, reject it, or use it to inform your own reasoning.
it's a ridiculous article
typical and common for a biased financial news source
again, it looks like you missed out on a lot of good reading if as you say of your investments "most of it is in income funds"
in my news reading I want a picture of the entire world - and I believe I can get a fairly accurate picture - not from any one source but by considering all of them - I will get at least 5 different points of view on important issues
what I don't want is a high five from some market tout
.
When bankers start talking about a Wily Coyote moment, it might be time to pay attention.
Just checked on BR recommended AIPI. It’s approaching its 2 year anniversary. As I predicted down from around 54 to 34. But as Billy predicted total returns quite good. Paid out around $35 a share in the less than 2 years. Original dividend around $1.50 a month but now down to around $1. Which is still a 40% annual ‘return’.
If this is in a taxable account I’d say it’s a BAD investment. Your initial stake is being returned to you as DIVIDENDS while you build up a CAPITAL LOSS.
Mine is in tax deferred so I’ll keep riding it with Billy.
Quote: SOOPOOStill a farthing or two below ATH.
Just checked on BR recommended AIPI. It’s approaching its 2 year anniversary. As I predicted down from around 54 to 34. But as Billy predicted total returns quite good. Paid out around $35 a share in the less than 2 years. Original dividend around $1.50 a month but now down to around $1. Which is still a 40% annual ‘return’.
If this is in a taxable account I’d say it’s a BAD investment. Your initial stake is being returned to you as DIVIDENDS while you build up a CAPITAL LOSS.
Mine is in tax deferred so I’ll keep riding it with Billy.
link to original post
AIPI pays a monthly Return On Capital that is not taxable. After you receive a payout equal to your original purchase price, it is treated as capital gains. In about a year, I'll have had my original investment returned and will still be collecting $1 or so per share for the next 30 or so years. I will owe capital gains on the payouts, but I think it still works very well.
My spending account looks horrible- down almost 15% in a roaring market, but the three main stocks lost less than 7,000 while paying out almost 21,000. That's a $14,000 return last year on an initial $50,000 investment, which is now valued at around $43,000. I'm phasing out the CEPI portion, but adding to FEPI and AIPI. The whole tariff debacle hurt these ETFs last year, as the way they work, you capture all the market downturn, but only half the uptick because of covered options.
Quote: billryanQuote: SOOPOOStill a farthing or two below ATH.
Just checked on BR recommended AIPI. It’s approaching its 2 year anniversary. As I predicted down from around 54 to 34. But as Billy predicted total returns quite good. Paid out around $35 a share in the less than 2 years. Original dividend around $1.50 a month but now down to around $1. Which is still a 40% annual ‘return’.
If this is in a taxable account I’d say it’s a BAD investment. Your initial stake is being returned to you as DIVIDENDS while you build up a CAPITAL LOSS.
Mine is in tax deferred so I’ll keep riding it with Billy.
link to original post
AIPI pays a monthly Return On Capital that is not taxable. After you receive a payout equal to your original purchase price, it is treated as capital gains. In about a year, I'll have had my original investment returned and will still be collecting $1 or so per share for the next 30 or so years. I will owe capital gains on the payouts, but I think it still works very well.
My spending account looks horrible- down almost 15% in a roaring market, but the three main stocks lost less than 7,000 while paying out almost 21,000. That's a $14,000 return last year on an initial $50,000 investment, which is now valued at around $43,000. I'm phasing out the CEPI portion, but adding to FEPI and AIPI. The whole tariff debacle hurt these ETFs last year, as the way they work, you capture all the market downturn, but only half the uptick because of covered options.
link to original post
Interesting. Charles Schwab just lists the payout as a ‘dividend’, but I won’t dispute you that it is not really a dividend.
You ABSOLUTELY will not be getting $1 a month dividend for the next 30 years. It will continue to drop as it has since AIPI’s inception. Started at a buck fifty, in less than two years it’s down to a buck. As I’ve said before, it seems designed to shrink to nothing. But as you’ve sad, by then you will have reaped lots of ‘return of capital’ and then some.
Anyway…..
NEW ATH! +242%
Despite bloodbath for META, NVDA, MSFT, MA. The ‘broader market’ soared. Likely in anticipation of Trump’s visit to the Villages.
(Teasing…. Don’t suspend me!)
Quote: SOOPOO
Interesting. Charles Schwab just lists the payout as a ‘dividend’, but I won’t dispute you that it is not really a dividend.
You ABSOLUTELY will not be getting $1 a month dividend for the next 30 years. It will continue to drop as it has since AIPI’s inception. Started at a buck fifty, in less than two years it’s down to a buck. As I’ve said before, it seems designed to shrink to nothing. But as you’ve sad, by then you will have reaped lots of ‘return of capital’ and then some...
There once were (and maybe still are) a lot of bad REITs that operated under the same principle. They would bundle up a collection of properties that are circling the drain for unmentionable reasons, not be quite transparent about the addresses of their properties, and offer them as a REIT. As they palm off the properties individually on whoever and pay the proceeds to shareholders, it looks like a huge dividend when it's really return of capital, taking advantage of investors who don't know the difference and who will never get their investment back. Similar in structure to the subprime mortgage scam. It's already been sorted and you're getting the garbage.
It's not designed for capital growth; it's designed for income. If you don't need the income, it may not be your best choice.
If I bought $20,000 worth of Coca-Cola, I'd get about $600 in dividends and expect steady growth
$20,000 worth of AIPI and I get $8,000 in income ,with no expectation of growing much. The $7400 difference goes a long way towards helping the poor and hungry. If I were thirty, with a young family, I'd be doing it differently.
Quote: billryanAIPI holds roughly 75-100 stocks, nearly all of which are related to artificial intelligence. Roughly 30% of its holdings are in four stocks: NVIDIA, Palantir, Intel, and CrowdStrike. With a foundation like that, I don't see it fading to nothing anytime soon. It also has shares of Amazon, Cisco, and Microsoft
It's not designed for capital growth; it's designed for income. If you don't need the income, it may not be your best choice.
If I bought $20,000 worth of Coca-Cola, I'd get about $600 in dividends and expect steady growth
$20,000 worth of AIPI and I get $8,000 in income ,with no expectation of growing much. The $7400 difference goes a long way towards helping the poor and hungry. If I were thirty, with a young family, I'd be doing it differently.
link to original post
You don’t see it dwindling because you are being obtuse. Paying the 40% it is DESIGNED to dwindle. I surmise its managers are hoping it dwindles LESS than that 40%, just in NO WAY are any competent managers expecting a 40% payout without share price decreases.
Your inability to understand this simple concept is frankly annoying.
And the stupid comment about this type of investment helping the poor and hungry is equally annoying. Which of your dollars you nobly ascribe to them is of no import.
Why do analysts have an average projected price of $43 on something designed to go down? Once all the NACHO and TACO BS dies down, perhaps you'll appreciate it a bit more.
It currently pays $12.60 a year on a share valued at $35. How much of the $1.05 a month is generated by selling options is unknown. Without that critical piece of information, it is not certain how the managers are making monthly payouts. If they are selling holdings to make the payouts, where is the paper trail? AIPI owned 205,000 shares of Nvidia in 2024. It now owns over 220,000 shares. If it is selling assets to make payouts, it's doing a good job of hiding it. Might it be that they are really good at selling covered calls?
Why do analysts have an average projected price of $43 on something designed to go down? Once all the NACHO and TACO BS dies down, perhaps you'll appreciate it a bit more.
It currently pays $12.60 a year on a share valued at $35. How much of the $1.05 a month is generated by selling options is unknown. Without that critical piece of information, it is not certain how the managers are making monthly payouts. If they are selling holdings to make the payouts, where is the paper trail? AIPI owned 205,000 shares of Nvidia in 2024. It now owns over 220,000 shares. If it is selling assets to make payouts, it's doing a good job of hiding it. Might it be that they are really good at selling covered calls? Roughly 10% of options are exercised, meaning the ETF makes money on around 90% of the contracts it sells. JP Morgan changed the game a few years ago, and the boys from REX quadrupled down on their innovations. Some of us have gone into it understanding what they are buying. Others bought on someone's advice and are confused about how this lousy investment is doing so well.
Soopoo, what is the total return percentage-wise over two years, and how did it fare against your other investments? I'm thinking it will be in the Top 25%?
Quote: billryanAre you suggesting that any ETF that offers a ROC will eventually grind to nothing? I'm sorry you don't understand what you bought. I told you that it might not be the best thing for a tax-deferred account. Do you understand how AIPI generates income, and why a boomarang recovery is the worst possible scenario for the ETF, and that we've had two such incidents in the past year?
Why do analysts have an average projected price of $43 on something designed to go down? Once all the NACHO and TACO BS dies down, perhaps you'll appreciate it a bit more.
It currently pays $12.60 a year on a share valued at $35. How much of the $1.05 a month is generated by selling options is unknown. Without that critical piece of information, it is not certain how the managers are making monthly payouts. If they are selling holdings to make the payouts, where is the paper trail? AIPI owned 205,000 shares of Nvidia in 2024. It now owns over 220,000 shares. If it is selling assets to make payouts, it's doing a good job of hiding it. Might it be that they are really good at selling covered calls?
link to original post
No one is that good at selling covered calls. The reason is because they're covered calls.
When you write a covered call option, you own the stock, and if the price of the stock goes above a threshold the option can be exercised, you either pay cash or sell the stock at the strike price, and you aren't out much because you already got paid for selling the call option too. If the price doesn't exceed the threshold, the option expires, you keep all the money, but the reason why the option expired is the price did not rise, and it indeed may have gone down. It may have gone down by more than you sold the option for. Thus, you are giving something away to those who get to exercise the options, or you are giving something away because your portfolio isn't performing like you hoped. No free lunch.
I have a bunch of funds like that and they work by cashing in some of the increase of value of the fund's portfolio in the form of option sales. The profitability is self-limiting just because of the definition of covered calls. The 10-12% most of them pay is all you can expect in the long term if that's what they're actually doing.
Lets' say I own 100 shares of Exxon and write covered calls on 50 of them. If the stock goes up and I have to give up the half I sold the options on, I still make money on the half I didn't option. If the stock falls, I still have my hundred shares and pocket the premium. That is how it typically works. REX has finetuned the process. No REIT you bought a few years ago operates anything like these funds. Nothing like these funds existed before the summer of 2020, and even those (JEPI,SPY....I)were Model Ts compared to today's Tesla-like funds.
Quote: billryanI'd suggest you get a sales brochure from REX and try to see where you go wrong.
Lets' say I own 100 shares of Exxon and write covered calls on 50 of them. If the stock goes up and I have to give up the half I sold the options on, I still make money on the half I didn't option. If the stock falls, I still have my hundred shares and pocket the premium. That is how it typically works. REX has finetuned the process. No REIT you bought a few years ago operates anything like these funds. Nothing like these funds existed before the summer of 2020, and even those (JEPI,SPY....I)were Model Ts compared to today's Tesla-like funds.
link to original post
And my point is it's still a hedge, no matter how you slice it, and a hedge is never in itself profitable. It's just like a bookie laying off one side of a line somewhere else. That doesn't make money for him, it just keeps him in business.
In your example with XOM, if the stock goes up you will have made less money on it than someone who just held the stock and didn't write an option at all. If the stock goes down, you keep the cost of the option but there is no guarantee that will make up for the depreciation of the stock, it just blunts it a little. That is exactly a hedge- you are trading away some of the upside potential for some relief from the downside. The steady 10-12% I get from my assortment of buy-write funds roughly tracks the profitability of the stocks in those funds, minus the cost of hedging, minus the pay for the fund managers. And this is why I'm not going to return the calls of someone trying to sell me a 40% fund, because there are no stocks that are predictably so profitable.
Quote: billryanOkay. You still aren't getting it, but that is okay. I didn't bring this up. Soopoo did and I asked him to post his actual results from reinvesting the monthly payouts. My numbers are skewed because I bought a large sum and then sold as I bought into CEPI and FEPI
link to original post
I have no problem keeping AIPI and CEPI in my portfolio. I may change my name to ‘Mr. Diversified’. I stand by my comment AND am willing to bet on it!
Billy….. I’ll bet you another $25 that share price of AIPI is lower on 12/31/2026 than it is on 5/2/2026. Because I know the managers, if paying 35-40% a year, EXPECT it to drop. Even if they don’t say so. We can add this to our BTC bet!
Edit. AIPI AT 36.13 as I type. I’ll bet it’s under 36.13 on 12/31/2026. S and P at 7252. I’ll also offer bet that s and P 500 is up more (or down less) on same date.
Answering Billy’s query about how im doing with the AIPI distributions…. Mediocre! On purpose! All my dividends are going into 3.5% MMA.
Quote: SOOPOONew intraday high at +243%. Still have 6+ years until I have to make mandatory withdrawals and make this easy calculation I do not easy.
Answering Billy’s query about how im doing with the AIPI distributions…. Mediocre! On purpose! All my dividends are going into 3.5% MMA.
link to original post
Just curious why you are putting money in a 3.5% MMA when there are lots of Savings accounts paying over 4%? I think even I-Bonds are over 4% now.
Quote: DRichQuote: SOOPOONew intraday high at +243%. Still have 6+ years until I have to make mandatory withdrawals and make this easy calculation I do not easy.
Answering Billy’s query about how im doing with the AIPI distributions…. Mediocre! On purpose! All my dividends are going into 3.5% MMA.
link to original post
Just curious why you are putting money in a 3.5% MMA when there are lots of Savings accounts paying over 4%? I think even I-Bonds are over 4% now.
link to original post
I googled savings accounts that pay 4%. The top many hits were ALL ‘limited offer’ like 3.3% with .7% bonus after 6 months or terms like that. The money is in my Charles Schwab based retirement accounts. I’m sure there are ways for me to set up new accounts, and roll over the money. Not even close to worth it for me. In a short while I’ll hit a minimum amount and get around 0.2% higher. Of course the yield goes up and down depending on market conditions.
