Canadian Money Forum banner
61 - 80 of 152 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
800 Posts
I try not to get emotional about money and investing, but I've got to admit that I really enjoy seeing these new all time highs.

Anyone else enjoying this?
I find repeating making money shorting the market during crashes the most rewarding feeling. After seeing Arch Crawford on FNN after the 1987 crash having made a huge amount of money during the crash I wanted to be able to do the same thing. I started reading his work Arch called the top of the 1987 market with a horrendous crash to follow to with in one day over a month in advance. ( Arch retired last month @ 80 years young. Like me he see's through the BS & refuses to wear a mask.

I also subscribed to Elliott wave international after Bob Prechtor set the all time record in the United States Trading championships in the options division. The money is made fast & in multiples of about 10 - 35 fold in my cases during crashes. Making money while everyone else is losing is a real confidence boaster in ones independent thinking & having done it multiple times it gives you the feeling it was not a lucky lottery ticket win.

I have been using Elliott wave playing the long side of the rally with small amount on the table using 3x ETFs. In the Nasdaq 100 looking for a possible 3rd wave top in the 15,000s where wave 1 would equal wave 5 in the 5 wave rally that started after the wave 2 crash that began in 2000
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,411 Posts
Active management doesn't work, and this has been proven countless times. Not sure what else I can tell you.

Advisors, active fund managers, and even hedge funds (with the smartest people on earth) cannot even beat passive investment strategies long term. So what does that tell you about their skills?
This isn't even a debate about 'active management' vs low return passive management.
Finance professionals are telling you to tweak traditional 60/40 and other out of touch investment plans for the new ST realities of low interest rates and they are right. XBB is down -3.5% ytd, XSB is down -.5%. looks like they are right.

BTW on 'active' investing again advisors holding concentrated portfolios Lynch, Pape,Buffet, Gardner Brothers, Heinzl etc etc have all destroyed low return lazy index investing but you already know this. Mutual fund managers who have to hold 200+ stocks and basically buy the index obviously aren't going to beat it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,757 Posts
BTW on 'active' investing again advisors holding concentrated portfolios Lynch, Pape,Buffet, Gardner Brothers, Heinzl etc etc have all destroyed low return lazy index investing but you already know this. Mutual fund managers who have to hold 200+ stocks and basically buy the index obviously aren't going to beat it.
"have all destroyed" cannot be true, because the index is the sum of all investors' activity. Unless you think that retail investors are collectively large enough volume and horrible investors to counteract the absolute destruction of the indexes wreaked by literally every active advisor.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,411 Posts
"have all destroyed" cannot be true, because the index is the sum of all investors' activity. Unless you think that retail investors are collectively large enough volume and horrible investors to counteract the absolute destruction of the indexes wreaked by literally every active advisor.
I didn't say every active investor though.

You omitted the ' advisors holding concentrated portfolios ' (and their list) part. You are free to compare Berkshire's returns to the S&P 500 if you don't think Buffet can beat the lazy index.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,098 Posts
Discussion Starter · #65 ·
I'm getting flashbacks of 2017. Sell your bonds! Buy short term bonds! Preferred shares is the new fixed income! (lol, ridiculous).
In retrospective, buying and holding aggregate bond funds was the right move in 2017. I don't know how it will turn out this time, but I don't think you can go wrong by sticking to ZAG, XBB or VAB. And I believe that's true even if this year and the next are negative. I'm crazy, right?
Yeah, these kinds of moods appear every once in a while. It's just human nature I suppose.

People who make all these prognostications, like the guys on CNBC and in the media, might get some of these calls right once in a while. For the short term anyway. The problem really is that they cannot successfully time their way through markets over the long term. We've seen the long term results of hedge funds and active, tactical fund... they suck.

Trying to time markets, asset classes, interest rates, is not a good strategy in the long term, assuming you have a 10+ year horizon.

Deciding on a strategy you like the best. And then stick with it. If you don't like 60/40 and think we now live in a world where you must be 80% stocks 20% preferreds, fine, then decide on that and stick with that, no matter what.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,704 Posts
I think it might be fool hardy to stick with it no matter what. If conditions change so should a buy & hold portfolio imo.

I'm putting any maturing gic/bond into REIT's for the last 6 months. Not saying it is the right thing to do but changing conditions (not even beating the rate of inflation) requires me to not buy more.

When low rates first really hit a few years ago I started putting all maturing fixed into preferreds...maybe I got lucky but I still hold them instead of the GIC ladder I bought them with.

Once GIC rates & AAA bonds return to paying rate of inflation +1% I'll return to buying them.

No idea how a young person will ever retire getting 0% real return on their saved money.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,098 Posts
Discussion Starter · #67 ·
I'm putting any maturing gic/bond into REIT's for the last 6 months. Not saying it is the right thing to do but changing conditions (not even beating the rate of inflation) requires me to not buy more.
How do you know your existing investments won't beat inflation?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,678 Posts
@MrBlackhill too ... "actively" navigating markets and using facile logic to reposition oneself does not work. It's a losing strategy in the long term and studies have shown this.
Studies are not advice, they are a piece of information. This piece of information tells us about the risk and the distribution of that risk in the specific context of that study (population, methodology, hypotheses, etc).

If you are given a test that 95% fail but you are also given the choice to skip it and get the average score, you're the kind of person who would choose to skip it and you'd be happy with the average. I'm the kind of person who would be excited to take my chances.

When you're passionate about a subject, you don't want to be passive about it.

I never regret taking risks because that's how you learn the most and that's how you live the best experiences and adventures.

Yeah, these kinds of moods appear every once in a while. It's just human nature I suppose.

People who make all these prognostications, like the guys on CNBC and in the media, might get some of these calls right once in a while. For the short term anyway. The problem really is that they cannot successfully time their way through markets over the long term. We've seen the long term results of hedge funds and active, tactical fund... they suck.

Trying to time markets, asset classes, interest rates, is not a good strategy in the long term, assuming you have a 10+ year horizon.

Deciding on a strategy you like the best. And then stick with it. If you don't like 60/40 and think we now live in a world where you must be 80% stocks 20% preferreds, fine, then decide on that and stick with that, no matter what.
I'm wondering if there's a Swiss Money Forum with an equivalent of @james4beach telling people to keep buying Swiss bonds for the past decade.

Look at this :



Buy bonds for the uncorrelated asset class and the low volatility, but certainly not for the income or the performance.

I don't need the income, I don't care about volatility but I do care about performance, so my choice is clear and easy. No bonds.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,560 Posts
I'm getting flashbacks of 2017. Sell your bonds! Buy short term bonds! Preferred shares is the new fixed income! (lol, ridiculous).
In retrospective, buying and holding aggregate bond funds was the right move in 2017. I don't know how it will turn out this time, but I don't think you can go wrong by sticking to ZAG, XBB or VAB. And I believe that's true even if this year and the next are negative. I'm crazy, right?
Maybe 🤔 Who needs XBB with 1.6% YTM and -2.75% YTD return?! I’d prefer to have prefs with high rating and decent yield or US high grade ETF bonds like VCIT that yields 30% higher
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,098 Posts
Discussion Starter · #71 ·
I don't need the income, I don't care about volatility but I do care about performance, so my choice is clear and easy. No bonds.
For sure, if you have no concerns about volatility and want the highest probability of the highest performance, then you don't need bonds.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,098 Posts
Discussion Starter · #72 · (Edited)
I looked at my portfolio again on the weekend. Crazy, yet another all time high. Maybe this is what it felt like in the late 90s. Every day you look at the account, it's higher.

I think this is also the kind of market -- just like the 1990s -- which tests the discipline of people who are diversified (balanced funds and asset allocation). When a single asset, in this case stocks, takes off like a rocket, people start to feel like they should be fully invested in the rocket, and don't see the need for the diversification. This is demonstrated through many of the posts at CMF.

The point of diversification is not to get the highest return at all points in time. In fact it pretty much guarantees that you will hold some assets that are not performing well. At many times, diversification will be a drag on your returns.

@Jimmy you don't want that, right? Why would you want a drag on your returns. I think you should concentrate as much as possible into the highest returning area, especially whatever CNBC and the financial media promotes. That's what smart people do, I'm told.

Others like me will continue to hold diversified portfolios, even with some low performing components, and accept a drag on returns.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,609 Posts
Now the test is, do you stick with diversification and understand the point of it, or do you concentrate yourself into the hottest area and chase performance?
... I sleep through mine's so I think I belong in the first camp.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,411 Posts
@Jimmy you don't want that, right? Why would you want a drag on your returns. I think you should concentrate as much as possible into the highest returning area, especially whatever CNBC and the financial media promotes. That's what smart people do, I'm told.

Others like me will continue to hold diversified portfolios, even with some low performing components, and accept a drag on returns.
Not going to bite on your sarcasm sorry. This isn't about me or you. You are free to do what you want. You just shouldn't attack articles in the Globe just because they disagree w your eccentric ideology. There is more educational value if the forums have a variety of opinion too vs the same limited personal views repeated over and over.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,098 Posts
Discussion Starter · #75 ·
You just shouldn't attack articles in the Globe because they disagree w your views
It's very fair for me to point out that active market-timers have terrible track records. The problem is that nobody is able to predict which way these things will go, and financial writers -- including the Globe and Mail characters -- are pretending they can time markets. They can't.

Instead of being upset with me, you should be upset with those G&M writers. They are the ones using amateur analysis to advise people on how to change their investments, which is reckless and irresponsible of them.

Jimmy do you not remember a few years ago, when emerging markets were all the rage? How about commodities? Didn't you ever turn on BNN and see these people talking every single day, about how the only place to invest is in commodities, the energy sector, and emerging markets?

Think about how much money investors lost, listening to these worthless people.

I'm vocal about this because many people really get sucked in by these kinds of writers, and think that if they read the G&M or watch CNBC, or investment newsletter, that some "smart guy" can tell them which assets or sectors are the right place to be.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,411 Posts
It's very fair for me to point out that active market-timers have terrible track records. The problem is that nobody is able to predict which way these things will go, and financial writers -- including the Globe and Mail characters -- are pretending they can time markets. They can't.

Instead of being upset with me, you should be upset with those G&M writers. They are the ones using amateur analysis to advise people on how to change their investments, which is reckless and irresponsible of them.

Jimmy do you not remember a few years ago, when emerging markets were all the rage? How about commodities? Didn't you ever turn on BNN and see these people talking every single day, about how the only place to invest is in commodities, the energy sector, and emerging markets?

Think about how much money investors lost, listening to these worthless people.

I'm vocal about this because many people really get sucked in by these kinds of writers, and think that if they read the G&M or watch CNBC, or investment newsletter, that some "smart guy" can tell them which assets or sectors are the right place to be.
I don't know who you have in mind but people like Warren Buffet, Gordon Pape, Rob Carrick etc aren't talking about timing markets. They just don't share your eccentric models and overweight views on LT bonds, wisely in in my opinion. But I don't want to get into a conflated argument again

You can view them anyway you like. What is fair is others here deserve to hear their opinions either way though. The forums should be balanced. Despite that people can still make their minds up for themselves.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,098 Posts
Discussion Starter · #77 · (Edited)
Gordon Pape
He absolutely is writing about market timing. He is predicting interest rates and inflation, and changing the asset allocation decision based on that. That's a tactical allocation change which may, or may not, work out positively for the investor.

I realize that some people like timing the markets and asset classes. That's fine, but I am pointing out that it's market timing.

What is fair is others here deserve to hear their opinions either way though
True, and we do hear a lot of market timing opinions here on a daily basis. I am pretty sure that both passive investing and market timing / tactical bets are discussed. @Eder just did one here as well. These views aren't exactly censored or anything, we hear them all the time. Here is Eder's market timing / tactical bet from above.

Eder is making a prediction about future rates of several things, and is using that to make a change to his portfolio allocation. That is called market timing. It's not inherently bad or anything... but let's recognize that it's timing the market:

I'm putting any maturing gic/bond into REIT's for the last 6 months. Not saying it is the right thing to do but changing conditions (not even beating the rate of inflation) requires me to not buy more.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,678 Posts
@james4beach People are free to tell their opinion, what's wrong with those articles that you hate so much?

Life would be so boring if we couldn't share our opinions. Life would also be much harder if we couldn't have access to the opinion of other people.

Giving an opinion is not disinformation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Jimmy

·
Registered
Joined
·
21,098 Posts
Discussion Starter · #79 ·
@james4beach People are free to tell their opinion, what's wrong with those articles that you hate so much?
What's wrong with my criticism that you hate so much?

They make the argument, I make the counter argument. Plus the argument presented in the G&M is the dominant mainstream argument. This is the message we hear all the time: you just have to be a smart guy, and figure out what markets will do, and get rich.

That's the majority opinion. What I'm voicing is the minority opinion. There is no lack of the G&M and CNBC argument. It's blasted constantly across all media, all day, every day.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
57 Posts
@Jimmy, @MrBlackhill and @james4beach, I think all opinions help people reading this forum, no matter which opinion you hold.

Is it better to hold index ETFs or individual stocks? Depends who you ask. I’ve done both, and wouldn’t have learned a new way without reading differing opinions.

I don’t know what will happen in the future, and neither does anyone else.

The way @james4beach invests is not eccentric in my view. I’m diversified among asset classes, I once was all equities and learned it doesn’t suit my personality after 2008. I suspect others will come to the same realization in the future. (Not saying this will be Jimmy or MrBlackhill).
 
61 - 80 of 152 Posts
Top