|
Post by steadyeddy on Jan 23, 2024 22:34:36 GMT
chang , the question is if there are any actionable ideas from this forecast. I think China particularly is deeply under-valued. So China stocks seem attractive.
|
|
|
Post by yogibearbull on Jan 23, 2024 23:07:43 GMT
Singaporean hedge fund Asia Genesis blew up because of its long-China, short-Japan position. That trade may eventually work some day, but time ran out for this hedge fund. Market can make fools out of investors with conviction on risky trades. Twitter LINK
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2024 1:04:23 GMT
Has their 7 year forecast changed in last 7 years. Long wait for reversion to mean. I think I invested based on it 10 years back, still waiting...but for sure closer now than 10 years back
|
|
|
Post by steadyeddy on Jan 24, 2024 2:45:30 GMT
Has their 7 year forecast changed in last 7 years. Long wait for reversion to mean. I think I invested based on it 10 years back, still waiting...but for sure closer now than 10 years back Even a stopped clock is correct twice in a day....
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Jan 24, 2024 4:19:14 GMT
My one and only post about GMO. At the end of 2010, GMO published their 7 years forecast, I saved it since 2010, see below. After I saw GMO predictions, I thought it was so off and I posted that it will be wrong ST + LT and got a lot of XXXXXXX and many back and forth XXXXXXXXXXX...I would leave at that. The forecast below say that US LC would make 0.4%...SC -1.9%...EM 4.1%. These numbers are before inflation but the next real numbers are without inflation too. You can see that GMO prediction was "only" 14% for US LC. FD: reality( link): SPY made 14.4%...IWM 11.9%...EEM 3%. One of the worse misses in the history of predictions. So, after 13 years GMO is a lot closer I'm putting one million on BABA.
|
|
|
Post by anitya on Jan 24, 2024 5:08:36 GMT
chang, I have never seen GMO invest consistent with their 7 yr forecast. These forecast are for cheap publicity. Their first and recent offering is a U.S. Quality ETF, QLTY. Even though they have marginally global Quality OEF (GQETX), they chose to offer a strictly US quality product.
|
|
|
Post by chang on Jan 24, 2024 7:25:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by chang on Jan 24, 2024 7:39:31 GMT
|
|
|
Post by anitya on Jan 24, 2024 8:38:57 GMT
I know. I have been to their website several times. If they invested based on their public forecasts, they likely would have no clients.
|
|
|
Post by richardsok on Jan 24, 2024 10:12:56 GMT
FD -- I've been looking at BABA too despite my aversion to anything Chinese and their byzantine rules of stock ownership for foreigners where you "sorta" own a stock once-removed, but have few if any rights. BABA now beaten deep down to long term support. EPS 7.22 but projected 9.20. TRanks 8/10. MLynch 'buy' Technically still in a bearish pattern, but momentum is clearly weakening.
Where you and I differ is that I could not take anything like a large position in it. I have not pulled a trigger yet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 24, 2024 19:48:54 GMT
Is there evidence of reversion to mean of something that has been performing badly? Usually how long can be the wait?
Also I learned never compare valuation of one asset class with another or one country with another. Always compare with its own (same asset class) historical valuations taking in account how does the future looks. May be there is reason it is performing badly. Is that reason for bad performance no longer valid or is it something temporary?
|
|
|
Post by anitya on Jan 24, 2024 20:00:18 GMT
Yes, relative valuation should always be relative to itself and then add / subtract any new narrative (like the Chinese communist party buying equities (pure speculation on my part)).
|
|