|
Post by retiredat48 on May 21, 2021 20:39:46 GMT
FD posted, re me:There is no way to hold long term and not have lagging funds. I know your energy fund lagged for years. R48 reply in bold...and I sold off Energy over a few years, completely exiting. BTW when I say "lagging fund" I mean the fund with respect to other similar asset space funds. The Fund was not the issue. The SP500 made a lot more money than emerging between 2010-2020 with lower volatility. That's not an issue...that the S&P500 beat Emerging Markets. One holds both if they believe in having a DIVERSIFIED PORTFOLIO, balanced by international stock funds. That one space beats the other, is simply academic...in hindsight. There appeared to be many times EM was moving ahead of S&P, but then didn't. I TILT TO WINNERS, I never added to EM during this time; I took Energy Fund sales and added to S&P large caps...and so on. But I don't take reasonable and strategic asset spaces to zero, in which I am investing."studies that show up to 90% of portfolio performance is in asset allocation, not fund selection" I bag the difference, I have been doing it over 20 years. If you believe in studies than you should only use buy and hold Bogle style, the studies proved that most investors do better with B&H Are you a buy and hold investor? Mostly...yes, I am buy and hold...and add to. Look, I posted and maintained real time, in an (R48 & Norbert's) investment challenge in mid 2008 (half way thru bear market) a portfolio started with $400,000 cash, using my Pyramid Up buying, and the stock funds I own. It was titled "Early Retiree Portfolio." All purchases and sells documented. M* kept score. Many posters participated. I Took first place.
Interestingly, that $400,000 retiree portfolio has been kept in buy and hold status on M*. I looked it up today, and Morningstar has the portfolio total value (divy's reinvested) as: $1,301,124.46...copied directly from M*. This number can't be fudged. I think most retirees would be happy with this performance.401K: It's true that you invest in 401K over several decades and don't need Pyrup but you are also retired several decades too and why you should use PyrUp if you believe in it. I believe in both. DCA is great for 401.K biweekly pay additions. But if you make changes from one fund into another fund...PyrUp...selling the one, buying the other. This makes sure the new fund is indeed doing better.CEFs: Leveraged CEFs have similar risk/reward to stocks so again, if PyrUp is such a good tool why not use it? I explained earlier...the CEFs referred to were bonds/fixed income, which are simply contractual instruments. No need to pyr up, as all bonds, barring default, go to one price in the end--maturity price. You know the final price and total return.Did you PyrUp when you bought MJ? Why not? I did Pyr Up! I posted that I bought at prices around $12/share...then $13...then 14...then 15... and last purchase at $16/share. BTW these prices came very fast. You still didn't explain how you actually implement selling one fund and buying another using PyrUp. Two ways. 1) You sell out completely from the fund you own, using the proceeds to Pyramid Up into the new fund. Treat it as separate transactions...or
2) You do same day, or close to same day, bucket sells from the fund you own, going into the new fund. Pyramid Up from there, provided the new fund is bettering the old one. If it is not, question what you are doing. By this method, you get to see an improvement is underway. Otherwise, halt. And you have no "out-of-market" time exposure.
R48
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on May 23, 2021 12:46:32 GMT
R48:I sold off Energy over a few years FD: and during the exit, energy kept losing money for years while SP500 made money. Someone who really plays momentum and a good trader exit much faster. Do you think it takes capecod years to get in/out of a position?
R48:the CEFs referred to were bonds/fixed income, which are simply contractual instruments. FD: leveraged CEFs are far from "normal" bond funds and should not be treated like one. PCI, one of the best CEFs lost more than the SP500 in March 2020. In the last 6 months PCI had similar performance to SPY (over 16%) while BND(bond index) lost over 2%. Is the risk/reward and correlation of PCI resemble a typical high-rated bond fund or stock fund?
|
|
|
Post by xray on May 23, 2021 16:17:00 GMT
Your: R48:I sold off Energy over a few years FD: and during the exit, energy kept losing money for years while SP500 made money. Someone who really plays momentum and a good trader exit much faster. Do you think it takes capecod years to get in/out of a position?
R48:the CEFs referred to were bonds/fixed income, which are simply contractual instruments. FD: leveraged CEFs are far from "normal" bond funds and should not be treated like one. PCI, one of the best CEFs lost more than the SP500 in March 2020. In the last 6 months PCI had similar performance to SPY (over 16%) while BND(bond index) lost over 2%. Is the risk/reward and correlation of PCI resemble a typical high-rated bond fund or stock fund?
-----------------------
Hate to tell you this but "energy" is doing "very well" since a lot of us had bought in. The problem appears to be the "TIMING" [of when we get in and when we reduce shares currently being held and then selling out completely (when required to)]. Currently, in energy [looking at my current portfolio (COB Friday) with the energy components], I show CAPL, with a current 11.05% dividend [service stations with grocery store built in], has a report card grade of 72 and has a power rating of 100 [suggesting we will be going higher in MktPrc], GLP, with a dividend of 9.24%, has a report card grade of 98, and a power rating of 100, SRLP, with a dividend of 10.81%, has a report card grade of 87 with a power rating of 92, KYN [with infrastructure], has a current dividend of 7.37% [and will be going higher this year] has a current report card grading of 98 and a Power rating of 100, and then USDP [(12th biggest) railroad oil play], with a dividend of 7.26% [just raised and with their latest dividend announcement will be going higher the next three Qtr's and with a new terminal opening soon] has a report card grade of 69 and a power rating of 72....
With the public going back into airlines, rental cars, our cars being utilized more often, and people returning to work by vehicles [and not staying home], energy [IMHO] is going higher. Buy low, sell high [for CapGains remains one of our goals and objectives for the longer term]....
One single opinion of the many I am sure.... Live Long and Prosper....
|
|
|
Post by anitya on May 23, 2021 19:02:25 GMT
xray, You seem to buy a lot of LPs. How easy / cumbersome is it to deal with K-1s? Thanks. A
|
|
|
Post by xray on May 23, 2021 19:21:54 GMT
Anita,
That is why we have tax accountants for tax forms. Protects us [in general] from any errors or overpays....
Live Long and Prosper....
|
|
|
Post by johntaylor on May 24, 2021 15:58:36 GMT
I will draft K-1s, but leave final for the CPA
|
|
|
Post by sheryldell on May 24, 2021 17:38:26 GMT
retiredat48, Is that portfolio you referred to from 2008-9 available on the M* community website? Can you provide a "link" or post the holdings and return for each fund please. Sounds like "time in the market" not timing the market at its best example. Thanks
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on May 25, 2021 17:06:37 GMT
Your: R48:I sold off Energy over a few years FD: and during the exit, energy kept losing money for years while SP500 made money. Someone who really plays momentum and a good trader exit much faster. Do you think it takes capecod years to get in/out of a position? R48:the CEFs referred to were bonds/fixed income, which are simply contractual instruments. FD: leveraged CEFs are far from "normal" bond funds and should not be treated like one. PCI, one of the best CEFs lost more than the SP500 in March 2020. In the last 6 months PCI had similar performance to SPY (over 16%) while BND(bond index) lost over 2%. Is the risk/reward and correlation of PCI resemble a typical high-rated bond fund or stock fund? ----------------------- Hate to tell you this but "energy" is doing "very well" since a lot of us had bought in. The problem appears to be the "TIMING" [of when we get in and when we reduce shares currently being held and then selling out completely (when required to)]. Currently, in energy [looking at my current portfolio (COB Friday) with the energy components], I show CAPL, with a current 11.05% dividend [service stations with grocery store built in], has a report card grade of 72 and has a power rating of 100 [suggesting we will be going higher in MktPrc], GLP, with a dividend of 9.24%, has a report card grade of 98, and a power rating of 100, SRLP, with a dividend of 10.81%, has a report card grade of 87 with a power rating of 92, KYN [with infrastructure], has a current dividend of 7.37% [and will be going higher this year] has a current report card grading of 98 and a Power rating of 100, and then USDP [(12th biggest) railroad oil play], with a dividend of 7.26% [just raised and with their latest dividend announcement will be going higher the next three Qtr's and with a new terminal opening soon] has a report card grade of 69 and a power rating of 72.... With the public going back into airlines, rental cars, our cars being utilized more often, and people returning to work by vehicles [and not staying home], energy [IMHO] is going higher. Buy low, sell high [for CapGains remains one of our goals and objectives for the longer term].... One single opinion of the many I am sure.... Live Long and Prosper.... Energy + your selections are doing well now but horrible in the last 10 years. Remember, we are talking about mostly B&H which is what R48. See chart below. High Div never impressed me, I always look at risk-adjusted performance. When the Div is very high it usually means leveraged and/or high risk. If I want risk I always prefer high tech companies with no or low div. I never understood the high div obsession, it doesn't guarantee better performance or volatility. I also don't get why retirees must own funds to cover their monthly expenses and forget about their portfolio risk-adjusted performance. Most/all retirees have a cash flow (from SS + distribution + pension + can sell something, what is so difficult to sell 3-4 times per year), in good time they can sell stocks and in bad times they can sell some bonds. Some of these bonds should be a ballast for stocks which means in market meltdown they will go up or have minimal losses. Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by yogibearbull on May 25, 2021 17:31:00 GMT
Energy has been a good trade recently. There may still be some upside. Why would traders worry about 10-yr B&H? In that time, this is the 2nd cycle in energy.
|
|
|
Post by xray on May 25, 2021 20:38:44 GMT
Your: Energy + your selections are doing well now but horrible in the last 10 years. Remember, we are talking about mostly B&H which is what R48. See chart below.
High Div never impressed me, I always look at risk-adjusted performance. When the Div is very high it usually means leveraged and/or high risk. If I want risk I always prefer high tech companies with no or low div. I never understood the high div obsession, it doesn't guarantee better performance or volatility.
I also don't get why retirees must own funds to cover their monthly expenses and forget about their portfolio risk-adjusted performance. Most/all retirees have a cash flow (from SS + distribution + pension + can sell something, what is so difficult to sell 3-4 times per year), in good time they can sell stocks and in bad times they can sell some bonds. Some of these bonds should be a ballast for stocks which means in market meltdown they will go up or have minimal losses.
-----------------
1... "horrible in the last 10 years" ... Many of us do not invest looking at historical's. We use the latest data and our historical's for buying/selling are always in terms of "Day's and week's"....
2... "High Div never impressed me" ... High Div is "everything [IMHO]. When the div collapses below 9%, the MktPrc normally starts to go lower. Our "portfolio" holdings are normally around 12% Div [normal markets] and will collapse some when the market going higher. In corrective markets, some of us buy additional shares to "boost" a "undervalued" security in our portfolio. Currently, we are struggling to maintain 10% since we have been taking a lot of CapGains. Keep in mind that if/when the market "collapses", dividends are what keeps the MktPrc's within "reason" [stable 8-10% while waiting for a market recovery IMHO]....
3... "When the Div is very high it usually means leveraged and/or high risk. If I want risk I always prefer high tech" ... High risk to some of us is when we do not do our homework properly [analysis]. Some of us have portfolio's designed to tell us what the risk currently is on any buy/sell and have a "sell code" that mandates increase/decrease of shares in any security. We can never plan for total risk but we can [based on our analysis] limit the risk considerably....
4... "I also don't get why retirees must own funds to cover their monthly expenses and forget about their portfolio risk-adjusted performance. Most/all retirees have a cash flow (from SS + distribution + pension + can sell something, what is so difficult to sell 3-4 times per year), in good time they can sell stocks and in bad times they can sell some bonds. Some of these bonds should be a ballast for stocks which means in market meltdown they will go up or have minimal losses." ... What you may not understand is than "Blue collar" workers are not in your league and must "supplement" their income after retiring. Most blue collar workers do not have your analysis skills and do "very badly" trying to time the market. The 2008/2009 crash left them in ruin [IMHO] and have not returned. They do the best that they can....
One single opinion of there many I am sure....
Live Long and Prosper....
|
|
|
Post by retiredat48 on May 31, 2021 19:35:27 GMT
retiredat48 , Is that portfolio you referred to from 2008-9 available on the M* community website? Can you provide a "link" or post the holdings and return for each fund please. Sounds like "time in the market" not timing the market at its best example. Thanks Hi sheryldell... A decade ago, some of the posters here readily shared their portfolios for reader viewing on Morningstar Forums. (With the new forum I'm not sure that capability exists now). But it came to pass that forums became more and more uncivil, posters belittling fund picks of others, etc. This resulted in most posters closing off the "public view". Eventually I did also. So I am reluctant to open up this portfolio to public view. The posters here do seem to be controlling such instincts well. However, I am considering a "guest article" with either Vanguard, or Morningstar (they used to do this 15 years ago), that reviews this portfolio and the long-term results of a "buy-and-hold strategy" coupled with Pyramid Up accumulations, and the outcome. So I am keeping it closed for awhile. However, if you send me a private memo, with your e-mail address, I will send to you the top ten stock fund holdings that delivered this performance. R48
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Jun 1, 2021 21:11:39 GMT
Your:Energy + your selections are doing well now but horrible in the last 10 years. Remember, we are talking about mostly B&H which is what R48. See chart below. High Div never impressed me, I always look at risk-adjusted performance. When the Div is very high it usually means leveraged and/or high risk. If I want risk I always prefer high tech companies with no or low div. I never understood the high div obsession, it doesn't guarantee better performance or volatility. I also don't get why retirees must own funds to cover their monthly expenses and forget about their portfolio risk-adjusted performance. Most/all retirees have a cash flow (from SS + distribution + pension + can sell something, what is so difficult to sell 3-4 times per year), in good time they can sell stocks and in bad times they can sell some bonds. Some of these bonds should be a ballast for stocks which means in market meltdown they will go up or have minimal losses. ----------------- 1... "horrible in the last 10 years" ... Many of us do not invest looking at historical's. We use the latest data and our historical's for buying/selling are always in terms of "Day's and week's".... 2... "High Div never impressed me" ... High Div is "everything [IMHO]. When the div collapses below 9%, the MktPrc normally starts to go lower. Our "portfolio" holdings are normally around 12% Div [normal markets] and will collapse some when the market going higher. In corrective markets, some of us buy additional shares to "boost" a "undervalued" security in our portfolio. Currently, we are struggling to maintain 10% since we have been taking a lot of CapGains. Keep in mind that if/when the market "collapses", dividends are what keeps the MktPrc's within "reason" [stable 8-10% while waiting for a market recovery IMHO].... 3... "When the Div is very high it usually means leveraged and/or high risk. If I want risk I always prefer high tech" ... High risk to some of us is when we do not do our homework properly [analysis]. Some of us have portfolio's designed to tell us what the risk currently is on any buy/sell and have a "sell code" that mandates increase/decrease of shares in any security. We can never plan for total risk but we can [based on our analysis] limit the risk considerably.... 4... "I also don't get why retirees must own funds to cover their monthly expenses and forget about their portfolio risk-adjusted performance. Most/all retirees have a cash flow (from SS + distribution + pension + can sell something, what is so difficult to sell 3-4 times per year), in good time they can sell stocks and in bad times they can sell some bonds. Some of these bonds should be a ballast for stocks which means in market meltdown they will go up or have minimal losses." ... What you may not understand is than "Blue collar" workers are not in your league and must "supplement" their income after retiring. Most blue collar workers do not have your analysis skills and do "very badly" trying to time the market. The 2008/2009 crash left them in ruin [IMHO] and have not returned. They do the best that they can.... One single opinion of there many I am sure.... Live Long and Prosper.... Basically, you have 2 big groups of investors. Most care about risk-adjusted performance and the other cares a lot more about performance. So, what matters to most is risk-adjusted performance. As someone who look only at numbers/analysis, high-yield is not superior. I have heard their arguments for years. For every good high-yielder I can find better stocks with low-no yield. For every good high-yielder trader I can find better low-no yield trader. So, the bottom line is what is the performance,SD,Sharpe,Sortino of the portfolio. The rest is just noise.As expected you didn't have a good answer for the last 10 lagging years. Whatever you think you are doing better, a good low-yielder can do. I and most others shouldn't care if their portfolio yield 1-2-3% and definitely should avoid a total portfolio yield over 5-6%. We also found out that you must be a trader. Looking at the big picture, using very cheap indexes + some managed fund + minimal trading is very easy and will produce good results. Anybody can do it with min knowledge and time. Using very high-yielders + trading MAY result good risk/adjusted performance but it has many moving parts, and a lot harder and time-consuming.
|
|
|
Post by xray on Jun 2, 2021 15:10:42 GMT
FD1000, Your: 1... Basically, you have 2 big groups of investors. Most care about risk-adjusted performance and the other cares a lot more about performance. 2... So, what matters to most is risk-adjusted performance. As someone who look only at numbers/analysis, high-yield is not superior. I have heard their arguments for years. For every good high-yielder I can find better stocks with low-no yield. For every good high-yielder trader I can find better low-no yield trader. 3... So, the bottom line is what is the performance,SD,Sharpe,Sortino of the portfolio. The rest is just noise. 4... As expected you didn't have a good answer for the last 10 lagging years. Whatever you think you are doing better, a good low-yielder can do. 5... I and most others shouldn't care if their portfolio yield 1-2-3% and definitely should avoid a total portfolio yield over 5-6%. We also found out that you must be a trader. Looking at the big picture, using very cheap indexes + some managed fund + minimal trading is very easy and will produce good results. Anybody can do it with min knowledge and time. 6...Using very high-yielders + trading MAY result good risk/adjusted performance but it has many moving parts, and a lot harder and time-consuming. -------------- 1... Many of us dividend oriented investors are always looking for dividends within our "risk-adjusted performance" requirements to our individual goals and objectives.... 2... Unfortunately, we agree not to agree. High yield, to a lot of us, is superior in protecting one's investment capital [in collapsing/correcting markets]. I have no doubt that you [as a probable superior "trader"] may do much better than a lot of us [since we are always value oriented]. Our yearly goals and objectives are [and have always been] 15% [10% dividends + 5% CapGains in both up/down markets]. This year, like some "recent" past years, many of us have had some very superior CapGains [because of current market conditions]. Many of us are currently at 35% ROI this year [8.04 estimated dividends for the current year, + 27.34% CapGain [1st & 2nd Qtr to date]. Last year was even better though with 46%. You, as a better trader [with no div play], will probably be doing much better than +35% or 46% in a single trade. We don't take that away from you [or others]. The problem with dividends is that some of us [not buy/hold forever types] encounter that we have to give up some of our dividends [expected for the current year] for CapGains and when no immediate investment exists currently on the horizon [that appears to have value].... 3... What you call noise is many other analysis parameters are not utilized by many investors because they don't currently exist in their evaluations of securities for investing. You will find it "humorous" that many of us do not invest in a new investment unless it is totally undervalued
|
|
|
Post by retiredat48 on Jun 2, 2021 23:08:48 GMT
FD, you keeping making these speculations about other's investing; for me, too numerous to reply to each one.
Here's one to show you how off-base you are: You posted:
3) You (R48) have been telling us you were holding VWELX since 1921 1953?, well VWELX is trailing PRWCX for over 20 years (chart). How come you still own VWELX?
------------------------------------- Simple.
First, I have and do still own some PRWCX also.
Second...The reason I still own VWELX in a taxable account is (regardless of tax handcuffs), that I will not violate my mom's investing Rule number 3, which is:
"3. If you receive a gift of stock shares or a mutual fund, you do not sell same until the donor passes away."
My Mother-In-Law is still living at age 101, and she still loves her VWELX. I will never sell until...
R48
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Jun 3, 2021 0:01:09 GMT
xray, I will make it very short. For average Joe investor and most others KISS=buy and hold and hardly trade is a superior method. It's backed up by research and why Vanguard is so big. For traders and others who manipulate their portfolio, higher yield isn't superior, especially very high-yielder. The main reason, tech is the best sector. The rest is just noise and excuses why you must own very high-yielders. If you are smart to buy high-yielder then you could be as smart to buy AMZN(or many other tech) and make much more.
|
|
|
Post by rhythmmethod on Jun 3, 2021 1:01:02 GMT
xray, I will make it very short. For average Joe investor and most others KISS=buy and hold and hardly trade is a superior method. It's backed up by research and why Vanguard is so big. For traders and others who manipulate their portfolio, higher yield isn't superior, especially very high-yielder. The main reason, tech is the best sector. The rest is just noise and excuses why you must own very high-yielders. If you are smart to buy high-yielder then you could be as smart to buy AMZN(or many other tech) and make much more. FD1000, makes a lot of sense to me. One of the worst mistakes investors make is thinking they are smarter than the market. Few, if any, are.
|
|
|
Post by Norbert on Jun 3, 2021 10:03:30 GMT
FD1000" If you are smart to buy high-yielder then you could be as smart to buy AMZN(or many other tech) and make much more." Right. Investing in dividend-payers is just as easy as picking the next high tech winner. Piece of cake. I guess that anyone who's smart enough to trade bond OEFs is also smart enough to trade stocks or stock funds for much higher risk-adjusted returns.
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Jun 3, 2021 12:32:45 GMT
FD1000 " If you are smart to buy high-yielder then you could be as smart to buy AMZN(or many other tech) and make much more." Right. Investing in dividend-payers is just as easy as picking the next high tech winner. Piece of cake. I guess that anyone who's smart enough to trade bond OEFs is also smart enough to trade stocks or stock funds for much higher risk-adjusted returns. The usual, my posts are generic, not what I have done. In my case: I hardly ever owned single stocks. 1995-2000=I owned one index(similar to VTI) at 100% after I read Random walk 2000-current: owned mostly good risk/reward funds with core and explore portion and using momentum. I started planning my retirement in 2011 and gradually switched to more bonds. My system was always about higher Sharpe ratio and never about high performance higher volatility. Looking back, I should/could/would invest several thousands in the best high tech companies and hold for years but I didn't...wait, I did own Google but sold after it doubles in several months. I realized early on that I worry if I own a stock and lose $1000 but I don't worry if my mutual fund lose $3000. I can't explain it logically. A good investor knows their comfort level and limits.I think I have done pretty well for a poor immigrant who came to this country and retired after just 23 years and started investing in 1995. The rest is just noise and your constant sarcasm over 10 years.
|
|
|
Post by Norbert on Jun 3, 2021 14:01:04 GMT
FD1000 " If you are smart to buy high-yielder then you could be as smart to buy AMZN(or many other tech) and make much more." Right. Investing in dividend-payers is just as easy as picking the next high tech winner. Piece of cake. I guess that anyone who's smart enough to trade bond OEFs is also smart enough to trade stocks or stock funds for much higher risk-adjusted returns. The usual, my posts are generic, not what I have done. In my case: I hardly ever owned single stocks. 1995-2000=I owned one index(similar to VTI) at 100% after I read Random walk 2000-current: owned mostly good risk/reward funds with core and explore portion and using momentum. I started planning my retirement in 2011 and gradually switched to more bonds. My system was always about higher Sharpe ratio and never about high performance higher volatility. Looking back, I should/could/would invest several thousands in the best high tech companies and hold for years but I didn't...wait, I did own Google but sold after it doubles in several months. I realized early on that I worry if I own a stock and lose $1000 but I don't worry if my mutual fund lose $3000. I can't explain it logically. A good investor knows their comfort level and limits.I think I have done pretty well for a poor immigrant who came to this country and retired after just 23 years and started investing in 1995. The rest is just noise and your constant sarcasm over 10 years. I really don't have a problem with your personal decision to focus on bond funds since 2011; that you know yourself and purposely seek decent returns combined with low volatility. I just don't grasp why you tell us about it over and over again, regardless of the thread topic. And your "generic advice" stinks. You criticize people who focus on dividends instead of indexing; and equate the difficulty of dividend investing style with picking the next Amazon. That's ridiculous. Haven't you considered that others have found their comfort zone in dividend-focused investing? Just like you settle for lower returns because your investing style suits you? And you're not the only one with a challenging personal background. I just don't publish my personal story online. But I promise you, no one handed me anything.
|
|
|
Post by rhythmmethod on Jun 3, 2021 17:49:48 GMT
I agreed with FD1000 , for most investors, less trading is probably better (I speak for myself). I don't really agree with his use of (almost) exclusive FI. I don't need to, it's his $ and meets his criteria. I also get a lot of usable of info from Norbert , and appreciate his viewpoint on investing. Interesting that there are so many ways to be a successful investor as long as one sticks to their plan. Pity that there sometimes seems to be a game of "gotcha". Thanks to everyone who shares a different viewpoint that makes me challenge my thinking.
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Jun 3, 2021 18:53:22 GMT
The usual, my posts are generic, not what I have done. In my case: I hardly ever owned single stocks. 1995-2000=I owned one index(similar to VTI) at 100% after I read Random walk 2000-current: owned mostly good risk/reward funds with core and explore portion and using momentum. I started planning my retirement in 2011 and gradually switched to more bonds. My system was always about higher Sharpe ratio and never about high performance higher volatility. Looking back, I should/could/would invest several thousands in the best high tech companies and hold for years but I didn't...wait, I did own Google but sold after it doubles in several months. I realized early on that I worry if I own a stock and lose $1000 but I don't worry if my mutual fund lose $3000. I can't explain it logically. A good investor knows their comfort level and limits.I think I have done pretty well for a poor immigrant who came to this country and retired after just 23 years and started investing in 1995. The rest is just noise and your constant sarcasm over 10 years. I really don't have a problem with your personal decision to focus on bond funds since 2011; that you know yourself and purposely seek decent returns combined with low volatility. I just don't grasp why you tell us about it over and over again, regardless of the thread topic. And your "generic advice" stinks. You criticize people who focus on dividends instead of indexing; and equate the difficulty of dividend investing style with picking the next Amazon. That's ridiculous. Haven't you considered that others have found their comfort zone in dividend-focused investing? Just like you settle for lower returns because your investing style suits you? And you're not the only one with a challenging personal background. I just don't publish my personal story online. But I promise you, no one handed me anything. mmm...please reread my post. 1) I didn't focus on bonds since 2011, I started to switch GRADUALLY to more bonds. 2) The most important is risk-adjusted performance for most people and why research and analysis is looking at that. My portfolio Sharpe ratio is very high. More: 1) It's a lot easier to find good tech stocks than very high good divvy stocks. Start from the early 80" and buy the big tech of their time from MSFT+INTL to the FAANG since years ago. 2) I will continue to criticize higher-yielder because I base it on numbers, analysis and logic and why most of the rich people have done it by looking at ALL stock and especially high-tech stocks. When high-yielder can't prove the numbers they start talking about divvy are better in down market which is a bogus claim. Total return + risk attribute(SD,Sharpe,Sortino) are what counts. So, looking at everything most have a higher chance to do better by NOT concentrating on high-yielders. I'm glad you have a great story, please post it. Remember, I never got or will get profit sharing, a pension or an Inheritance. I did it all from pure investing.
|
|
bf22
Commander
Posts: 135
|
Post by bf22 on Jun 3, 2021 19:56:09 GMT
I really don't have a problem with your personal decision to focus on bond funds since 2011; that you know yourself and purposely seek decent returns combined with low volatility. I just don't grasp why you tell us about it over and over again, regardless of the thread topic. And your "generic advice" stinks. You criticize people who focus on dividends instead of indexing; and equate the difficulty of dividend investing style with picking the next Amazon. That's ridiculous. Haven't you considered that others have found their comfort zone in dividend-focused investing? Just like you settle for lower returns because your investing style suits you? And you're not the only one with a challenging personal background. I just don't publish my personal story online. But I promise you, no one handed me anything. mmm...please reread my post. 1) I didn't focus on bonds since 2011, I started to switch GRADUALLY to more bonds. 2) The most important is risk-adjusted performance for most people and why research and analysis is looking at that. My portfolio Sharpe ratio is very high. More: 1) It's a lot easier to find good tech stocks than very high good divvy stocks. Start from the early 80" and buy the big tech of their time from MSFT+INTL to the FAANG since years ago. 2) I will continue to criticize higher-yielder because I base it on numbers, analysis and logic and why most of the rich people have done it by looking at ALL stock and especially high-tech stocks. When high-yielder can't prove the numbers they start talking about divvy are better in down market which is a bogus claim. Total return + risk attribute(SD,Sharpe,Sortino) are what counts. So, looking at everything most have a higher chance to do better by NOT concentrating on high-yielders. I'm glad you have a great story, please post it. Remember, I never got or will get profit sharing, a pension or an Inheritance. I did it all from pure investing. So we all agree that as long as we are comfortable with our investment style and get the required (by our own definition) results, we are all good? I believe what you are saying is that as long as SD/Sharpe is within my parameters, I'm in good shape.
I do think that there are different ways to reach the same result. 50 ways to leave your lover...
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Jun 4, 2021 18:06:16 GMT
So we all agree that as long as we are comfortable with our investment style and get the required (by our own definition) results, we are all good? I believe what you are saying is that as long as SD/Sharpe is within my parameters, I'm in good shape.
I do think that there are different ways to reach the same result. 50 ways to leave your lover...
A good combo of performance+SD will show in the Sharpe. Add Sortino(down volatility) and you are in a good shape. The rest is up to you.
|
|
|
Post by sheryldell on Jun 24, 2021 20:24:27 GMT
retiredat48 , Is that portfolio you referred to from 2008-9 available on the M* community website? Can you provide a "link" or post the holdings and return for each fund please. Sounds like "time in the market" not timing the market at its best example. Thanks Hi sheryldell... A decade ago, some of the posters here readily shared their portfolios for reader viewing on Morningstar Forums. (With the new forum I'm not sure that capability exists now). But it came to pass that forums became more and more uncivil, posters belittling fund picks of others, etc. This resulted in most posters closing off the "public view". Eventually I did also. So I am reluctant to open up this portfolio to public view. The posters here do seem to be controlling such instincts well. However, I am considering a "guest article" with either Vanguard, or Morningstar (they used to do this 15 years ago), that reviews this portfolio and the long-term results of a "buy-and-hold strategy" coupled with Pyramid Up accumulations, and the outcome. So I am keeping it closed for awhile. However, if you send me a private memo, with your e-mail address, I will send to you the top ten stock fund holdings that delivered this performance. R48 To R48. Thanks. I sent you a p message.
|
|
|
Post by retiredat48 on Jun 25, 2021 19:23:49 GMT
Got it sheryl...working on it. I would like to post selecting this thread, about an interesting development.Richardsok posted, that I have more angles than a geometry class. OK. Over the last 15 years I have posted how I took out Home Equity Lines of Credit, during my age sixties, to enable conversions of Trad IRAs to ROTH IRAs. That is, I lived off of the HELOC monies, so that I would not have to draw down Trad IRA portfolios. This helped keep me in a zero fed tax bracket, and no taxes paid for the conversions either. I still have two large HELOCs. Even if I inherited money, I will not pay the HELOCs off. Will settle matters at death. Turns out, "Propublica" has recently exposed the tax returns of several billionaires; of interest is that a goodly number used similar borrowing power (their business/shares as collateral) to enable zero income distributed to them, and thus no tax. Most borrowed millions. Some billionaires actually lived off the borrowed money...for years. Then at death, the step-up in capital gains meant no tax on their company shares. They paid off loans, distributed remainder to heirs. And if you distribute to charities, no estate taxes either. What a country. So, I take it the billionaires reading my posts, got it; they appreciated the strategy! Others, not so many takers. R48
|
|
|
Post by Chahta on Jun 26, 2021 10:06:30 GMT
I understand using the heloc to live on to avoid income tax but how can you do a Roth conversion and avoid income tax?
|
|
|
Post by FD1000 on Jun 30, 2021 0:19:30 GMT
Thanks Frank.Actually, while he won't admit to the PU words, Capecod, (who has been adversarial towards me), has always done his investing in PYRAMID UP FASHION. He adamantly never averages down... he buys in buckets, on increasing prices. Here are some other Capecod posts in my library, of him supporting Pyr Up investing: -------------------------------------------------- Here is Capecod in his own words: ---------------------------------------------------- --I will add FI CEFs when stuff has bottomed and is starting up. Regards, Dick
--Phrog, you're a good guy. Don't fall into the feelgood "unrealized loss isn't a loss" nonsense. It's killed even more nice young traders than averaging down! Regards, Dick
-- Capecod, in his own words: 1/8/2013: Dollar cost averaging is the advice provided to retail investors by institutional traders whose First Iron Law of Survival is: NEVER ADD TO LOSERS.
Post #3151468 With global swap spreads blowing out a bit, I'm not buying anything back until it is going up. More fine young traders died averaging down than ......(pick your own rude close!).
Regards, Dick
Post #3689344 ...Agree....too many friends suffering with MLPs to be humorous, but these need to stop going down first, bounce then retest lows, and finally start up in earnest before I'll play (if then).
Regards, Dick
--------------------------------------------------------
my note: And you would be completely ignoring the vast majority of active mutual fund managers, who average-up into their winning stocks...and curtail losers. Good day. R48...Pyramid Up author R48, I buy when the trend is up, you can call it Pyr up but, all the serious, successful traders that I know practice it differently: 1) None hold funds for years like you do 2) Buying a lot faster than you, maybe 2 (max 3) buckets. 3) Buying much larger % while you nibble. 4) Selling faster than buying to cash when markets are at high risk 5) Usually hold up to 10 funds. Easy test: 1) What % of your portfolio was in cash in March 2020 2) How many times did you trade 20+% of your portfolio in one day since 06/2020? 3) How many funds do you own?
|
|