[2020] A little stock market sense

[rapmarks]

this stuff is not hard to automate. I'm sure one of the on-line brokers has most of that set up as a configurable "Strategy In A Box".
When the CEO of IBM said the world would need about 5 computers, one of them was for that. Another was for playnig pong. The other 3? Got me?

So you say in five minutes you can log in, two factor authentication, look over your portfolio, balance, chose new sectors, and purchase in several different sectors. I take more time to look over my portfolio than that. But I don’t work at it like you guys.
if most of the posters are as good at investing as they say here, we have many multi multi millionaires on this thread.

 

[DrQ]

I am replying to the constant brain-deadening links to mass media nonsense. I can't imagine reading such crap. Even the headlines give away the Jumpin Jabronis nature of it

My FA knows that I'm a bargain hunter. He has a great track record of spotting quality during these downturns.

I also learned not to pick stocks based on mags like Money Magazine because they are too late and the gains have already been earned.

'Zactly! Just like the commercials hawking gold too.

 

[WaikikiFirst]

So you say in five minutes you can log in, two factor authentication, look over your portfolio, balance, chose new sectors, and purchase in several different sectors. I take more time to look over my portfolio than that. But I don’t work at it like you guys.
if most of the posters are as good at investing as they say here, we have many multi multi millionaires on this thread.

a) you missed "automated"
b) " take more time to look over my portfolio than that" ... having managed portfolios professionally for a decade, I KNOW what is in the portfolio, a quick glance at a portfolio that is spread across 4 different accounts gives me a minds-eye of sectors, likely top & bottom performers, reacters to last night's news, etc. People who do this professionally or even every day, get like that.
I LMAO at how much effort the on-line brokers put into pie charts and other "what's in my portfolio" crap for people who can't really understand "what's in my portfolio".
Just because you're not good at understanding a portfolio of 20, 30 stocks, funds, options, doesn't mean nobody is

 

[WaikikiFirst]

great track record of spotting quality during these downturns

not that I have any skin in UPS or even care, but did he happen to mention UPS has been having its own specific issues that have nothing to do with "this downturn"?

Does your "FA" tell you to read the crap you link to?

 

[WaikikiFirst]

Cramer is a TV personality whose shtick is rapid reaction to any one of maybe 400 stocks.
What in the world would make anyone think accuracy has been his #1 concern for a LONG time?
I met him 2x back in the day. Very smart guy who was already slightly ADD and his shtick has obviously done damage in that regard.

Look at M Burry in The Big Short. Look at Cramer. Polar opposites. Which one seems focused on "accuracy"? ummmmmmmmmmmmmm?

 

[DrQ]

Does your "FA" tell you to read the crap you link to?

Per Morningstar:
Bulls Say Matthew Young, CFA, Senior Equity Analyst, 24 Jul 2024

• Despite near-term normalization, UPS' US ground and express package delivery operations should enjoy positive longer-term tailwinds from e-commerce growth.
• UPS' massive package sortation footprint, immense air and delivery fleet, and global operations knit together a presence that’s extraordinarily difficult to replicate.
• On top of superior parcel density, UPS uses many of the same assets to handle both express and ground shipments, contributing to industry-leading operating margins.

Bears Say Matthew Young, CFA, Senior Equity Analyst, 24 Jul 2024

• Freight diversions seen last year from the Teamsters' strike threat and lingering sluggish retail

He knows that I don't get riled by turbulent markets, I have fun looking at and posting the "sky is falling" articles.

 

[CalGalTraveler]

Has anyone seen an unbiased analysis of Cramer's wins and losses. FWIW I rarely follow him but curious minds want to know.

 

[easyrider]

I wonder how accurate Cramer is. I bought Sears in early 2000s on his recommendation. One of my worst investments. His reco on UNH was a winner.

I also learned not to pick stocks based on mags like Money Magazine because they are too late and the gains have already been earned.

What I liked about Cramer is the random callers asking about picks and Cramer's explanation of those picks. That's about it.

Bill

 

[easyrider]

Has anyone seen an unbiased analysis of Cramer's wins and losses. FWIW I rarely follow him but curious minds want to know.

There is one on Reddit. The thing I remember is Cramer's picks were winners on a short term basis with a 555% gain in the short term time period.

Bill

 

[WaikikiFirst]

unbiased analysis of Cramer's wins and losses

Does he define a price target / sell point? Does he define a time horizon? Does he define a long/short portfolio at any specific point in time?
for such an analysis to be worth diddly, it must be structured. Cramer is anything but structured, not that I have seen him for more than a minute here and there for the last many yrs, but I HIGHLY DOUBT his shtick has become more structured. It is a shtick. How can anyone think it is "analyzable"?

 

[WaikikiFirst]

Matthew Young

Dear M Young: And yet the stock has been in a downtrend for at least 2.5 yrs. Go figure. Maybe it was just super-duper expensive 2.5 yrs ago?

 

[DrQ]

Dear M Young: And yet the stock has been in a downtrend for at least 2.5 yrs. Go figure. Maybe it was just super-duper expensive 2.5 yrs ago?

IF you had RTFM the Morningstar report, you would see that it was overvalued, most likely due to pandemic hype. Even at it's Aug 4th price, it was undervalued.

 

[rapmarks]

a) you missed "automated"
b) " take more time to look over my portfolio than that" ... having managed portfolios professionally for a decade, I KNOW what is in the portfolio, a quick glance at a portfolio that is spread across 4 different accounts gives me a minds-eye of sectors, likely top & bottom performers, reacters to last night's news, etc. People who do this professionally or even every day, get like that.
I LMAO at how much effort the on-line brokers put into pie charts and other "what's in my portfolio" crap for people who can't really understand "what's in my portfolio".
Just because you're not good at understanding a portfolio of 20, 30 stocks, funds, options, doesn't mean nobody is

Well I have way more than thirty, I am not a professional, and I didn’t think the people that are boasting of their financial prowess were professionals. But I have done extremely well, and I take the bragging with a grain of salt

 

[letsgobobby]

Everyone’s an investing genius on TUGS! Who knew?



On a risk-adjusted basis most investors, especially active investors, are vastly underperforming an appropriate benchmark. They might not know it - but it doesn’t make it less true.

For 98% of individual investors, the winning answer is 70-80% in a low cost, tax efficient stock index fund/ETF like VTI (with or without a similar international fund like VXUS), and 20-30% in a low cost, tax efficient bond index fund like BND or the tax-free muni equivalent.

Invest on a regular basis, like every time you get paid. Never touch your investments again until you retire. Rebalance once every year or five.

Read about Warren Buffett’s bet with hedge fund guru Ted Seides.

Buffett's Bet with the Hedge Funds: And the Winner Is …

In 2008, Warren Buffett placed a million-dollar bet that an S&P 500 index fund would beat the funds of funds hedge fund managers would select.

www.investopedia.com

Understand that almost everyone out there is lying to your and/or themselves and they aren’t outperforming the market in toto.

Ignore all the news and all the prognosticators. Educate yourself about passive investing and modern portfolio theory work, and why individual stock-picking and market timing don’t.

Amazon.com

Amazon.com

Amazon.com

https://a.co/d/7RcWlj3

 

[PigsDad]

if most of the posters are as good at investing as they say here, we have many multi multi millionaires on this thread.

Truer words had never been spoken. I questioned earlier in this thread why Renter hangs around here and is not a billionaire since he claims his system always beats the market. He should be running his own fund with his great market knowledge! Investors would be flocking to such a fund!

Kurt

 

[WaikikiFirst]

consider selling your "system" to mutual fund managers

Again, I have zero interest in defending mutual funds, but these articles are full of it. This is behind a paywall, but I'll bet if I read it, I could point out the gotchas.
Do you want me to quickly show what nonsense it is every time you post one?
No actively managed fund beat the SP500 over the last 5 yrs? It took me 6 seconds to think of one that most likely did, and VOILA, another 2 minutes to see that it not only beat the SP500, it trounced it.

Mutual Fund Results - Mutual Funds Research | Fidelity Investments

Fidelity offers over 10,000 mutual funds from dozens of different mutual fund companies and can help you find the right ones for virtually any investment need.

fundresearch.fidelity.com

FSPTX grew from $10K to almost $30K in 5 yrs ending july 31.
SP500 grew from $10K to about $20K in 5 yrs ending july 31.
R2000 (which some ppl here like for bad reasons) grew from $10K to only $14K in 5 yrs ending july 31.
MSCI EAFE (which some ppl here might like for "Go Figure" but maybe similar reasons) grew from $10K to only $14K in 5 yrs ending july 31.
FSPTX is a mutual fund and I have every reason to believe it is "actively managed".

SP500 got trounced by an actively-managed mutual fund. Yawn. I'm sure I could find a handful just by understanding "the market", and understanding how little these authors understand about what is going on with their assumptions.

Do you know the #1 "gotcha"? Do I have to explain it to you again?

 

[WaikikiFirst]

On a risk-adjusted basis most investors, especially active investors, are vastly underperforming an appropriate benchmark. They might not know it - but it doesn’t make it less true.

You see, HERE we have a solid thought. What makes it solid?
a) Usage of "risk-adjusted basis" rather than "beating"
a) Usage of "an appropriate benchmark" rather than "the market"

An early warning sign that someone has little idea what they are talking about is frequent usage of the term "beating the market".
I suggest Brett read more bobby and less of that other stuff. If a headline incl "beat(ing) the market", the author is not highly-knowledgeable in the area he/she chooses to write about.

edit: 3rd reason it is solid is usage of the word "most", rather than the idiotic theory that "nobody beats the market"

 

[Brett]

Again, I have zero interest in defending mutual funds, but these articles are full of it. This is behind a paywall, but I'll bet if I read it, I could point out the gotchas.
Do you want me to quickly show what nonsense it is every time you post one?
No actively managed fund beat the SP500 over the last 5 yrs? It took me 6 seconds to think of one that most likely did, and VOILA, another 2 minutes to see that it not only beat the SP500, it trounced it.

Mutual Fund Results - Mutual Funds Research | Fidelity Investments

Fidelity offers over 10,000 mutual funds from dozens of different mutual fund companies and can help you find the right ones for virtually any investment need.

fundresearch.fidelity.com

FSPTX grew from $10K to almost $30K in 5 yrs ending july 31.
SP500 grew from $10K to about $20K in 5 yrs ending july 31.
R2000 (which some ppl here like for bad reasons) grew from $10K to only $14K in 5 yrs ending july 31.
MSCI EAFE (which some ppl here might like for "Go Figure" but maybe similar reasons) grew from $10K to only $14K in 5 yrs ending july 31.
FSPTX is a mutual fund and I have every reason to believe it is "actively managed".

SP500 got trounced by an actively-managed mutual fund. Yawn. I'm sure I could find a handful just by understanding "the market", and understanding how little these authors understand about what is going on with their assumptions.

Do you know the #1 "gotcha"? Do I have to explain it to you again?

LOL
There's a reason actively managed stock mutual funds do not consistently outperform the overall market
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_timing

(hint: the answer is in the second paragraph)

 

[WaikikiFirst]

LOL
There's a reason actively managed stock mutual funds do not consistently outperform the overall market
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_timing

(hint: the answer is in the second paragraph)

In spite of the fact that I just replied to your prev post that said "NONE" did by showing you one that did, and I can show you others. glwt. But now I guess you're throwing the word "consistently" into the mix? Moving the goal line is always fun on the www.
With the word "consistently", anyone with any clue knows why they don't. Are you just learning this?
Hint: you don't know much about the underlying assumptions and I doubt the author does either.
Hint: read what bobby wrote and read a whole lot less of this junk you get at wherever.com.

 

[WaikikiFirst]

ps: if you think "beating" mutual funds is a big accomplishment, well, I think that is sad

 

[Brett]

ps: if you think "beating" mutual funds is a big accomplishment, well, I think that is sad

In spite of the fact that I just replied to your prev post that said "NONE" did by showing you one that did, and I can show you others. glwt. But now I guess you're throwing the word "consistently" into the mix? Moving the goal line is always fun on the www.
With the word "consistently", anyone with any clue knows why they don't. Are you just learning this?
Hint: you don't know much about the underlying assumptions and I doubt the author does either.
Hint: read what bobby wrote and read a whole lot less of this junk you get at wherever.com.

Investors Finally Throw In The Towel On Active Fund Managers​

https://www.investors.com/etfs-and-funds/personal-finance/sp500-actively-managed-funds-vs-passive/

 

[easyrider]

Does he define a price target / sell point? Does he define a time horizon? Does he define a long/short portfolio at any specific point in time?
for such an analysis to be worth diddly, it must be structured. Cramer is anything but structured, not that I have seen him for more than a minute here and there for the last many yrs, but I HIGHLY DOUBT his shtick has become more structured. It is a shtick. How can anyone think it is "analyzable"?

Crammer does provide a quick decent analysis of a company he picks to buy, sell or hold especially when callers ask about a stock. Since he is a corporate show, Crammer isn't allowed to own his picks unless it's for his charitable foundation is the word. I haven't watched his show since 2008 and even then it was sporadic.

Bill

I found the old Reddit Crammer picks thread only because of the 555% daily pick was stuck in my head.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Daytrading/comments/mtfkvu
Cramer made a total of 651 buy recommendations over the course of the past 4 months. If you had invested in every single stock, he recommended and then pulled out the next day, the returns were a staggering 555%. He was also right on 58.9% of the calls he made (Benchmark being 50% since anyone can pick a random stock and the probability of the stock going up is 50%). The weekly performance returns are also a respectable 42% but he was barely touching 50% in the percentage of right picks. One month from his recommendations, the stock return is an abysmal -223% and he was wrong more than he was right on his calls. The returns till date are also phenomenal with 446% return and Cramer being right a whopping 63.6% in his stock picks.

 

[WaikikiFirst]

invested in every single stock, he recommended and then pulled out the next day, the returns were a staggering 555%

Yes, as I was thinking but didn't bother writing, if you want to do even a diddly analysis of him, you must assume what he MEANT. Many many assumptions.
That analysis there that gets to 555%? In addition to the "1-day" assumption, do they assume buy on the open? sell on the close? trading costs are small, but not zero, and that is 365 day-trippers, but multiply that by how many stocks he mentions each day.

"over the course of the past 4 months. ... was also right on 58.9% of the calls he made (Benchmark being 50% since anyone can pick a random stock and the probability of the stock going up is 50%)"
Well, if it was a rising market, the odds of picking a stock that just goes up is >50%. there is an advance-decline index that I don't bother with, but ...

 

[Brett]

How to Cope When the Markets Panic​

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/08/09/business/stock-market-bonds-recession-panic.html

"Take a deep breath and make sure you’re well positioned for a potential storm. But stick it out for the long haul.
Panic can happen easily in market declines — and it can vanish just as quickly. Late in the week, it was almost as if the seemingly calamitous market whirlwind had never happened.

The episode provided a reminder of why, when your own money is at stake, it’s so important to pause, take a deep breath and think calmly. What we just experienced wasn’t all that severe, on a historical basis, at least not in the United States — but it could well presage deeper losses down the road. Big downturns are part of investing, much as recessions are part of economic life.

It’s worthwhile to rebalance your portfolio periodically, making sure you still have a mixture of stocks and bonds that isn’t riskier than you can handle.

Over the long run, stocks have produced great returns, but the trick is staying in the market long enough to benefit. So, diversify and rebalance. If it will help you sleep better, hold more investment-grade bonds. The recent turmoil is a reminder of why all of that is so essential.

 

[Talent312]

I sensed we were due a correction, but not so harsh.
We took a $6K haircut... enuff for me to say, "Ouch."
But we're 60%+ in fixed-income assets, so we'll live.
C'est la vie.