[2020] A little stock market sense

[Brett]

The elite snob nitpickers said it could not be done. Trading in 5 minutes. Today I made 50 trades in less than 5 minutes using Schwab's Stock Slices where you can make 30 fractional trades at one time.

Today I was doing them 10 at a time reinvesting my year end dividends into those stocks that went down at the end of the year. I put my list in order from lowest market value to highest. I then took the first 10. I then took the one closest to the baseline and looked at the difference from the value to my baseline. Say it was $50. So I bought all 10 for $50 each for a total of $500.

Then I did the next 10 and did the same. Then the next 10. It took me 50 trades to have all my dividends reinvested where I wanted and that was into those stocks that were down.

Probably many "elite snob" day traders can trade stocks in 5 minutes or less (and non-elites too)
But consistently making above market returns ........ not so much

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/12/02/business/stock-market-index-funds.html

 

[WorldT]

A while back Janet said they weren't concerned about the National Debt because of gdp strenght. Now Janet is saying gdp isn't going to prevent a default. She said there will need to be extraordinary measures taken between Jan 14 and Jan 20. We all know why this is happening at that time and it's just one more reason to dislike all of the people involved.

Bill

I think you might be mixing up two different issues/topics. The national debt/gdp conversation is different from the debt ceiling/extraordinary measures.

A strong gdp theoretically will prevent default because the government will always collect enough money to service its debt. Of course, there is a breaking point. While we don't know what that is, we do know we haven't reached it.

The debt ceiling is an arbitrary number/limit beyond which the government can not borrow. The debt ceiling prevents the government from borrowing to function and service its debts (this is where the national debt and the debt ceiling intersects). Considering that the USA has been running on deficits (always borrowing) for over a decade, the debt ceiling (the arbitrary number) has been raised multiple times to another higher arbitrary number to allow for more borrowing. This has happened under multiple administrations because in recent years, the deficit has happened under every administration after Clinton.
The extraordinary measures she mentioned that may start in the second week of January is due to the government maxing out its borrowing ability due to the arbitrary limit. The extraordinary measures is just moving money around to pay for basic functions and service government debt.

 

[Brett]

I think you might be mixing up two different issues/topics. The national debt/gdp conversation is different from the debt ceiling/extraordinary measures.

A strong gdp theoretically will prevent default because the government will always collect enough money to service its debt. Of course, there is a breaking point. While we don't know what that is, we do know we haven't reached it.

The debt ceiling is an arbitrary number/limit beyond which the government can not borrow. The debt ceiling prevents the government from borrowing to function and service its debts (this is where the national debt and the debt ceiling intersects). Considering that the USA has been running on deficits (always borrowing) for over a decade, the debt ceiling (the arbitrary number) has been raised multiple times to another higher arbitrary number to allow for more borrowing. This has happened under multiple administrations because in recent years, the deficit has happened under every administration after Clinton.
The extraordinary measures she mentioned that may start in the second week of January is due to the government maxing out its borrowing ability due to the arbitrary limit. The extraordinary measures is just moving money around to pay for basic functions and service government debt.

And I don't think Bill understands things like "earnings per share". The stock market is more impacted by corporate earnings, corporate sales, and corporate debt.

 

[easyrider]

I think you might be mixing up two different issues/topics. The national debt/gdp conversation is different from the debt ceiling/extraordinary measures.

A strong gdp theoretically will prevent default because the government will always collect enough money to service its debt. Of course, there is a breaking point. While we don't know what that is, we do know we haven't reached it.

The debt ceiling is an arbitrary number/limit beyond which the government can not borrow. The debt ceiling prevents the government from borrowing to function and service its debts (this is where the national debt and the debt ceiling intersects). Considering that the USA has been running on deficits (always borrowing) for over a decade, the debt ceiling (the arbitrary number) has been raised multiple times to another higher arbitrary number to allow for more borrowing. This has happened under multiple administrations because in recent years, the deficit has happened under every administration after Clinton.
The extraordinary measures she mentioned that may start in the second week of January is due to the government maxing out its borrowing ability due to the arbitrary limit. The extraordinary measures is just moving money around to pay for basic functions and service government debt.

It has something to do with bank liquidity. The word was to use up your credit lines while you can.

Bill

 

[Brett]

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/01/10/business/stocks-bonds-investing-trump.html


"If you have held stocks since 2022 there’s a good chance that your portfolio has had a spectacular performance. All you really needed to do was hold a piece of the broad U.S. stock market in a cheap, diversified index fund."

"The economy is in a good place. It’s growing very strongly. The labor market is at full employment" said St. Louis Fed President Alberto Musalem in an interview Thursday

"The S&P 500 wiped out its 2025 gains as investors assessed a block buster jobs report that makes future interest-rate cuts seem less likely.

 

[RENTER]

Yesterday in the market route this portfolio produced a 0.19% gain.

1. The 31 real estate stocks in the S&P 500 with an equal amount in a real estate short fund
2. The 22 energy stocks in the S&P 500 with an equal amount in an energy short fund

My thinking for creating this is usually not always energy goes up with rising rates because rising energy prices causes inflation to rise.

When those interest rates rise, the real estate stocks suffer because people prefer bonds with higher interest rates.

Then it works the other way as interest rates fall. If interest rates are falling, the economy is slowing which means energy prices are falling as demand falls. Then people want the real estate stocks which pay dividends more than the interest off the bonds

As I said usually not always. So that is why I have the shorts in there in case they both fall.

 

[RENTER]

Let's hope a stock and bond market correction is not coming for those who are running for their lives in California and those who did in North Carolina who believed in buy and hold, 60/40 or just owning a few momentum stocks.

A correction is the last thing they need. This is why I am a firm believer that as long as there are no commissions and you can fractionally trade, own as many investments as you can and buy and hold and rebalance securing your profits everyday by cherry picking the winners.

Others have argued with me saying that is timing the market. On CNBC the other day, they said rebalancing is not timing the market. I agree, it is building up my safety net.

 

[Brett]

Let's hope a stock and bond market correction is not coming for those who are running for their lives in California and those who did in North Carolina who believed in buy and hold, 60/40 or just owning a few momentum stocks.

A correction is the last thing they need. This is why I am a firm believer that as long as there are no commissions and you can fractionally trade, own as many investments as you can and buy and hold and rebalance securing your profits everyday by cherry picking the winners.

Others have argued with me saying that is timing the market. On CNBC the other day, they said rebalancing is not timing the market. I agree, it is building up my safety net.

"Cherry picking the winners" seems easy when the stock market keeps rising 25% every year but it is market timing which can cause poor results over the long term

"Few investors have been able to predict market shifts with such consistency
that they gain any significant advantage over the buy-and-hold Index Fund investor."
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/markettiming.asp

 

[Brett]

Your Financial Adviser Is Under Pressure To Take Another Bite of Your Money
https://www.wsj.com/finance/investing/what-you-dont-know-could-sting-your-portfolio-6c095df2

"Your financial adviser may have a conflict of interest that you would never even think to ask about. Advisers are required by law to act in your best interest. They can
sometimes be pushed to do otherwise, though. The latest push comes from an unlit corner of the financial industry, and you need to know about it so you can guard
against it.

"Late last year a Fidelity custody representative said the financial-advisory firm needed to generate at least $90,000 more in annual revenue.

"Fidelity Investments is a firm I’ve long admired, but this is the opposite of how investment advice should work. Your adviser’s job is to get you the highest after-tax return at
a given level of risk for the lowest possible cost.

"Trading fees and other sources of income for custodians have been declining for years. “So the custodians are saying to [advisers], ‘Please
do more of the moneymaking things for us,’
" What bothers Armbruster and me is the idea of paying custodial costs by moving money to investment options that advisers might not otherwise favor.
You need to ask your financial advisers if any of their recommendations are swayed by what’s most lucrative for the custodian. And custodians should charge for their
services exclusively through explicit, transparent fees. That way, advisers wouldn’t feel pressured to act in the custodians’ best interest instead of your own.

 

[RENTER]

"Cherry picking the winners" seems easy when the stock market keeps rising 25% every year but it is market timing which can cause poor results over the long term

"Few investors have been able to predict market shifts with such consistency
that they gain any significant advantage over the buy-and-hold Index Fund investor."
https://www.investopedia.com/terms/m/markettiming.asp

If you are well diversified as I am, you will always have winners in a up or down market. So it is easy to cherry pick and secure the profits to rebalance or put them in a money market to dollar cost average into what was down

 

[WaikikiFirst]

That oh-so eFFiCieNT market likes NFLX 13% more than it did 1 hr ago. That stuff is HILARIOUS.
Step 1: Confusing ADD for "efficiency"! LMAO
Step 2: Thinking you cannot "beat" ADD! LMAO
Step 3: Give that man a Nobel Prize! LMAO. Who knew? All it takes to win a Nobel Prize is to suck at picking stocks!

 

[letsgobobby]

another record high

 

[Brett]

another record high

We're now in the "Golden Age", maybe the stock market will have above average returns or maybe not
Either way I'm still spending (and helping the economy) like an aging boomer

 

[RENTER]

My 50/50 of 288 investments that covers the world economy that attempts to beat the indexes during a bull and bear cycle with a buy/hold/rebalance strategy that takes 5 minutes a day is up 0.21% today. Elite snobs feel free to mock me. Others feel free to PM me if you want to learn. I do not charge trying to help others.

 

[TolmiePeak]

My 50/50 of 288 investments that covers the world economy that attempts to beat the indexes during a bull and bear cycle with a buy/hold/rebalance strategy that takes 5 minutes a day is up 0.21% today. Elite snobs feel free to mock me. Others feel free to PM me if you want to learn. I do not charge trying to help others.

Why don't you just start a hedge fund and sell your advice instead? Why give it away for free?

 

[TolmiePeak]

We're now in the "Golden Age", maybe the stock market will have above average returns or maybe not
Either way I'm still spending (and helping the economy) like an aging boomer

Yes the goal should be spending it down to zero when you check out.

 

[WaikikiFirst]

Ser

Others feel free to PM me if you want to learn.

Seriously, show that you know how to properly assess the performance of a portfolio before expecting disciples. Do you actually think that anybody thinks you have been "out-performing" the SP500 by "Buying The Losers" while the SP500 continues to his all-time highs? Seriously? Why don't you state how you are actually doing instead of cherry-picking a day here or there.

Here's a lesson: I have a different strategy, but I am also willing to trade off extra return for added safety. So, from memory ... and anyone can look at a chart of SP500 to see if I get my dates right ... one day late Oct2023 I looked at the 2 yr SP500 chart. I realized that on that day, SP500 was UNCHed since about late Jan2022, so about 21 months. Check my dates. Little fuzzy. But UNCHed it was.
Over that same 21 month span, my portfolios were up 14%. I thought "I'll take that." I also thought "Maybe I'll add a little risk. That is a long time for SP500 to just tread back & forth." I should have thought "COVER ALL HEDGES. RISK ON. RISK ON!" The next day I did add a little risk, but just a little.
The next day, teh sp500 took off. I think it was the day Powell made it clear that his next move was to cut. So, in the next 3 (maybe 4?) months, again, look at the chart if you want complete accuracy, the SP500 rose 30% & my portfolios rose another 14% on top of the prev 14%. Do the math (1+14%)squared is pretty damn close to (1+30%). So, over (21 + 3) 24 months I was right in line with the SP500 return, but with, idk, 30% of the volatility. (see "Alpha") And after those 3 months, continued strong SP500 meant I had to hit some big winners to keep up.

Point being: with the SP500 at all-time highs, almost any risk-reduction strategy has been reducing return at least as much as reducing risk. There are exceptions, but "Buying The Losers" is NOT one of them. So, how much is that portfolio up over the last 18 months? Do tell

 

[WaikikiFirst]

I thought "I'll take that." I also thought "Maybe I'll add a little risk. That is a long time for SP500 to just tread back & forth." I should have thought "COVER ALL HEDGES. RISK ON. RISK ON!" The next day I did add a little risk, but just a little.

Funny how this works. On Friday, I spent time reading, thinking, and looking at AAPL's valuation. I decided "I'll buy AAPL, and right here between $220 & $222 I will buy a LOT of AAPL." Yes, it was sort of a "Buy The Loser" moment, but not a generic move. I bought a little AAPL on Friday. I planned to buy more today, near that $222. Well, again, just as it becomes clear, the opportunity gets tough, because, for almost everybody selling the winners today means buying the losers, and AAPL is one of the winners today vs the LOSER over the last month or 2 or 3.

And back to the "Efficient" BS. This is where the market is Efficient: when it decides it was wrong about something and decides to quickly reverse. When it is a TRADE. Vs TRADERS, the mkt is efficient. For INVESTORS, the market is nowhere near efficient. It has ADD.

 

[CO skier]

I do not charge trying to help others.

I am sure it is worth every penny.

"You get what you pay for."
- Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

 

[RENTER]

I am sure it is worth every penny.

"You get what you pay for."
- Kurt Vonnegut Jr.

for those paying brokers and advisors who took a big hit yesterday while I finished up 0.48% for the day, remember you get what you paid for.

 

[RENTER]

Ser

Seriously, show that you know how to properly assess the performance of a portfolio before expecting disciples. Do you actually think that anybody thinks you have been "out-performing" the SP500 by "Buying The Losers" while the SP500 continues to his all-time highs? Seriously? Why don't you state how you are actually doing instead of cherry-picking a day here or there.

Here's a lesson: I have a different strategy, but I am also willing to trade off extra return for added safety. So, from memory ... and anyone can look at a chart of SP500 to see if I get my dates right ... one day late Oct2023 I looked at the 2 yr SP500 chart. I realized that on that day, SP500 was UNCHed since about late Jan2022, so about 21 months. Check my dates. Little fuzzy. But UNCHed it was.
Over that same 21 month span, my portfolios were up 14%. I thought "I'll take that." I also thought "Maybe I'll add a little risk. That is a long time for SP500 to just tread back & forth." I should have thought "COVER ALL HEDGES. RISK ON. RISK ON!" The next day I did add a little risk, but just a little.
The next day, teh sp500 took off. I think it was the day Powell made it clear that his next move was to cut. So, in the next 3 (maybe 4?) months, again, look at the chart if you want complete accuracy, the SP500 rose 30% & my portfolios rose another 14% on top of the prev 14%. Do the math (1+14%)squared is pretty damn close to (1+30%). So, over (21 + 3) 24 months I was right in line with the SP500 return, but with, idk, 30% of the volatility. (see "Alpha") And after those 3 months, continued strong SP500 meant I had to hit some big winners to keep up.

Point being: with the SP500 at all-time highs, almost any risk-reduction strategy has been reducing return at least as much as reducing risk. There are exceptions, but "Buying The Losers" is NOT one of them. So, how much is that portfolio up over the last 18 months? Do tel

Ser

Seriously, show that you know how to properly assess the performance of a portfolio before expecting disciples. Do you actually think that anybody thinks you have been "out-performing" the SP500 by "Buying The Losers" while the SP500 continues to his all-time highs? Seriously? Why don't you state how you are actually doing instead of cherry-picking a day here or there.

Here's a lesson: I have a different strategy, but I am also willing to trade off extra return for added safety. So, from memory ... and anyone can look at a chart of SP500 to see if I get my dates right ... one day late Oct2023 I looked at the 2 yr SP500 chart. I realized that on that day, SP500 was UNCHed since about late Jan2022, so about 21 months. Check my dates. Little fuzzy. But UNCHed it was.
Over that same 21 month span, my portfolios were up 14%. I thought "I'll take that." I also thought "Maybe I'll add a little risk. That is a long time for SP500 to just tread back & forth." I should have thought "COVER ALL HEDGES. RISK ON. RISK ON!" The next day I did add a little risk, but just a little.
The next day, teh sp500 took off. I think it was the day Powell made it clear that his next move was to cut. So, in the next 3 (maybe 4?) months, again, look at the chart if you want complete accuracy, the SP500 rose 30% & my portfolios rose another 14% on top of the prev 14%. Do the math (1+14%)squared is pretty damn close to (1+30%). So, over (21 + 3) 24 months I was right in line with the SP500 return, but with, idk, 30% of the volatility. (see "Alpha") And after those 3 months, continued strong SP500 meant I had to hit some big winners to keep up.

Point being: with the SP500 at all-time highs, almost any risk-reduction strategy has been reducing return at least as much as reducing risk. There are exceptions, but "Buying The Losers" is NOT one of them. So, how much is that portfolio up over the last 18 months? Do tell

What ever you say. You know everything and your way is the only way

 

[RENTER]

Why don't you just start a hedge fund and sell your advice instead? Why give it away for free?

Do not want to deal with the government and all their regulations and jerks who think they know it all. Happy just where I am and if I can help others not to get crushed with a system I devised for myself, it makes the world a better place. Because if everyone's ships don't rise, revolution is around the corner

Plus the is no reason for people to buy a hedge fund when they can do it themselves.

 

[TolmiePeak]

for those paying brokers and advisors who took a big hit yesterday while I finished up 0.48% for the day, remember you get what you paid for.

It is the guy who has $1.2m in DJT call options that is non-stop posting on Reddit that is really taking a hit. Although when his wife started posting as well seeking an intervention I questioned the whole thing.

 

[RENTER]

Ser

Seriously, show that you know how to properly assess the performance of a portfolio before expecting disciples. Do you actually think that anybody thinks you have been "out-performing" the SP500 by "Buying The Losers" while the SP500 continues to his all-time highs? Seriously? Why don't you state how you are actually doing instead of cherry-picking a day here or there.

Here's a lesson: I have a different strategy, but I am also willing to trade off extra return for added safety. So, from memory ... and anyone can look at a chart of SP500 to see if I get my dates right ... one day late Oct2023 I looked at the 2 yr SP500 chart. I realized that on that day, SP500 was UNCHed since about late Jan2022, so about 21 months. Check my dates. Little fuzzy. But UNCHed it was.
Over that same 21 month span, my portfolios were up 14%. I thought "I'll take that." I also thought "Maybe I'll add a little risk. That is a long time for SP500 to just tread back & forth." I should have thought "COVER ALL HEDGES. RISK ON. RISK ON!" The next day I did add a little risk, but just a little.
The next day, teh sp500 took off. I think it was the day Powell made it clear that his next move was to cut. So, in the next 3 (maybe 4?) months, again, look at the chart if you want complete accuracy, the SP500 rose 30% & my portfolios rose another 14% on top of the prev 14%. Do the math (1+14%)squared is pretty damn close to (1+30%). So, over (21 + 3) 24 months I was right in line with the SP500 return, but with, idk, 30% of the volatility. (see "Alpha") And after those 3 months, continued strong SP500 meant I had to hit some big winners to keep up.

Point being: with the SP500 at all-time highs, almost any risk-reduction strategy has been reducing return at least as much as reducing risk. There are exceptions, but "Buying The Losers" is NOT one of them. So, how much is that portfolio up over the last 18 months? Do tell

also what part of I beat the indexes over a bull and bear cycle do you not understand. Oops is that to simple for you to understand since it does not require complex math

 

[RENTER]

For those who I sent a reply PM to, it took longer to type that than me taking 10% profits each day. If you follow my plan and it works for you, please do me a favor. There are 5 types of people I cannot stand.
1. nitpickers who make life difficult for others over BS
2. those who try to impress people by using big words when they can be using 5 letter words
3. those who try to impress people using complex math when they an be using simple math
4. those who try to impress people by turning simple things into complex things
5. those who generally just like to argue and will argue with you if you say the sun is yellow

Please if my system works for you, please rub it in their faces. You may enjoy it like I do. Never in my wildest imagination that a simple common-sense system I developed for myself that an 8th grade should understand is not understood by adults. Especially from those 5 groups who just want to argue.

I have dealt with people like this before. They are generally well-paid mid-level corporate workers especially tech workers who think they are smarter than others. The smart person was the one who created the company. They are just well paid and no smarter than others. Just lucky. When that luck ends and those well-paid salaries disappear, they crumble like a house of cards. Just like many of those well-paid athletes when their careers end.