Down goes the Dow

Ghost of Igloi wrote:(1) It is totally disingenuous to believe a lot of money has not been lost in crypto the last several months.

(2) Most of it, and especially NFTs are a total scam. Should not even be allowed, let alone promoted by the financial industry.

(1) Of course money has been lost in crypto the last few months. Some has also been made. If you look at a different timeframe the balance between gains and losses would be reversed. Same as for any other security, except with bigger swings over less time than for many. For some investors (not me) this is exactly the kind of action they are interested, and the chance of losing 50% over a half year is tolerable if accompanied by the chance of gaining tenfold, as it has.

(2) one mans scam is another’s opportunity. For me, I agree, most of the current action is snake oil. Probably not all of it though.

You really do like to cherry pick timeframes to underscore your point of view, but this is a completely disingenuous way to talk about financial markets. Again, I think you know this, or at least your really should.

Time frames are relative. Just this past week Sally spoke of a 40-50 year time horizon. I didn’t hear any criticism of that, which is totally ridiculous for the average investor. Furthermore, when you take a look back today with extreme valuations, unprecedented monetary and fiscal stimulus, the last ten years is a poor benchmark for the next ten years. And that is what most here use. Even you use standards of modeling that are well beyond your life span.

Vix still below 20 - quite low.

Which suggests we still have a good ways to fall.

I wouldn't expect the market to bounce much until VIX 25 at a minimum.

Revisiting time horizon, and so called cherry picking. A reasonable time horizon would be the peak of the Tech Bubble. It encompasses the beginning of extraordinary monetary policy, a peak in the market. Peak March 2000 to December 2021 the S&P 500 Index has delivered a return of 5.74%. A far cry from the double digit returns of the last ten years, and inline with the poor GDP growth of this period. As noted earlier, most of this market rise is in large cap growth, seen in multiple expansion. In other words investors paying more for a unit of earnings.

Anyone that is going to pick as the focus of their timeframes for consideration, the high points of a long uptrend or alternatively, the bottom or a large downturn, really is just wasting all of out time. I might go on for several paragraphs how those benchmarks do not represent the level of market exposure or cost basis for most (if any) investors, but a) it won't do any good, and b) it's rather obvious to most of us as an attempt to bias the data to a slanted interpretation of performance,

Otherwise, good luck with your investments. I consider myself very very fortunate to not think like that.

To not think like that misses the lessons from four thousand years of financial history. But that mistake has been made numerous times over four thousand years, so nothing new there.

Even if you are right, timing is everything.

I would much rather be in the position of unrealized capital gains with which I might take profits from in the event of a sustained downturn than to have missed out on those capital gains by timing the market incorrectly.

The Nasdaq gained about 400% between 1995 and 2000. Over the next couple of years it lost about 78%. Could you imagine a 78% loss today? It would ruin many people close to retirement. Diversity, diversity and diversity.

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

The Nasdaq gained about 400% between 1995 and 2000. Over the next couple of years it lost about 78%. Could you imagine a 78% loss today? It would ruin many people close to retirement. Diversity, diversity and diversity.

I meant diversification, diversification, diversification.

is Igy suggesting that we've had poor stock market returns the last couple of decades?

agip wrote:

is Igy suggesting that we've had poor stock market returns the last couple of decades?

He cherry picks the height of the dot-com bubble as a starting point to minimize the outstanding returns we have had the last 2 decades.

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

agip wrote:

is Igy suggesting that we've had poor stock market returns the last couple of decades?

He cherry picks the height of the dot-com bubble as a starting point to minimize the outstanding returns we have had the last 2 decades.

And to double down on dumb, he also then cherry picks ARKK and a recent downturn off the ATH in bitcoin, i guess as some sort of canary in the coal mine.

Is this just an attempt to draw a reaction? Idk.

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

The Nasdaq gained about 400% between 1995 and 2000. Over the next couple of years it lost about 78%. Could you imagine a 78% loss today? It would ruin many people close to retirement. Diversity, diversity and diversity.

March 2009, the S&P 500 went back to June 1996 levels. From March 2000 the NASDAQ was negative for 16 years.

Igy believes this history is more relevant to future returns, than measures of the last 11 years.. Perhaps cyrpto, SPACs, and ARKK are canaries in the coal mine.

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

The Nasdaq gained about 400% between 1995 and 2000. Over the next couple of years it lost about 78%. Could you imagine a 78% loss today? It would ruin many people close to retirement. Diversity, diversity and diversity.

I'm all for "diversity".

But in terms of your portfolio, i also might try to diversify.

Just sayin'

But glad you're coming around to the inclusion side of politics, sally, Glad your eyes are finally being opened!

seattle prattle wrote:

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

The Nasdaq gained about 400% between 1995 and 2000. Over the next couple of years it lost about 78%. Could you imagine a 78% loss today? It would ruin many people close to retirement. Diversity, diversity and diversity.

I'm all for "diversity".

But in terms of your portfolio, i also might try to diversify.

Just sayin'

But glad you're coming around to the inclusion side of politics, sally, Glad your eyes are finally being opened!

LOL. I am all for the inclusion side. But I still believe meritocracy trumps all.

seattle prattle wrote:

Sally Vixxxxxxxxens wrote:

He cherry picks the height of the dot-com bubble as a starting point to minimize the outstanding returns we have had the last 2 decades.

And to double down on dumb, he also then cherry picks ARKK and a recent downturn off the ATH in bitcoin, i guess as some sort of canary in the coal mine.

Is this just an attempt to draw a reaction? Idk.

Yet the two of you look at the most speculative and overvalued asset market in history (bonds and housing too) and believe this somehow portends a positive investment future.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:Yet the two of you look at the most speculative and overvalued asset market in history (bonds and housing too) and believe this somehow portends a positive investment future.

Igy, throughout this lengthy thread, you’ve projected narratives onto others that they have not tried to tell. I’ve been patient with this a long time, but for some reason, somehow today you’ve frayed my last nerve. Money is made and lost every day. Everyone here knows that and we each have our own ways of managing our own risks. Nobody on here (or anywhere, ever) bought their whole portfolio at the peak of any specific bubble. We’ve all made money, and we’ve all lost money. For some, the net result has been better, for others, worse. We are all adults and responsible for our own decisions. None of us need a mother hen nagging us all the time to remind us what we already know.

🐔 < Igy hen with frayed nerves in a falling market

😷

Earnings Scorecard: For Q4 2021 (with 20 S&P 500 companies reporting actual results), 15 S&P 500 companies have reported a positive EPS surprise and 18 S&P 500 companies have reported a positive revenue surprise.