I have had DOWN years...just not down years that were worse than when the Dow had a down year...other than one other time, and now in 2022, that will happen again.
So, if 2023 is a down year for stocks, even if MY stocks go down, I could still beat the Dow.
Read, ponder, comprehend.
You are the one that misunderstands. Virtually zero professional money managers are benchmarked to the Dow.
So what? It doesn't matter what benchmark they use. It's the one I use. You really are a dolt.
I've been patiently waiting for the markets to revisit the lows from last month (11/3) when I sold a fair amount of tech etfs that I had owned for a considerable time at a break-even price, trying to avoid going into the red on them. Would like the opportunity to pick them back up since I believe that may likely be something of a bottom and have been regretting selling them. Need just a 4% drop from today's close. And it's getting close...
You are the one that misunderstands. Virtually zero professional money managers are benchmarked to the Dow.
So what? It doesn't matter what benchmark they use. It's the one I use. You really are a dolt.
I may be a dolt, but you are ignorant. Your current portfolio is virtually 1 to 1 correlated to the S&P 500, which by the way does not augur well for 2023.
The odds don't change that much regardless of the index. Beating any market any year is about 1/2. To beat the market (Dow, S & P, etc.) 32 out of 33 is about 1 in 6 billion (my calculation). So if everyone on Earth had a stock market account and played against the, let's say Dow each year, the probability is that one person (out of 6 billion on Earth) would beat the Dow 32 out of 33 years.
As was discussed back then, a 1:2 chance is extremely generous and it's likely closer to 1:10
BS. You people are insane.
If the Dow does 10% in a given year, and I return 10.1%, I have beaten the Dow. If I returned 9.9%, I would have lost to the Dow...the difference is minimal. I have had some luck. I have goosed the results in a few years when I threw in extra (still only counting the return, not the addition) when there were big drops, etc.
You think that there's only a 1 in 10 chance to beat the Dow? Man...perhaps you should just buy the Dow then.
The Dow, S & P and Nasdaq have different inclusion criteria and sectoral composition but they generally move in the same direction. I have found the 3 to be fairly closely correlated.
I may be a dolt, but you are ignorant. Your current portfolio is virtually 1 to 1 correlated to the S&P 500, which by the way does not augur well for 2023.
Dude, you are clearly a dolt. I make periodic changes to my holdings...usually buy buying a new fund or funds in different areas of the market for more diversity. I could have used ANY index to compare my returns against. I just happened to have used The Dow to compare against. It's just arbitrary. What a weird person you are to give a sh!t about this...especially when you don't even understand what is being said.
As was discussed back then, a 1:2 chance is extremely generous and it's likely closer to 1:10
BS. You people are insane.
If the Dow does 10% in a given year, and I return 10.1%, I have beaten the Dow. If I returned 9.9%, I would have lost to the Dow...the difference is minimal. I have had some luck. I have goosed the results in a few years when I threw in extra (still only counting the return, not the addition) when there were big drops, etc.
You think that there's only a 1 in 10 chance to beat the Dow? Man...perhaps you should just buy the Dow then.
He was looking at actively managed funds beating their respective indexes.
The Dow, S & P and Nasdaq have different inclusion criteria and sectoral composition but they generally move in the same direction. I have found the 3 to be fairly closely correlated.
Just look at today - the Dow is up 1.54%, the S & P up 1.45% and the NASDAQ up 1.41%. You would never expect that considering how different they are.
But seriously, who cares about Flagpole’s performance. All of this talk from him, he’s going to retire maybe little earlier than average. He’s not going to be able to retire that lavishly. Can’t afford to retire in California like he dreamed of and will be stuck in Ohio.
With how the market is going, he may delay his retirement where he ends up retiring at normal age. So, big deal.
But seriously, who cares about Flagpole’s performance. All of this talk from him, he’s going to retire maybe little earlier than average. He’s not going to be able to retire that lavishly. Can’t afford to retire in California like he dreamed of and will be stuck in Ohio.
With how the market is going, he may delay his retirement where he ends up retiring at normal age. So, big deal.
Dang, and to think how disappointed Adam Schiff and Jimmy Kimmel will be.
One more thing about Flagpole. With his arrogance in investing, he got absolutely slaughtered this year having such aggressive funds nearing retirement. It was fine back in 2008 when he had decade plus to still work. But this time when he is nearing so close to retirement and investing like he does with 25% in growth funds, etc, he go absolutely slaughtered when he’s nearing retirement thinking that having couple of years of cash funds would be fine. He definitely should have throttled back as he has already won the game. Stayed too aggressive to the end which could cost him working few more extra years. Pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered.
One more thing about Flagpole. With his arrogance in investing, he got absolutely slaughtered this year having such aggressive funds nearing retirement. It was fine back in 2008 when he had decade plus to still work. But this time when he is nearing so close to retirement and investing like he does with 25% in growth funds, etc, he go absolutely slaughtered when he’s nearing retirement thinking that having couple of years of cash funds would be fine. He definitely should have throttled back as he has already won the game. Stayed too aggressive to the end which could cost him working few more extra years. Pigs get fed, hogs get slaughtered.
There is a school of thought that believes one’s investments should maintain a level of aggressiveness prior to, and during, early retirement that is similar to what is typically recommended in younger years. The thinking is that if one expects to live 20+ years in retirement, history suggests a growth strategy for the first decade, or so, of retirement will grow that nest egg substantially beyond what it would be with a more conservative approach.
I don’t know if this is Flagpole’s thinking, but more and more financial planners are getting on board with this strategy.
I've been patiently waiting for the markets to revisit the lows from last month (11/3) when I sold a fair amount of tech etfs that I had owned for a considerable time at a break-even price, trying to avoid going into the red on them. Would like the opportunity to pick them back up since I believe that may likely be something of a bottom and have been regretting selling them. Need just a 4% drop from today's close. And it's getting close...
Guess you don't like today's market then.
Thx. for thinking of this.
1. While part of me wants the market to go down so I can load back up on those shares I regrettably sold back in Nov. lows, I do realize that the other 99% of our holdings will benefit from market rises like todays, so I am torn. Frankly, it is a relief to have a reason to somewhat welcome drops, psychologically.
2. I know that it may not revisit the Nov. lows for some time, if ever, so I hedged my bets and considered the drop this far (since Powell's announcement) to be an opportunity that should be taken, so I bought back a modest percentage - 6% -of what I sold at the Nov. low. Another words, I hedged my bet somewhat.