EPTOn May 13 2019 06:55 Sermokala wrote:
But man I've got some jones to short me some uber when it goes live.
But man I've got some jones to short me some uber when it goes live.
uber came out last week, it's already down 15%+
Trading/Investing Thread - Page 2
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21242 Posts
uber came out last week, it's already down 15%+ | ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9489 Posts
On May 13 2019 19:55 Laserist wrote: Since S&P500 is in record values and US indicators going well stop me from buying any stocks or index for now. I am basically sitting on my very small pile of cash and waiting for another 20-30% drop before buying anything. It is fascinating to see US markets having one of the longest winning streak while the rest of the world burned to ashes. I wonder if anyone has a prediction on when US market may join the crowd. What if on the next correction, the index drops 15% and then goes back up. Still sitting on cash? When it hits 20% correction, how do you know to buy in then? are you really going to hold out for 30%? | ||
|
Carnivorous Sheep
Baa?21242 Posts
| ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9858 Posts
Sp500 and DJI is not looking too hot. Public perception on the economy seems to be shifting pretty quick... Anyway who's done their analysis, any views on the possibility of a recession? My gut tells me the Mexico tariffs and China trade war will come to an uneventful conclusion and we will be back to some more growth. But I'm kind of thinking about selling, even though we've had like a 6% drop in the last month, and rebuying after the next 15%+ drop. We haven't had a recession in a while, but from the fundamentals standpoint, it seems like the US is doing well. Idk, I went against my strategy, and got a little worried and started reading articles. Either way, economic growth hasn't been representative of the stock growth in recent years, and I feel like the US doesn't have much room to go up... Hoping to get some light from someone who has looked at the subject deeper. Oddly I don't trust any information from the internet outside of teamliquid. | ||
|
solidbebe
Netherlands4921 Posts
| ||
KwarK
United States41987 Posts
| ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9489 Posts
On June 01 2019 17:29 solidbebe wrote: Try to time the market and you'll get squashed like a bug, that's the only advice I can give you. That and reinvest dividends Investing for retirement is pretty much figured out now and it's a race to the bottom for management fees on ETFs. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9858 Posts
If you're a fund manager, even though you expect the stock market to go down, you can't just sell everything, because you're investors would get angry, you always have to have a portfolio. I'll have to analyse historic data, but my intuition says that if I bought at arbitrary time, sold at the first moment that my stocks exceeded 15%, and purchased any time the market dropped by 10% from its short term peak, I'd be ahead of the market. | ||
|
KwarK
United States41987 Posts
On June 02 2019 06:49 FiWiFaKi wrote: You know, I agree with you guys mainly, but I have this idea, and maybe it's common knowledge, but I feel it gives me an advantage compared to the big guys. If you're a fund manager, even though you expect the stock market to go down, you can't just sell everything, because you're investors would get angry, you always have to have a portfolio. I'll have to analyse historic data, but my intuition says that if I bought at arbitrary time, sold at the first moment that my stocks exceeded 15%, and purchased any time the market dropped by 10% from its short term peak, I'd be ahead of the market. No. A fund manager can buy assets they expect to correlate with a dropping market. The opposition of a bullish position isn't no position, it's a bearish position. No. You would sell when 15% up and never buy back in if it never dropped by more than 10% below that. That's the issue with selling while you're ahead. | ||
|
FiWiFaKi
Canada9858 Posts
Kind of shitty just watching 20 grand wiped out in a couple weeks haha. I'm still ahead of where I bought at little after the December 2018 trough at least. It just seems like there's hard limits of how much you can deviate above below the valuation curve, and when you're above I feel like it increases probability to lose money instead of gaining money, even though for 5 years it goes against the prediction. Pretty much, the idea is to never sell until I need the money, according to you guys. I was taking a similar approach, and it's not bad, expected return over the long term is difficult to gauge, but say maybe 8%/year. That's not a bad return, but is there nothing one can do to try and push that percentage higher? | ||
|
KwarK
United States41987 Posts
Obviously buy low and sell high is a winning strategy. The issue is that low and high aren't labelled. The market spends quite a lot of time at an all time high, you can't simply sell at an all time high and wait for it to drop 10% before you buy back in. The potential loss from never buying back in is far greater than the potential gain. https://qz.com/487013/this-game-will-show-you-just-how-foolish-it-is-to-sell-stocks-right-now/ | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2590 Posts
People claiming that buy and hold is 'the best trading strategy' are... frustrating, to say the least. Plenty of people manage to beat dca on some index or holding bitcoin or whatever your measuring stick is; but it takes a good amount of learning, and a tremendous amount of discipline not to mention mental fortitude to actually do so. Active trading is for sure not for everyone; it's an acquired skill that takes time and practice to master, but it's crazy to claim that it's 'impossible to time the markets' or whatever just because Joe Average with no background or experience in trading isn't likely to do so on his first foray to Nasdaq. Not saying that buy and hold is wrong or bad or anything -- for a person with little interest in trading and no desire or time to put into learning about it, it certainly works. But there are plenty of other ways to make money in the markets, and plenty of ways to have good exposure to market rises without resigning to sitting through every drawdown that might come your way. | ||
|
KlaCkoN
Sweden1661 Posts
On June 02 2019 07:14 FiWiFaKi wrote: ………….. Pretty much, the idea is to never sell until I need the money, according to you guys. I was taking a similar approach, and it's not bad, expected return over the long term is difficult to gauge, but say maybe 8%/year. …….. I hear the 8% (or 10, or whatever the annualized return over the past century for the snp500 is) quite a lot. Most of the people I know (including me) are more or less all in on the snp500 or some version thereof. I'm just not sure how rational it actually is to expect future returns to equal past ones. For example the annualized CPI adjusted return of the Nikkei225 since 1980 is ~2.2% If you count since 1990 it's negative 2%. I guess my point is just that it is quite possible for the stockmarket broadly to yield negative returns over extremely long periods of time without any large external shocks. Obviously Japanese society is still quite functional, living conditions are improving, there have been no wars etc. Obviously the US is not Japan, demographics are much better population is still increasing etc … but then again, the past 100 years for America has been about as good as it is theoretically possible to be. The rest of the world burned itself to ash, not to mention the huge technology and know-how transfers after the last war. It just seems somehow risky to bet on all that repeating itself over the next 50 years. I can see many reasons why the American economy will keep massively over performing but it is not a law of nature, and trying to guess whether or not it will seems as foolhardy as trying to pick individual stocks. The problem is that I'm not really sure how to hedge. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2590 Posts
On June 02 2019 10:00 KlaCkoN wrote: I can see many reasons why the American economy will keep massively over performing but it is not a law of nature, and trying to guess whether or not it will seems as foolhardy as trying to pick individual stocks. The problem is that I'm not really sure how to hedge. Most people don't realize that stock prices aren't always indicative of real economic performance. S&P going up in price doesn't mean the economy is improving, it just means there are more people buying shares than selling them. | ||
|
KlaCkoN
Sweden1661 Posts
On June 02 2019 09:55 Salazarz wrote: That game is incredibly stupid, and the only thing it proves is that most people talking about 'timing the markets' have absolutely no clue about trading. Of course you're not going to reliably beat the market by watching a 10 year chart roll by in front of you within a minute, with no access to any kind of analytics, historical data, or political / economic color. People claiming that buy and hold is 'the best trading strategy' are... frustrating, to say the least. Plenty of people manage to beat dca on s&p 500 or holding bitcoin or whatever your measuring stick is; but it takes a good amount of learning, and a tremendous amount of discipline not to mention mental fortitude to actually do so. Active trading is for sure not for everyone; it's an acquired skill that takes time and practice to master, but it's crazy to claim that it's 'impossible to time the markets' or whatever just because Joe Average with no background or experience in trading isn't likely to do so on his first foray to Nasdaq. I mean the fact that plenty people do it doesn't really say much, wouldn't one very hand wavily expect ~50% of people to succeed, 50% to fail and their average to be, by definition, the total market? I forget where, but I read recently that people who traded retail stocks the past couple of years using satellite data to measure the fraction of occupied spots in parking lots beat the market by 4% or so. That's neat, but it also seems very hard to reproduce by a non professional. It seems to me that in order to actually beat the market, you need to know something everyone else does not. And normal financial disclosures of the kind available to laymen are almost definitionally not that. | ||
|
KlaCkoN
Sweden1661 Posts
| ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2590 Posts
On June 02 2019 10:10 KlaCkoN wrote: I mean the fact that plenty people do it doesn't really say much, wouldn't one very hand wavily expect ~50% of people to succeed, 50% to fail and their average to be, by definition, the total market? I forget where, but I read recently that people who traded retail stocks the past couple of years using satellite data to measure the fraction of occupied spots in parking lots beat the market by 4% or so. That's neat, but it also seems very hard to reproduce by a non professional. It seems to me that in order to actually beat the market, you need to know something everyone else does not. And normal financial discolors of the kind available to laymen are almost definitionally not that. You don't need any secret sauce to 'beat the market', you just need to actually study and practice. In a lot of ways, it's similar to something like poker -- for an average person, it all comes down to luck of the draw, but even a basic understanding of the underlying systems increases your odds of outperforming the average person massively. | ||
|
KwarK
United States41987 Posts
On June 02 2019 10:08 Salazarz wrote: Most people don't realize that stock prices aren't always indicative of real economic performance. S&P going up in price doesn't mean the economy is improving, it just means there are more people buying shares than selling them. As someone coming in with an attitude of superiority you really should know that there, by definition, must be the same number of buyers as there are sellers. | ||
|
Salazarz
Korea (South)2590 Posts
On June 02 2019 10:17 KwarK wrote: As someone coming in with an attitude of superiority you really should know that there, by definition, must be the same number of buyers as there are sellers. I've been up for 48+ hours and I honestly can't think clearly enough to phrase this in a way that is both succinct and descriptive enough for you, but I'm pretty sure you know what I meant by that, anyway... More buyers willing to pay ever increasing prices over current spot price than sellers willing to sell lower? I don't know, I'm sure you can find a better way to pick an argument than that, if you really want to argue about this at all. | ||
|
CorsairHero
Canada9489 Posts
On June 02 2019 09:55 Salazarz wrote: That game is incredibly stupid, and the only thing it proves is that most people talking about 'timing the markets' have absolutely no clue about trading. Of course you're not going to reliably beat the market by watching a 10 year chart roll by in front of you within a minute, with no access to any kind of analytics, historical data, or political / economic color. People claiming that buy and hold is 'the best trading strategy' are... frustrating, to say the least. Plenty of people manage to beat dca on some index or holding bitcoin or whatever your measuring stick is; but it takes a good amount of learning, and a tremendous amount of discipline not to mention mental fortitude to actually do so. Active trading is for sure not for everyone; it's an acquired skill that takes time and practice to master, but it's crazy to claim that it's 'impossible to time the markets' or whatever just because Joe Average with no background or experience in trading isn't likely to do so on his first foray to Nasdaq. Not saying that buy and hold is wrong or bad or anything -- for a person with little interest in trading and no desire or time to put into learning about it, it certainly works. But there are plenty of other ways to make money in the markets, and plenty of ways to have good exposure to market rises without resigning to sitting through every drawdown that might come your way. I suppose Warren Buffett hasn't spent enough time learning and mastering trading to beat the S&P 500 the last decade Sitting through a drawdown is some active fund manager talking point. They forget to mention buy and hold also captures every rise in the market and we all know how the market did the last 100 years. Let's hear your strategy though. | ||
| ||
