Stock market is a "fully-fledged epic bubble" and will burst
Discussion
I've slowed new purchases but not selling anything. Approx 10% down on assets purchased late last year (which came from similar risk funds so way I see it is they would have remained in the market had I not inherited them) and approx 20% down on main sipp which is not a surprise to me considering it was big tech heavy. I've seen it worse, to be fair.
Mr Whippy said:
What’s worse?
Buying high. Selling low.
Selling lower.
Waiting a decade to break even.
I’d argue that selling low and buying lower is a good way to neutralise the loss into a market bottom (assuming that transpires).
Inflation still hot, risky geopolitics. CBs still targeting record levels of moves towards tightening, and actually tightening faster as time passes.
QT starting to kick in.
Only a massive optimist would want to stay in, if they’d bought at recent highs… imo.
True but if one is that good at timing the market one would be smarter to just selling high and buying low. Buying high. Selling low.
Selling lower.
Waiting a decade to break even.
I’d argue that selling low and buying lower is a good way to neutralise the loss into a market bottom (assuming that transpires).
Inflation still hot, risky geopolitics. CBs still targeting record levels of moves towards tightening, and actually tightening faster as time passes.
QT starting to kick in.
Only a massive optimist would want to stay in, if they’d bought at recent highs… imo.
Arguably, the most important driver as to whether to sell or hold (assuming a quality portfolio in the first instance) is an individual's stage of life or personal risk, I would think.
DonkeyApple said:
Arguably, the most important driver as to whether to sell or hold (assuming a quality portfolio in the first instance) is an individual's stage of life or personal risk, I would think.
But risk etc would've been determined at the outset so not very often tinkering is required going forward (other than rebalancing).RSTurboPaul said:
The value of your investments can go down as well as up.BobToc said:
Selling low and watching markets climb for potentially years while you wait in vain for the price to the level you’ve convinced yourself you’d buy at is also a possibility.
The recent highs were the largest anomaly on record vs long term averages.What’s more likely?
A reversion to the mean, or even more record breaking extremes while macro-economic factors deteriorate further?
But as I said, anyone not averaging in… anyone disproportionately buying in over the late 20 to late 21 period, well I feel sorry for them… but they’ll learn a lesson about buying based on greed and fomo.
Mr Whippy said:
What’s worse?
Buying high. Selling low.
Selling lower.
Waiting a decade to break even.
I’d argue that selling low and buying lower is a good way to neutralise the loss into a market bottom (assuming that transpires).
Inflation still hot, risky geopolitics. CBs still targeting record levels of moves towards tightening, and actually tightening faster as time passes.
QT starting to kick in.
Only a massive optimist would want to stay in, if they’d bought at recent highs… imo.
I guess it depends if one is an Investor or Speculator will determine how drawdowns are dealt with, the problem is and I readily include myself here is that in the "fog of war" it is often difficult to remember which hat I'm wearing. It's trite to say "buy and hold" or "sell when losses are 10%" because these things are based on fallacies because each situation differs. I had a position in Silver in March, Silver is really an industrial metal as opposed to a precious metal. I'd made approx 10% and then it stalled. I sold out at a 2% loss. Since then it's down another 14%. On the other hand I have small cap Silver Miner which is down over 20% and it doesn't worry me because the story is still good over the medium term. Buying high. Selling low.
Selling lower.
Waiting a decade to break even.
I’d argue that selling low and buying lower is a good way to neutralise the loss into a market bottom (assuming that transpires).
Inflation still hot, risky geopolitics. CBs still targeting record levels of moves towards tightening, and actually tightening faster as time passes.
QT starting to kick in.
Only a massive optimist would want to stay in, if they’d bought at recent highs… imo.
To paraphrase Ron Manager, It's the hardest game in the world made harder by the fact most of us don't actually know which game we are playing ( i include myself in this). The really frightening part is most players convince themselves that they do know.
Derek Chevalier said:
DonkeyApple said:
Arguably, the most important driver as to whether to sell or hold (assuming a quality portfolio in the first instance) is an individual's stage of life or personal risk, I would think.
But risk etc would've been determined at the outset so not very often tinkering is required going forward (other than rebalancing).
Mr Whippy said:
But as I said, anyone not averaging in… anyone disproportionately buying in over the late 20 to late 21 period, well I feel sorry for them… but they’ll learn a lesson about buying based on greed and fomo.
Why is it greed or FOMO ?If I were investing from income, then I'd be 'averaging in'. If I have a lump sum, then it goes in as a lump sum.
Anything else is just guesswork - sometimes I'd win, other times I'd lose - but not through greed or FOMO.
I am continuing to buy as much as I can with a top up at the end of each month, and letting time/DCA/compounding/Mr Market etc do it's magic.
20+ year timescale, and I lack the genius/foresight/superpower to time the market and make multiple macro calls (most of which economists and pros paid to do so get wrong).
There are many ways to overcomplicate investing IMO, diving in and out the market based on fear, performance chasing etc is one of them and for most will be detrimental to returns.
20+ year timescale, and I lack the genius/foresight/superpower to time the market and make multiple macro calls (most of which economists and pros paid to do so get wrong).
There are many ways to overcomplicate investing IMO, diving in and out the market based on fear, performance chasing etc is one of them and for most will be detrimental to returns.
si
800 said:
800 said: I am continuing to buy as much as I can with a top up at the end of each month, and letting time/DCA/compounding/Mr Market etc do it's magic.
20+ year timescale, and I lack the genius/foresight/superpower to time the market and make multiple macro calls (most of which economists and pros paid to do so get wrong).
Likewise. Have just increased my spend considerably on all my Vanguard funds, S&P, SIPP etc 20+ year timescale, and I lack the genius/foresight/superpower to time the market and make multiple macro calls (most of which economists and pros paid to do so get wrong).
bhstewie said:
I think if Gerry had sold everything at the top, sat on his hands and then bought back in fully when he picked the bottom he would have ended with more money than the other 2 put together. hstewie said:bhstewie said:
I'd suggest the scenario is pretty carefully planned to minimise any impact from their behaviour. What fraction of their pre GFC assets are they potentially investing over the market timing period under discussion?hstewie said:ATM said:
bhstewie said:
I think if Gerry had sold everything at the top, sat on his hands and then bought back in fully when he picked the bottom he would have ended with more money than the other 2 put together. hstewie said:*but who seem surprisingly well represented on PH
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff