Stock Market is the bottom in?

[BuckSutherland]

^^^

How do you fit so many untrue statements into one post?? You dont need a huge amount of money or plans to lose it to participate in the stock market.


My 13 year old nephew wants to start a Roth IRA. He can buy a dollar amount of any stock he wants (fractional shares). He could buy 1,000 different stocks with $1,000. Just because someone is a "professional" doesn't make them good at their jobs either. Just look at Dr. Fauci. I also know all kinds of shitty "professional" farmers, mechanics, salesmen, teachers, cops, nurses, contractors, pastors, etc.... Just because you couldn't make stocks work for you doesn't mean it cant work for all kinds of other people. I own some Raytheon. I'm up about 20% on it. Bought it when Biden picked Lloyd Austin to be Sec of Defense. Bought a bunch of Exxon and Chevron last December..... been fantastic.


Maybe some of us do long and hard research and identify macro trends or really get to know a company before we invest. 1/4 of my retirement portfolio was reorganized last year specifically because of the Biden presidency. Very first thing he did on inauguration day was to kill Keystone XL pipeline. Immediate validation to my hypothesis that he would propel us to much higher oil prices. Go look at your local gas pump. My Exxon shares have gone from $40 to 72 with 6 dividend payments along the way, and the prospect of much higher prices if this Ukraine bullshit keeps going.


All it takes is 1 explosive growth stock to put a person DEEP into the green. If you would have put $10,000 into Tesla 5 years ago it would be worth about $190,000 today. Its a bit foolish for you to assume that those of us in individual stocks are just "looking for a thrill" or that "dollar cost averaging" is the best long-term strategy.

 

[yoderjac]

^^^

How do you fit so many untrue statements into one post?? You dont need a huge amount of money or plans to lose it to participate in the stock market.


My 13 year old nephew wants to start a Roth IRA. He can buy a dollar amount of any stock he wants (fractional shares). He could buy 1,000 different stocks with $1,000. Just because someone is a "professional" doesn't make them good at their jobs either. Just look at Dr. Fauci. I also know all kinds of shitty "professional" farmers, mechanics, salesmen, teachers, cops, nurses, contractors, pastors, etc.... Just because you couldn't make stocks work for you doesn't mean it cant work for all kinds of other people. I own some Raytheon. I'm up about 20% on it. Bought it when Biden picked Lloyd Austin to be Sec of Defense. Bought a bunch of Exxon and Chevron last December..... been fantastic.


Maybe some of us do long and hard research and identify macro trends or really get to know a company before we invest. 1/4 of my retirement portfolio was reorganized last year specifically because of the Biden presidency. Very first thing he did on inauguration day was to kill Keystone XL pipeline. Immediate validation to my hypothesis that he would propel us to much higher oil prices. Go look at your local gas pump. My Exxon shares have gone from $40 to 72 with 6 dividend payments along the way, and the prospect of much higher prices if this Ukraine bullshit keeps going.


All it takes is 1 explosive growth stock to put a person DEEP into the green. If you would have put $10,000 into Tesla 5 years ago it would be worth about $190,000 today. Its a bit foolish for you to assume that those of us in individual stocks are just "looking for a thrill" or that "dollar cost averaging" is the best long-term strateg

Nothing I said was untrue. Without sufficient diversity, you incur individual company risk. Unless it is a full time job, and unlikely even then, you can't do enough research on enough individual stocks to get sufficient diversity.

Keep rolling the dice if you think it works for you. I've got no issues with that. Picking out individual stocks that have performed well in hindsight is a great way to convince folks to pick stocks. Just make sure to disclaim...past performance is not a guarantee of future results.

 

[homerj1]

Charlie Munger, Warren Buffett, and Mark Cuban all think diversification is for those who don't know what they're doing.

Is Diversification for Idiots?

The Case Against Over Diversifying Your Stock Portfolio

medium.com

 

[yoderjac]

Charlie Munger, Warren Buffett, and Mark Cuban all think diversification is for those who don't know what they're doing.

Is Diversification for Idiots?

The Case Against Over Diversifying Your Stock Portfolio

medium.com

Warren Buffet was not a stock picker. He has always been very skilled at reallocation of capital. He buys synergistic companies, disassembles them, and rebuilds them. He is one amazing guy. Listening to him over time was part of the learning experience that has gotten me to the point of avoiding individual stocks. The taught me the difference between building businesses and picking stocks.

 

[homerj1]

A page on how Warren Buffett picks stocks

How Does Warren Buffett Choose His Stocks?

Fellow investors have long praised—and envied—Warren Buffett's seemingly uncanny ability to pick stocks. Here is how he does it.

www.investopedia.com

 

[yoderjac]

A page on how Warren Buffett picks stocks

How Does Warren Buffett Choose His Stocks?

Fellow investors have long praised—and envied—Warren Buffett's seemingly uncanny ability to pick stocks. Here is how he does it.

www.investopedia.com

He has been an expert a identifying inefficient allocation of capital in companies and making deals that correct it. Most of Buffet's success has come from getting inside companies. He has a team that he works with delving deep into books and leveraging his financial influence. One thing that astonishes me about the man is his ability to retain his humility.

 

[homerj1]

I thought Buffett didn't pick stocks

 

[Kooch]

He has been an expert a identifying inefficient allocation of capital in companies and making deals that correct it. Most of Buffet's success has come from getting inside companies. He has a team that he works with delving deep into books and leveraging his financial influence. One thing that astonishes me about the man is his ability to retain his humility.

You admire his humility. How ironic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[yoderjac]

You admire his humility. How ironic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

If you've ever seen him interviewed it quickly becomes obvious how he has an eye for misallocated capital in business. He has been more consistent at picking synergistic companies (vs stocks) and pulling the appropriate leavers to reorganize them into profitable businesses. Unlike many of the other billionaires who think they have all the answers because things broke there way in life, Buffet offers his opinion with plenty of caveats regarding how things could go against his thoughts.

There is a big difference between analyzing companies, identifying changes in business practices, and having a strong influence, if not outright control, in the decision making, and simply picking stocks. Buffet did not make his fortune picking stocks. He made it rebuilding companies.

I'm fortunate that I made enough mistakes when I was young enough to make the necessary corrections to enjoy my retirement. It was nothing but dumb luck that I made those mistakes early in life.

 

[Buckly]

Nothing I said was untrue. Without sufficient diversity, you incur individual company risk. Unless it is a full time job, and unlikely even then, you can't do enough research on enough individual stocks to get sufficient diversity.

Keep rolling the dice if you think it works for you. I've got no issues with that. Picking out individual stocks that have performed well in hindsight is a great way to convince folks to pick stocks. Just make sure to disclaim...past performance is not a guarantee of future results.

I must comment. Picking stocks of well run solid companies is not rolling the dice. And to say you can never do enough research is ridiculous. in todays world it’s easier than ever to do research. Diversity comes in many ways. Index funds produce average returns over time but there’s a whole lot of losers in there you don’t need. Pick stocks in several different sectors and with good companies and you will make more money without the losers giving you just average returns. Many a person has made money and had fine retirements with just owning individual stocks. Nothing wrong with index but too many losers in there.

 

[yoderjac]

I must comment. Picking stocks of well run solid companies is not rolling the dice. And to say you can never do enough research is ridiculous. in todays world it’s easier than ever to do research. Diversity comes in many ways. Index funds produce average returns over time but there’s a whole lot of losers in there you don’t need. Pick stocks in several different sectors and with good companies and you will make more money without the losers giving you just average returns. Many a person has made money and had fine retirements with just owning individual stocks. Nothing wrong with index but too many losers in there.

You can do plenty of external research on individual companies but you don't get to see the books like buffet. Just what the report publicly. Doing sufficient detailed research on a large enough sampling of companies to cull to a diverse enough group of good companies does indeed take a lot of time and effort. When I talk about rolling the dice, I'm referring to an individual company. When you have enough of them you begin to approximate the broad market to a greater or lesser degree. The question is not can you make money investing this way. The question is, over the long haul can you beat the S&P 500. Very few outsiders do in the long run.

 

[Buckly]

How do you know how many people beat the S&P in the long run? I’m only going to speak of myself that’s all I’m an expert on LOL

 

[yoderjac]

How do you know how many people beat the S&P in the long run? I’m only going to speak of myself that’s all I’m an expert on LOL

Just look at mutual fund managers. Every year we have funds with great returns that are multiples of the S&P, but they don't last long. When you look at them compared to the S&P over the long run, you don't find winners. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying no one every beats the S&P. There are winners at the casino too. I'm just saying that statistically, over the long haul, the odds are not in your favor. Again, for having fun picking stocks can be great! For investing money that you will need in retirement, folk will do better dollar cost averaging into the broad market.

I'm certainly no financial expert. I'm just providing my experience countering the view that XXX will be the next big winner...get on board. Perhaps over the next lifetime or two, things will change. Inflation adjusted returns of the broad market have been pretty steady over history.

As I say, to each his own...Don't like my view on investing, go buy individual stocks...You would be no different than me when I was young.

 

[BuckSutherland]

Jack, the first stock my advisor and I bought in my retirement account a few years ago (2018) was Apple around $40. Apple stock represents nearly 48% of Warren Buffet's $228 billion dollar stock portfolio. Apparently Warren is a genius and I'm an idiot..... I'm thoroughly enjoying the 300+% gains though...... Put my SEP contribution last year into Microsoft at $232. The whole contribution. Seems to be working out about as good as when we bought Apple.

 

[Hoytvectrix]

I'm with Jack on this one. If someone consistently beat the S&P they would be making more money on a lecture circuit or selling books than in the market itself. I say put up or shut up. At this point, the burden of proof is on individuals making the claim to pick em better than the overall market. I've brought this up before- questioning whether folks were actually analyzing their trades compared to some independent indices, and have yet to see anyone demonstrate they are even trying. This is feeling like a fool's errand.

At this point it feels like I'm at the blackjack table listening to some apparent regular talking about "their system" of betting when they don't even know what Basic Strategy is.

Is it possible. Yes, absolutely. Is it likely? Math says otherwise.

 

[yoderjac]

Jack, the first stock my advisor and I bought in my retirement account a few years ago (2018) was Apple around $40. Apple stock represents nearly 48% of Warren Buffet's $228 billion dollar stock portfolio. Apparently Warren is a genius and I'm an idiot..... I'm thoroughly enjoying the 300+% gains though...... Put my SEP contribution last year into Microsoft at $232. The whole contribution. Seems to be working out about as good as when we bought Apple.



View attachment 40624View attachment 40625

Absolutely! You can find many stocks, that have done very well over the years. I owned Berkshire Hathaway for many years as well as apple. I also remember back when Digital Equipment came out of nowhere and became a dominate computer company. Apple, with their proprietary control of both the HW and OS were written off as the PC and open source came into vogue. Digital Equipment got clobbered as Intel became the dominate chip in the server and client market. Apple got into the phone market earlier seeing it as more than a simple phone in the long run. It has driven their profits and been the springboard for many of their new products.

So, depending on which stock you picked and when you picked it you could have done very well or be licking your wounds.

Pointing out how individual stocks have performed is kind of like the testimonials for those "Manliness Restoration Supplements". Every single guy on the ads testify just how wonderfully they worked for them...and she'll like it too!

I've got nothing against financial advisors. I've got relatives in that profession. I can't really understand how they exist. With their great stock picking abilities, I can't figure out why they are wasting their time advising clients on which stocks to buy and sell. I would they they would all be multi-millionaires after a few years with their own investments and just retire.

By the way, on a serious note, I used Berkshire for many years as a proxy for the market. As buffet is getting older, even though I know he has been training his right-hand man, I became concerned it was simply not broad enough. It never exceeded 25% of my portfolio, but as I was starting the glidepath to retirement a few years ago, I went to two major buckets, S&P ETFs, and cash. I still keep a small percentage of play money in some sector funds. I've organized to keep those higher risk sector funds in my Roth and the cash portion in the regular rollover IRA.

 

[Buckly]

I’m going to say again just to be more clear. Investing in a well run proven solid company is not a high risk adventure. It’s good investing

 

[Buckly]

Just look at mutual fund managers. Every year we have funds with great returns that are multiples of the S&P, but they don't last long. When you look at them compared to the S&P over the long run, you don't find winners. Don't get me wrong. I'm not saying no one every beats the S&P. There are winners at the casino too. I'm just saying that statistically, over the long haul, the odds are not in your favor. Again, for having fun picking stocks can be great! For investing money that you will need in retirement, folk will do better dollar cost averaging into the broad market.

I'm certainly no financial expert. I'm just providing my experience countering the view that XXX will be the next big winner...get on board. Perhaps over the next lifetime or two, things will change. Inflation adjusted returns of the broad market have been pretty steady over history.

As I say, to each his own...Don't like my view on investing, go buy individual stocks...You would be no different than me when I was young.

What stocks did you buy when you were young that burnt you so bad. and why did you buy them

 

[b116757]

Warren Buffett made a 10-year bet on his market strategy. Here's how he won

He wanted to prove that index funds can beat the pros

amp.usatoday.com

Warren Buffets 10 year bet it’s a good read. I remember reading it in the Berkshire quarterly report several years ago.

 

[BuckSutherland]

I'm with Jack on this one. If someone consistently beat the S&P they would be making more money on a lecture circuit or selling books than in the market itself. I say put up or shut up. At this point, the burden of proof is on individuals making the claim to pick em better than the overall market. I've brought this up before- questioning whether folks were actually analyzing their trades compared to some independent indices, and have yet to see anyone demonstrate they are even trying. This is feeling like a fool's errand.

At this point it feels like I'm at the blackjack table listening to some apparent regular talking about "their system" of betting when they don't even know what Basic Strategy is.

Is it possible. Yes, absolutely. Is it likely? Math says otherwise.

You dont have to "consistently beat" the S and P over and over and over again year after year to make a lot of money. All it takes is to be right one or two times. You can be right a few times and over the course of 20-30 years and WASTE the S and P 500 even with a bunch of losses. People do it all the time. You of all people should know that being you're in bitcoin. How many millionaires and billionaires has crypto made in relatively short time period?? Some of us have all kinds of money and investment outside the markets and dont give two shits if the math says just buy the S and P and grind it out. I'm perfectly comfortable with the added upside that individual stocks represent. In 20-30 years, I will find out if I made the correct move. I like the opportunity to go for a homerun with a small percentage of my net worth.