mrs wrote:
mister wrote:
I see where Morgan Stanley and BOA are predicting a "Melt Up" in the market soon.
Obviously, they are not reading Igy's comments on this thread. Or! Maybe they are.
Incorrect on Morgan Stanley, May 1 publication
May 2
https://article.wn.com/view/2019/05/02/Wall_Street_Banks_Tell_Clients_To_Prepare_For_Market_Melt_Up/mister wrote:
mrs wrote:
Incorrect on Morgan Stanley, May 1 publication
May 2
https://article.wn.com/view/2019/05/02/Wall_Street_Banks_Tell_Clients_To_Prepare_For_Market_Melt_Up/
Silence is Golden!
mister wrote:
mrs wrote:
Incorrect on Morgan Stanley, May 1 publication
May 2
https://article.wn.com/view/2019/05/02/Wall_Street_Banks_Tell_Clients_To_Prepare_For_Market_Melt_Up/
Oh, snap! Igy pwnd again!
My b&h is down another 0.25% today.
Ok i will spare everyone the daily gyrations of my experimental b&h!
Maserati wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
I've found that it has gotten very hard to do a momentum trade in the last 6 months or so. I used to be able to make quick trades profitable at least 9 out of every 10 trades. Now, not so much. The buy and hold is the only thing that's been working. It's like this - most trades i make now take a few days to actually show a profit. It seems like the timing of the buy is not what it used to be.
Amen. Momentum was super easy for a while, but there’s too much turbulence now on the same time-scale. Maybe now it takes a bit longer.
Igy I have never changed my tune. In response to seattle, I re-iterate my knowledge of the facts of the distortion of economic numbers that I detailed on here long ago., especially relating to GDP deflator, CPI, gov’t spending in GDP, hedonic adjustments, U1-U6, etc.
It’s about appearances, sentiment, and confidence. I re-iterate that the market is more managed than it is manipulated, and that might be a good thing. When bumps are smoothed out, people stop responding to other people on short timescales, and investment becomes more efficient, and trading less so—and imo investment is more economically efficient and beneficial than is trading.
One must read the winds, and check one’s biases at the door—but yes, shifting gears is hard. Ask me how I know!
Absolutely - "...investing is more economically efficient and beneficial than is trading" and my returns strongly support that supposition. Also, I couldn't agree more on your statement: "One must read the winds, and check one’s biases at the door." When i was hitting on my swing trades, they were done by first feeling what my gut really wanted me to do (i.e.: jump aboard when things were running way up or sell after a drop), realize that the bulk of investors were feeling the exact same thing, and then calculating on how to monopolize on that sentiment.
That's the way i think when i get in a groove on swing trades. Long term moves in the market are a different story, and the hardest part is differentiating a swing trade opportunity from a longer term direction.
Right now, i am tending towards the b&h with relatively little cash on the sidelines with which to try any swing trades.
You know, today's downturn could have been a lot bigger given how far we have risen. That is not such a bad sign.
Three times a charm:
https://northmantrader.com/2019/05/02/trend-breaks/djia-451/
Great. Thanks.
Like I have said before the old man isn’t in charge anymore. Buffett is the Uncle Fester front man (take over men pulling the strings while Becky Quick froths at the mouth). Warren strayed from his value roots long ago. We’ll see if this is a good buy and hold.
“Berkshire Hathaway has been buying shares of Amazon. But Warren Buffett isn’t the one behind the purchases.”
“One of the fellows in the office that manage money ... bought some Amazon so it will show up in the 13F” later this month, Buffett told CNBC Thursday, on the eve of the kick off of Berkshire’s annual shareholders meeting in Omaha. Buffett was referring to either Todd Combs or Ted Weschler, who each manage portfolios of more than $13 billion in equities for Berkshire.”
Who’s been a better investor than Warren Buffett?
wondering wrote:
Who’s been a better investor than Warren Buffett?
Peter Lynch.
Good choice, but he invested other people’s money.
wondering wrote:
Good choice, but he invested other people’s money.
Yeah, but consider this ... during his fund's 13 years , the annualized returns were 29% and built the fund's assets from $20 million to $14 billion. Best 20 year peformance of any fund in history.
seattle prattle wrote:
Maserati wrote:
Amen. Momentum was super easy for a while, but there’s too much turbulence now on the same time-scale. Maybe now it takes a bit longer.
Igy I have never changed my tune. In response to seattle, I re-iterate my knowledge of the facts of the distortion of economic numbers that I detailed on here long ago., especially relating to GDP deflator, CPI, gov’t spending in GDP, hedonic adjustments, U1-U6, etc.
It’s about appearances, sentiment, and confidence. I re-iterate that the market is more managed than it is manipulated, and that might be a good thing. When bumps are smoothed out, people stop responding to other people on short timescales, and investment becomes more efficient, and trading less so—and imo investment is more economically efficient and beneficial than is trading.
One must read the winds, and check one’s biases at the door—but yes, shifting gears is hard. Ask me how I know!
Absolutely - "...investing is more economically efficient and beneficial than is trading" and my returns strongly support that supposition. Also, I couldn't agree more on your statement: "One must read the winds, and check one’s biases at the door." When i was hitting on my swing trades, they were done by first feeling what my gut really wanted me to do (i.e.: jump aboard when things were running way up or sell after a drop), realize that the bulk of investors were feeling the exact same thing, and then calculating on how to monopolize on that sentiment.
That's the way i think when i get in a groove on swing trades. Long term moves in the market are a different story, and the hardest part is differentiating a swing trade opportunity from a longer term direction.
Right now, i am tending towards the b&h with relatively little cash on the sidelines with which to try any swing trades.
You know, today's downturn could have been a lot bigger given how far we have risen. That is not such a bad sign.
Yeah that's great but have you had 1000% returns in one day?
You don't go back from that. It's like winning a jackpot at a slot machine once. The adrenaline rush
236k jobs and unemployment down to 3.6%!!
This is basically unprecedented growth we're in. Inflation is low, GDP is high(ish) and jobs are plentiful? I don't get it
Racket wrote:
236k jobs and unemployment down to 3.6%!!
This is basically unprecedented growth we're in. Inflation is low, GDP is high(ish) and jobs are plentiful? I don't get it
Yeah, true enough. The jobs are there and it's a candidate's market to choose, thus the slowly rising wage rate. The only negative i hear is that there were less people looking for work (more dropping out of the labor force), which is more of a footnote than a major concern, anyway.
Congrats when you can land a 1000% gainer on an options trade. Sounds way crazier than anything i would want to even remotely know about, but my hat's off to ya.
All that jabbering about swing trades yesterday forced me back into my old winning strategy at the open and I'm ahead on one today, but I'm just going to ride it out as a buy and hold. I'm seeing upside for the rest of the year.
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Three times a charm:
https://northmantrader.com/2019/05/02/trend-breaks/djia-451/
More support from Igy for buy and hold. Who says you can’t teach an old dog new tricks?
seattle prattle wrote:
The jobs are there. The only negative i hear is that there were less people looking for work (more dropping out of the labor force
If the jobs are there, why do you think people are dropping out of the work force?
purple martin wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
The jobs are there. The only negative i hear is that there were less people looking for work (more dropping out of the labor force
If the jobs are there, why do you think people are dropping out of the work force?
Boomers are getting old and have to retire eventually.
Racket wrote:
purple martin wrote:
If the jobs are there, why do you think people are dropping out of the work force?
Boomers are getting old and have to retire eventually.
You're right!
And probably earlier with their investments doing so well over the past 10 years.