Down goes the Dow

seattle prattle wrote:

agip wrote:

All time highs again.

ride 'em, stock jockeys!

I really should use this opportunity to totally unwind leveraged ETFs..

I feel like we've had this conversation before, but you know you're not supposed to hold those for longer than like a week.

Fax is fax wrote:

K5 detector wrote:

Yet we know exactly what to expect from you, K5. You’re more of a one trick pony than even Igy.

The facts are the facts and Agip's statement was inaccurate.

I do believe Ian Anderson had you in mind when he sang of the "endless whining sound". You lack all clever and entertainment value.

You think Anderson had me in mind when he wrote “My God”? Interesting. I’m going to speculate that you were the inspiration for “Eleanor Rigby”.

BTW, agip was right,

Get ready for the downturn wrote:

After being fully out of the (equities) market for several months, I took the plunge back in this morning.

This will undoubtedly result in a market downturn.

You have been warned.

My follow-up.

In the market for 3 days. Already have lost over 1.5% of the investment.

You were all warned,

As predicted wrote:

Get ready for the downturn wrote:

After being fully out of the (equities) market for several months, I took the plunge back in this morning.

This will undoubtedly result in a market downturn.

You have been warned.

My follow-up.

In the market for 3 days. Already have lost over 1.5% of the investment.

You were all warned,

Don't feel bad! Imagine the lost gains by a guy who's investment strategy for the past 8 years has been based on anticipation of a 60% market downturn that never happened.

At least you have a chance to recover. Unfortunately, he never will.

Potential gains missed is one thing.

Actual wealth lost another.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/bfmB39A.jpg?itok=Pm7OX1JX

From Media Bias / Fact Check:

The website is registered in Bulgaria under the name Georgi Georgiev, a business partner of Krassimir Ivandjiiski.

In a quote from the above New Yorker article they summarize the political stance of the blog, which Lokey told Bloomberg is: “Russia=good. Obama=idiot. Bashar al-Assad=benevolent leader. John Kerry= dunce. Vladimir Putin=greatest leader in the history of statecraft.”

Zero Hedge’s content has been classified as “alt-right” and has been criticized for presenting conspiracy theories.

In review, Zero Hedge publishes pro-right wing/Trump articles such as Pat Buchanan: “Trump Calls Off Cold War II.” As well as fake news stories regarding liberals: Anti-Trump Protesters Bused Into Austin, Chicago.

Editorial content is written under the pseudonym Tyler Durden and usually focuses on conspiracies related to economic collapse. Zero Hedge sources to factually mixed think tanks such as the The Mises Institute, which promotes Austrian (Anarcho-Capitalism) economics.

A factual search reveals a terrible track record with IFCN fact checkers. There are too many failed checks to list here.

Overall, we rate Zero Hedge an extreme right biased conspiracy website.

^you are dumb money.....

Racket wrote:

seattle prattle wrote:

I really should use this opportunity to totally unwind leveraged ETFs..

I feel like we've had this conversation before, but you know you're not supposed to hold those for longer than like a week.

We have but i remain largely unconvinced. Fees are high, but around 1%, not prohibitively high. And as for the distortion that might happen due to daily re-balancing, i've spot checked several timeframes to see how much this distorts actual returns, and sometimes it's worked to my advantage, sometimes it detracts, but overall, not a lot of deviation from the straight multiple one might expect.

Honestly, the big motivation to get out of them is mostly just to reduce the level of risk in the portfolio overall. Ironically, i have a fair amount of cash i could use to partially de-leverage and buy back equal amounts of the unleveraged ETFs (not completely, but a substantial amount.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

^you are dumb money.....

Thanks for the intelligent counter argument.

seattle prattle wrote:

Racket wrote:

I feel like we've had this conversation before, but you know you're not supposed to hold those for longer than like a week.

We have but i remain largely unconvinced. Fees are high, but around 1%, not prohibitively high. And as for the distortion that might happen due to daily re-balancing, i've spot checked several timeframes to see how much this distorts actual returns, and sometimes it's worked to my advantage, sometimes it detracts, but overall, not a lot of deviation from the straight multiple one might expect.

Honestly, the big motivation to get out of them is mostly just to reduce the level of risk in the portfolio overall. Ironically, i have a fair amount of cash i could use to partially de-leverage and buy back equal amounts of the unleveraged ETFs (not completely, but a substantial amount.

Seattle,

I believe your assumptions are correct. I think trading in and out would be more costly. You stick with your theme or you get out.

Igy

Hellooooooooo. wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

^you are dumb money.....

Thanks for the intelligent counter argument.

Sure, no problem troll.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

seattle prattle wrote:

We have but i remain largely unconvinced. Fees are high, but around 1%, not prohibitively high. And as for the distortion that might happen due to daily re-balancing, i've spot checked several timeframes to see how much this distorts actual returns, and sometimes it's worked to my advantage, sometimes it detracts, but overall, not a lot of deviation from the straight multiple one might expect.

Honestly, the big motivation to get out of them is mostly just to reduce the level of risk in the portfolio overall. Ironically, i have a fair amount of cash i could use to partially de-leverage and buy back equal amounts of the unleveraged ETFs (not completely, but a substantial amount.

Seattle,

I believe your assumptions are correct. I think trading in and out would be more costly. You stick with your theme or you get out.

Igy

When I do swing trades with a small amount, which i do try fairly regularly, i have to admit that i don't do as well as if i would have just done nothing. THe longer term buy and hold has worked for me better, by quite a bit.

But trading in and out is more enticing than ever now that brokerages are offering free trading.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

https://www.zerohedge.com/s3/files/inline-images/bfmB39A.jpg?itok=Pm7OX1JX

It would be helpful to the discerning reader if you could provide a citation for this.

seattle prattle wrote:

But trading in and out is more enticing than ever now that brokerages are offering free trading.

You can't do it. They make you wait three days for a trade to "clear" and you cannot use that $$ to buy.

seattle prattle wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Seattle,

I believe your assumptions are correct. I think trading in and out would be more costly. You stick with your theme or you get out.

Igy

When I do swing trades with a small amount, which i do try fairly regularly, i have to admit that i don't do as well as if i would have just done nothing. THe longer term buy and hold has worked for me better, by quite a bit.

But trading in and out is more enticing than ever now that brokerages are offering free trading.

The 3x leveraged exposure is already on average at about 2.2-2.5x on just day trading at a maximum. The underlying has to increase exactly linearly to get those gains day over day, otherwise you're going to miss out. Can you still get like 1.5x leverage in an 11 year bull market by holding for several months? Yes, but you leave a lot on the table compared to if you buy and sell on a 2-3 day schedule. Maybe the fees are less than I remember too, but those 3x funds are basically for people who don't want to do options but still want leverage, and the maintenance fees aren't cheap.

American economy is unstoppable.

Igy, tell us again why you hate America and want it fail? Just kidding buddy, happy Friday.

seattle prattle wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Seattle,

I believe your assumptions are correct. I think trading in and out would be more costly. You stick with your theme or you get out.

Igy

When I do swing trades with a small amount, which i do try fairly regularly, i have to admit that i don't do as well as if i would have just done nothing. THe longer term buy and hold has worked for me better, by quite a bit.

But trading in and out is more enticing than ever now that brokerages are offering free trading.

You should try micro-futures. Relatively new and a lot of people have crowded in so there's decent liquidity. It's like regular features except like half the leverage

all time highs again

whoo rah

We're in a weird time when good news in the economy is actually good news for the stock market. GDP and jobs numbers better than expected and it's considered a positive for stocks. Probably because everyone knows that interest rates are unlikely to go much lower, and they are very low, so let's just hope for better than the anemic economic results of the last year.