Down goes the Dow

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Dr. Racket wrote:

I don't know if I 'd call him a scrub. He runs a bespoke bear fund. There's a lot of bear funds out there run by big players like Invesco which means he has to make a case for his bear fund in light of heavy competition - hence why he shills for it continuously all over Twitter.

Don't buy that. It is more intellectual arguments, which by the way are more grounded in fact than anything coming from Wall Street. Posters here consume it daily. Full Deal Deal, which will be regurgitated with dire consequences for the trader as well as passive investor.

He's a salesman making a case for his bear fund at the end of the day.

You didn't pay asking price for that Cayman did you?

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

wondering wrote:

What happened in the other years?

What will happen over the next ten yeasrs is the more important question? Perhaps you will be "wondering" what happened to your investments once it is too late.

So if it’s the next ten years that are important, why are you quoting Hussman discussing the past?

Dr. Racket wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Don't buy that. It is more intellectual arguments, which by the way are more grounded in fact than anything coming from Wall Street. Posters here consume it daily. Full Deal Deal, which will be regurgitated with dire consequences for the trader as well as passive investor.

He's a salesman making a case for his bear fund at the end of the day.

You didn't pay asking price for that Cayman did you?

If Hussman’s commentaries were grounded in fact, he’d you know....make money. Not lose money when adjusted for inflation since inception.

He’s a salesman who probably believes his own stories. Caveat emptor.

Though not anymore than your own stories. The difference is his stories are grounded in historical market performance. Your truth is unwritten by the Fed.

This is interesting - is the financial world healing? Much less negative-rate debt now.

https://twitter.com/LizAnnSonders/status/1363823775087816705?s=20

hoo boy the curve keeps getting steeper.

This summer is going to be wild.

Steepest since 2017 now, approaching midpoint of (eyeballed) historical average

things happen so fast now. look how quickly that curve steepened.

And the bounceback from the 35% bear market in 2020 was the fastest on record, I believe.

Machines and bored people at home, I suspect.

https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/T10Y2Y

agip wrote:...the bounceback from the 35% bear market in 2020 was the fastest on record, I believe. ...

Yep, it was way faster than anyone expected, I'm pretty sure. Of course the plunge was among the fastest of that magnitude on record also (similar to the worst for SP500 in 1929, 1931, 1932, 1987, 2008)... crazy days in the middle of this damn pandemic!

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

A history lesson:

“Here’s an unpleasant full-cycle calculation. Within the 80-year period from 1929 to 2009, the S&P 500 took three long, interesting trips to nowhere, accounting for 53 of those years (1929-1945, 1959-1982, and 1995-2009), underperforming risk-free Treasury bills after all was said and done.”

—John Hussman

Makes a strong case for buy-and-hold.

Dr. Racket wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Don't buy that. It is more intellectual arguments, which by the way are more grounded in fact than anything coming from Wall Street. Posters here consume it daily. Full Deal Deal, which will be regurgitated with dire consequences for the trader as well as passive investor.

He's a salesman making a case for his bear fund at the end of the day.

You didn't pay asking price for that Cayman did you?

No, on the Cayman. Hussman is no more a salesman for his fund than the collective voice of Wall Street is for stocks always up. The later has much more power, and is responsible for much more damage.

Financial Advisor wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

A history lesson:

“Here’s an unpleasant full-cycle calculation. Within the 80-year period from 1929 to 2009, the S&P 500 took three long, interesting trips to nowhere, accounting for 53 of those years (1929-1945, 1959-1982, and 1995-2009), underperforming risk-free Treasury bills after all was said and done.”

—John Hussman

Makes a strong case for buy-and-hold.

No, makes a strong case that valuations matter.

On the Cayman, bought at the end of the model year; 2016 purchased late December 2016.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

On the Cayman, bought at the end of the model year; 2016 purchased late December 2016.

December 2016 was well into the 2017 model year.

Car and Driver wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

On the Cayman, bought at the end of the model year; 2016 purchased late December 2016.

December 2016 was well into the 2017 model year.

OK, I guess that is why the price was good. The dealer had zero 2017 models, by the way.

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

Financial Advisor wrote:

Makes a strong case for buy-and-hold.

No, makes a strong case that valuations matter.

agreed with Igy here, that if that stat is true (and it's probably not true - I suspect it is skewed for a very significant reason like not counting dividends or only looking at big caps) then it's not at all an argument for buy and hold, for individual investors. Individuals have short time horizons. 20 years for example. If you retire at 65 and lose money in the stock market for 20 years until you die, that's a total disaster for buy and hold.

But that's why we diversify with gold, bonds, foreign stocks, etc. A diversified 60/40 portfolio rarely if ever has extended losing periods.

wacky market today

Vanguard Growth Fund: -1.86%

Vanguard Value Fund: +0.51%

I suppose people are just taking profits and that's not so unusual.

agip wrote:

wacky market today

Vanguard Growth Fund: -1.86%

Vanguard Value Fund: +0.51%

I suppose people are just taking profits and that's not so unusual.

Hussman ahead of NASDAQ YTD by end of the day?

agip wrote:

Ghost of Igloi wrote:

No, makes a strong case that valuations matter.

agreed with Igy here, that if that stat is true (and it's probably not true - I suspect it is skewed for a very significant reason like not counting dividends or only looking at big caps) then it's not at all an argument for buy and hold, for individual investors. Individuals have short time horizons. 20 years for example. If you retire at 65 and lose money in the stock market for 20 years until you die, that's a total disaster for buy and hold.

But that's why we diversify with gold, bonds, foreign stocks, etc. A diversified 60/40 portfolio rarely if ever has extended losing periods.

As agip suspects, Hussman’s data is incorrect. He is not wrong about the first period as that was the Great Depression. But in each of the other two periods, the S&P more than doubled from the beginning of the first year to the end of the last year.

????

Bought the dip on BTC. Now about 40% NW allocation to Crypto.

Guess I'm only 28/29, if I lose it all then i can make up for it.

YOLO.

Clearly you are incorrect just using the the 1995-2009 period. Here is the intermediate period. Remember “in excess of Treasury Bills.”

https://www.hussmanfunds.com/wp-content/uploads/comment/mc190906m.png