For reference, the most generic portfolio possible - the Vanguard global 60/40 portfolio VSMGX, is up 14% this year to date.
We can argue about how to think about risk adjusted returns if you have 70%+ in stocks, but that Vanguard fund is a good measure of the generic return of the stock and bond markets this year. Pretty good year!
And I'm curious to know exactly what those holdings are. Broad-market etf's, I would guess. Flagpole, what are your vehicles of choice?
He doesn't do ETFs.
Why do people like restaurant food so much?
Because there are many things that are in it that they would be reluctant to use on their own, mostly because it's rich. They don't know (and don't want to know) what's in there.
He said he's in mutual funds predominantly and it is highly likely that the funds, being growth funds presumably, are heavy in tech. One can dig into the fund's holdings after the fact by perusing their quarterly reports, but few investors do.
My bet is that his mutual funds are tech heavy, unbeknownst to him. FWIW, even the capitalization-weighted S&P 500 index is tech heavy. Chew on that.
I would be more prone to acquiesce and agree with you except for the time of year - Santa Claus rally into the first week or so of the New Year. Hard to see how retail wouldn't make a big move here since we are coming off such a big run-up (read: FOMO) and the flood of money that comes into the market at the first of the new year to fund the Roths.
I am retired and bought several bonds with terms of 5 years or even ten years for a couple that were paying 6%. I took the chance in tying up the money for this long period. Had inflation gone up, I would be stuck with them. Since int rates are going down, these are valuable holdings.
Surprise, I had one "called" last week and 3 more this week.
Inflation continues and I lose and they win.
Int rates go down and -- they take back their ball and go home
This post was edited 41 seconds after it was posted.
I am retired and bought several bonds with terms of 5 years or even ten years for a couple that were paying 6%. I took the chance in tying up the money for this long period. Had inflation gone up, I would be stuck with them. Since int rates are going down, these are valuable holdings.
Surprise, I had one "called" last week and 3 more this week.
Inflation continues and I lose and they win.
Int rates go down and -- they take back their ball and go home
Heads the bond issuer wins, tails the bond buyer loses
Flagpole has been right. Look at the S&P returns over 10, 20, and 30 year horizons, and the chances are about 75% that it has risen in any particular year.
My guess is that with trade situations, market control, currency wars, political trends, and so on, that trend should continue for, say, 10 years. Things might be shifting, but only slowly. Think about how those factors were 10 years ago, say from London 2012 onwards: pretty much the same, although there was the Arab spring, Syria, Ukraine, Gaza, QE, QT, interest rate hikes, BRICS, US national debt, Japan national debt, Brexit, etc etc etc etc.
Nothing has really changed. Will it in the next 10 years? I can't see it.
CORRECT! Also, while countries can't have an immediate and huge effect on markets, most first-world countries, including The United States, put their thumb on the scale in favor of wealthy investors. Until that changes, investing as much as you can stomach is a good idea.
1) I find it odd and yet funny (funnier as this continues) why so many of you WANT me to be tech heavy. In this year when the NASDAQ has gone UP 42+%, it would be nice if I WERE so tech heavy (and yes I realize there is tech in other indicies). You realize my gain this year so far is about half that, right?
2) The "liquid hoard" is very easy to have in my situation. It is 3 YEARS currently of expenses, and since I have ZERO debt, that is super easy to have. I didn't even really try. We had a set amount we were investing, and the rest was just there to use as we needed/wanted, and it has just built up to where it is now...actually it's over 3 YEARS of expenses now, and it will continue to grow unless we decide to take a trip around the world or something like that before The Lovely Mrs. Flagpole decides to also retire. It has been a little more than 10 years now when I decided that I would rather have years of liquid expenses save than conservative holdings (bonds for example), and I do like that idea generally, but my portfolio has gained so much value since then that I no longer even need that liquid hoard. I could take a 2% withdrawal rate and have more money than we ever made in a year.
OK, what is your YTD performance of just your equity holdings?
Well, what I posted the other day was it...it's all stocks. I only count what I have invested, and I only invest in stocks. Today (actually as of yesterday's date) it is even a little higher at UP 21.79%.
So Flagpole how old are you? Are you pivoting away from equities, or do you plan to do so?
I am 57. I am retired, but my wife is a college professor and still works. She is my age and wants to teach for 4 more school years.
I do not plan to pivot away from equities and don't believe I would ever do that. I understand why many people do that, and I'm not necessarily against that, but I have no need to do so...I currently have 3 YEARS of expenses saved liquid, and that will only increase until my wife retires, and besides that, I have a lot more invested in stocks that I could have imagined...more than enough to protect me against bad stock market periods.
Hoo boy. This poster said that wall street had never been as bearish as it was on 6/30/23, in this century anyway. And the poster noted that such bearishness is a good counter-indicator.
And it was. Market up 7% so far in the 2H.
Ryan Detrick, CMT @RyanDetrick Strategists have never been more bearish on the final six months of the year than they are now. Other years they expected a negative final six months and what happened? '99- +7.0% '19- +9.8% '20- +21.2% '21- +10.9%
11:20 PM · Jul 10, 2023 · 117.7K Views
Strategists have never been more bearish on the final six months of the year than they are now.
Other years they expected a negative final six months and what happened?
This poster says a fed member put the chance of a soft landing at 10%. Well that's not zero! But it looks like we'll get one.
No one knows anything about macro forecasting.
And no, Rosenberg, the market did not go lower - or much lower anyway - when he posted the SP500 was very low: 3636. Just about the low.
David Rosenberg @EconguyRosie The NY Fed’s blog took the words out of my mouth: “the probability of a soft landing… is only about 10 percent.” John Williams willingly tightened into a recession! As pundits call a bottom, just know it’s way out there. The Fed wants this market to go lower & go lower it shall. 12:53 PM · Jun 17, 2022
This post was edited 3 minutes after it was posted.
Not a terrible forecast. The low was 3764, the high was 4768. So far anyway. I mean it was very wrong, but in the end it was a bullish prediction that paid off. Partial credit.
Jonathan Ferro @FerroTV "We established a 2023-end S&P500 target of 4200... We believe the S&P500 will trade as low as 3410 in 2023 as rates eventually "back up" and spreads widen. In a "soft landing" scenario (not our base case), we believe the S&P500 can trade as high as 4420" Wells Fargo 5:20 AM · Dec 8, 2022
most first-world countries, including The United States, put their thumb on the scale in favor of wealthy investors.
CORRECT! lololololol
I don’t think that Flagpole is as stupid as some posters make him out to be. Have read that QE-induced asset inflation is a direct transfer of wealth from the lower to the upper classes. If you can ride out dips and not panic, golden!
Have also read that there will be a dip next year, probably early. I think I will load up on some Vanguard MF’s, something I have never done before.
Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win a LetsRun t-shirt.Help us build the best running shoe review site for a chance to win one of 10 LetsRun t-shirts.
