Hmmmm.... so NVDA is down 12.3 % in last few days??? You forgot to mention it is up 430,000% (YES, 430 THOUSAND %) in last 25 years while your favorite fund (hussman "strategic" where is the strategy) is down 40% in the same time line.
Since it's inception, NVDA had 5 drawdowns of over 50%!
When James Chanos was once asked why he goes short, his response, so I can go long. Yes, Hussman's fund has done poorly, but here's the thing, it zigs when NVDA or the S&P 500 zags.* You can use Portfolio Visualizer's Efficient Frontier and it will spit out a 55-45 allocation for a HSGFX-NVDA portfolio, rebalanced annually. It's Sharpe ratio is 1.59 vs 1.42 for NVDA, you're better compensated for risk. It will cut max drawdown for NVDA BY 1/2. ( Past performance is no guarantee of future results )
* HSGFX was originally intended to be market neutral when valuations were considered too high. I've pointed out in other posts Hussman went short around 2011. I would use BTAL if I was doing this, it's portfolio and methodology are more transparent. Not a recommendation, do your own DD.
Hmmmm.... so NVDA is down 12.3 % in last few days??? You forgot to mention it is up 430,000% (YES, 430 THOUSAND %) in last 25 years while your favorite fund (hussman "strategic" where is the strategy) is down 40% in the same time line.
Since it's inception, NVDA had 5 drawdowns of over 50%!
When James Chanos was once asked why he goes short, his response, so I can go long. Yes, Hussman's fund has done poorly, but here's the thing, it zigs when NVDA or the S&P 500 zags.* You can use Portfolio Visualizer's Efficient Frontier and it will spit out a 55-45 allocation for a HSGFX-NVDA portfolio, rebalanced annually. It's Sharpe ratio is 1.59 vs 1.42 for NVDA, you're better compensated for risk. It will cut max drawdown for NVDA BY 1/2. ( Past performance is no guarantee of future results )
* HSGFX was originally intended to be market neutral when valuations were considered too high. I've pointed out in other posts Hussman went short around 2011. I would use BTAL if I was doing this, it's portfolio and methodology are more transparent. Not a recommendation, do your own DD.
The drawdowns you talk about are only focusing on the index appreciation/depreciation. But don't figure in dividends - yes?
But the bottom line is that NVDA is up 430,000% since 2000. That really is all that matters.
When James Chanos was once asked why he goes short, his response, so I can go long. Yes, Hussman's fund has done poorly, but here's the thing, it zigs when NVDA or the S&P 500 zags.* You can use Portfolio Visualizer's Efficient Frontier and it will spit out a 55-45 allocation for a HSGFX-NVDA portfolio, rebalanced annually. It's Sharpe ratio is 1.59 vs 1.42 for NVDA, you're better compensated for risk. It will cut max drawdown for NVDA BY 1/2. ( Past performance is no guarantee of future results )
* HSGFX was originally intended to be market neutral when valuations were considered too high. I've pointed out in other posts Hussman went short around 2011. I would use BTAL if I was doing this, it's portfolio and methodology are more transparent. Not a recommendation, do your own DD.
The drawdowns you talk about are only focusing on the index appreciation/depreciation. But don't figure in dividends - yes?
But the bottom line is that NVDA is up 430,000% since 2000. That really is all that matters.
I just verified at least one of these drawdowns and it appears to be correct.
Those are massive.
I contend that the big cumulative appreciation of NVDA is NOT "all that matters." I say that from the perspective of risk to reward calculation in evaluating an investment. Yes, based on past performance, NVDA has potential for high returns, but it is just as eveident that it has high likelihood for big downside potential (based on the large historical drawdowns). In determining if an investment is right for any particular investor, a basic understanding of it's risk to reward profile is helpful.
In short, that thing isn't your grandmother's 'buy-it-and-forgetaboutit' investment.
When James Chanos was once asked why he goes short, his response, so I can go long. Yes, Hussman's fund has done poorly, but here's the thing, it zigs when NVDA or the S&P 500 zags.* You can use Portfolio Visualizer's Efficient Frontier and it will spit out a 55-45 allocation for a HSGFX-NVDA portfolio, rebalanced annually. It's Sharpe ratio is 1.59 vs 1.42 for NVDA, you're better compensated for risk. It will cut max drawdown for NVDA BY 1/2. ( Past performance is no guarantee of future results )
* HSGFX was originally intended to be market neutral when valuations were considered too high. I've pointed out in other posts Hussman went short around 2011. I would use BTAL if I was doing this, it's portfolio and methodology are more transparent. Not a recommendation, do your own DD.
The drawdowns you talk about are only focusing on the index appreciation/depreciation. But don't figure in dividends - yes?
But the bottom line is that NVDA is up 430,000% since 2000. That really is all that matters.
NVDA didn't start paying dividends until the end of 2012. Current dividend yield is 0.02%. I doubt there are any retail investors that held NVDA in 2000 and didn't sell in the past 25 years.
The drawdowns you talk about are only focusing on the index appreciation/depreciation. But don't figure in dividends - yes?
But the bottom line is that NVDA is up 430,000% since 2000. That really is all that matters.
NVDA didn't start paying dividends until the end of 2012. Current dividend yield is 0.02%. I doubt there are any retail investors that held NVDA in 2000 and didn't sell in the past 25 years.
Concerning dividends, I read fairly recently that over the last 100 years 40% of the S & P total return has been from dividends but have a hard time believing that. Also, not very many of the Mag 7 even pay dividends.
NVDA didn't start paying dividends until the end of 2012. Current dividend yield is 0.02%. I doubt there are any retail investors that held NVDA in 2000 and didn't sell in the past 25 years.
Concerning dividends, I read fairly recently that over the last 100 years 40% of the S & P total return has been from dividends but have a hard time believing that. Also, not very many of the Mag 7 even pay dividends.
Growth stocks usually don't pay a dividend at all, or at least one of any size. Their objectives are different, and their big focus is in reinvesting in growing the comapny and in research and development.
It appears that Apple pays a small one, Nvidia virtually none, Amazon none, Microsoft's is samll, etc.
Sold SMST with some lots of +66%…..still plenty left, with theory MSTR either a con game or Michael Saylor crazy…..
^^^ This was from 2/25 of this year.
For the record, anything you held onto for more than the next month (March, 2025) would be under water (losing you money) and by a real lot.
For example, from the day you posted that, the ETF lost 2/3rds of its value. Ouch!
No ouch. Sold all of my holdings up big. Bought back beginning about 9/30. Current holdings all up better than 40%. If SMST heads south I will sell like I did before.
A bet against MSTR is one about the CEO more than Bitcoin. Though I think Bitcoin is a con job.
This post was edited 8 minutes after it was posted.
The appropriate market-based risk premium on a 50 year mortgage with an embedded option to lock-in the lowest yield of its life would be absurdly high. To make it affordable, the state subsidy would have to be enormous. These things would be near permanent profit drags.
Actually, a good summary by AI
The risk premium would be high because a 50-year mortgage with an embedded option to lock in the lowest yield is extremely risky for the lender . The longer the term, the greater the risk of the loan not being repaid, and the option gives the borrower the right to refinance at any time, transferring interest rate risk to the lender. This creates significant uncertainty, which investors would price in with a very high premium.
Longer term: A 50-year term is much longer than a traditional 15 or 30-year mortgage, which increases the risk for the lender. The longer the loan, the more time there is for the borrower's financial situation to change or for the economy to shift in a way that makes the loan less secure. Embedded option: The "option to lock-in the lowest yield" means the borrower can choose to refinance if interest rates fall, which is a significant risk for the lender. The lender is essentially giving the borrower a free option to call the loan at a lower rate, which they lose out on if rates drop. Transfer of risk: The option transfers the risk of interest rate fluctuations from the borrower to the lender. If rates fall, the borrower will refinance, and the lender will have to reinvest their money at a lower rate. If rates rise, the lender is locked into the original, lower rate. Uncertainty: The combination of a long term and a call option creates a very high degree of uncertainty for the lender. To compensate for this uncertainty, they would charge a much higher risk premium than for a standard mortgage.
I've been posting on the 50 yr mortgage thread, but let me elaborate on Hirst's; "The appropriate market-based risk premium on a 50 year mortgage with an embedded option to lock-in the lowest yield of its life would be absurdly high. To make it affordable, the state subsidy would have to be enormous."
On 11/14/2013, there was a 100 bps spread between the 30yr and 15yr mortgages; 4.35% to 3.35%. Payment on the 30yr was $1593 a month vs $2264 the 15yr ( $400,000 home, 20% down, $320,000 mortgage ). If one took out a 50yr mortgage with the same 100bps spread, 5.35%, the payment would be $1533. That's 60$ less than the 30yr mortgage payment.
As you explained it appears to be a horrible idea, along with today’s promise of $2,000 tariff checks.
We have family members selling property in Florida and North Carolina with the intention of moving to Boise. They have marked down their listings first posted to the market last month. I see the same trend on this end on properties they are considering. I wonder how aggressive they will need to drop the listing price, or if they decide against the move.
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.
