Ghost of Igloi wrote:
The guy is just a turd.
Oh, the irony!
-
Oh, the irony! -
Irony Mann wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
The guy is just a turd.
Oh, the irony!
^The Turd’s Spokesperson^ -
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Looking 2 invest wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
It keeps going up:
https://www.morningstar.com/funds/xnas/hsgfx/betaquote.html
Are you recommending this?
No.
So why do you continually post about a fund that you do not recommend? Are you not a fan of a fund that “keeps going up”? -
Is it doing better than your portfolio year-to-date?
-
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Is it doing better than your portfolio year-to-date?
Yes, but not for any time period beyond that. -
Well there you go, because that is all I am talking about.
-
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Well there you go, because that is all I am talking about.
Seems to be rather shortsighted to be talking about the YTD gain of a fund you don’t recommend. -
No it is actually longsighted since the fund is up 5.90% on the year right after I said I thought HSGFX would do well.
-
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
No it is actually longsighted since the fund is up 5.90% on the year right after I said I thought HSGFX would do well.
Could you link us to that post please? I can’t seem to find it. -
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
Hussman's Equity funds:
HSGFX - Strategic Growth Fund
HSIEX - Strategic International Fund
HSVLX - Strategic Value Fund
check out their charts. It's consistently down, down, and yet more down.
It's hard to find a single year when they didn't lose money.
If there was a way to short his funds, i'd be all over it.
I think you would be as unwise to short his funds as it is to hold TNA.
Follow the dialog starting around page 1378, interestingly a few days after the S&P peaked. Continues for sometime. -
Got it. Thanks.
-
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Follow the dialog starting around page 1378
Actually, if you've been following his dialog since March 2015, and investing based on that dialog, your portfolio should be showing some huge gains. -
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Stanley Morgan wrote:
seattle prattle wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-these-bullish-analysts-found-new-love-for-tesla-shares-2018-09-10
Igy, do you think it's prudent to infer anything from the misfortunes of Tesla onto bellweather stocks like Apple and Amazon? Seriously?
Desperate people say desperate things.
Actually desperate investors ignore valuations. AMZN trades 10 times above a normal valuation implying a price target of $217. Now in the world of the stock analyst having anything but a bullish view leads to a short career. “What the wise man does in the beginning, the fool does in the end.”
Yes, just like the above on 9/28/2018 when AMZN closed at $2,003. What is it now $1,500? -
Huh?? wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
“As we saw within a few sessions of the 2000 and 2007 peaks, it's a concern when weak participation & divergent internals are joined by high-level leadership reversals. The S&P 500 set a new high yesterday, but only 2.5% of NYSE issues did the same, with just as many new lows.”
John Hussman, 9/21/2018
So the S&P set a new record high with fully 1 in 40 issues also setting new highs. And you think this is bad news?
Yes, it was bad new since the market hit a peak at that time.
Sorry clones. -
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Huh?? wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
“As we saw within a few sessions of the 2000 and 2007 peaks, it's a concern when weak participation & divergent internals are joined by high-level leadership reversals. The S&P 500 set a new high yesterday, but only 2.5% of NYSE issues did the same, with just as many new lows.”
John Hussman, 9/21/2018
So the S&P set a new record high with fully 1 in 40 issues also setting new highs. And you think this is bad news?
Yes, it was bad new since the market hit a peak at that time.
Sorry clones.
0/10 -
Book wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Huh?? wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
“As we saw within a few sessions of the 2000 and 2007 peaks, it's a concern when weak participation & divergent internals are joined by high-level leadership reversals. The S&P 500 set a new high yesterday, but only 2.5% of NYSE issues did the same, with just as many new lows.”
John Hussman, 9/21/2018
So the S&P set a new record high with fully 1 in 40 issues also setting new highs. And you think this is bad news?
Yes, it was bad new since the market hit a peak at that time.
Sorry clones.
0/10
Correction: 10/10 -
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Huh?? wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
“As we saw within a few sessions of the 2000 and 2007 peaks, it's a concern when weak participation & divergent internals are joined by high-level leadership reversals. The S&P 500 set a new high yesterday, but only 2.5% of NYSE issues did the same, with just as many new lows.”
John Hussman, 9/21/2018
So the S&P set a new record high with fully 1 in 40 issues also setting new highs. And you think this is bad news?
Yes, it was bad new since the market hit a peak at that time.
Sorry clones.
A record high is bad new (sic)? Is this a joke? -
Melissa V wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
Huh?? wrote:
Ghost of Igloi wrote:
“As we saw within a few sessions of the 2000 and 2007 peaks, it's a concern when weak participation & divergent internals are joined by high-level leadership reversals. The S&P 500 set a new high yesterday, but only 2.5% of NYSE issues did the same, with just as many new lows.”
John Hussman, 9/21/2018
So the S&P set a new record high with fully 1 in 40 issues also setting new highs. And you think this is bad news?
Yes, it was bad new since the market hit a peak at that time.
Sorry clones.
A record high is bad new (sic)? Is this a joke?
Yes, the advance was narrow: FANGMAN; and what has happened since? -
Melissa V wrote:
[quote]Ghost of Igloi wrote:
A record high is bad new (sic)? Is this a joke?
You really don't get it?
What does a record high mean?
it means it's been all downhill since then. And loss of value is not a good thing.
