- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Anyone else currently sitting on the sideline in the stock market?
Posted on 8/31/16 at 9:26 am to dabigfella
Posted on 8/31/16 at 9:26 am to dabigfella
quote:
that ship has sailed
BS. now, whilst I'm not expecting a win thanks to libtard economic morons here who love their tax and regulate and spend, open borders gubments......if we go down it won't be without a fight like mccain or mittens.
almost forgot the handouts. we must not forget the HANDOUTS! add that to the list above also. I'll be popping champagne should we win. What will you do? jerkoff in your rolls royce?
This post was edited on 8/31/16 at 9:30 am
1
Posted on 8/31/16 at 9:42 am to Fat Bastard
Well personally I could care less who wins I don't know why people get so worked up over president it's not like my income is affected either way, like I said before I'm a republican and in 2008 people swore Obama was the end of the world and we just had the best years ever in the market so I can't complain. I won't lose sleep either way but as a houstonian I'd love to see our illegal immigrant problem reigned in bc it's ridiculous how taxpayers are paying for their schooling,healthcare,etc and to me that's the only reason I want trump. Taxes, whatever else I'm indifferent bc republican or democrat all our money will be wasted lol nobody is stopping that, but the influx of illegals and anchor babies I'd love to reign in bc I see it firsthand here in Houston and it's only going to get worse when you have illegal,uneducated people coming and multiplying like rabbits. The end game is not good.
Posted on 8/31/16 at 10:49 am to Northwestern tiger
I've been on the sidelines for 50 years. I'm hoping the market has a major correction in the next several months. In March I jump in for the long haul. $1,500/month, increasing 300-500/month each year (then another $1,500/month when my house is paid off). I'd love to start this process at a low point. And I hope dollar cost averaging will be my best friend.
ETA: Who wants to be my financial advisor?
ETA: Who wants to be my financial advisor?
This post was edited on 8/31/16 at 10:51 am
Posted on 8/31/16 at 11:02 am to Northwestern tiger
quote:This board has predicted 12 out of the last 3 corrections.....
have a feeling a correction is soon coming
This post was edited on 8/31/16 at 11:03 am
Posted on 8/31/16 at 11:13 am to LSURussian
quote:
This board has predicted 12 out of the last 3 corrections.....
Posted on 8/31/16 at 1:05 pm to Fat Bastard
I will never be less than 70% in equities. I own real estate too so that helps, but I just don't understand it.
There are guys like the OP through out the last 100 years. Why do you pull in and out? Guys like you OP are the ones that lose BIG, I mean really BIG. You wait for a small retraction and then invest everything then boom a big retraction and you pull out.
Allocate in a manner that makes you feel comfortable for the next 10 years and go do something fun in life. No one can predict the market.
There are guys like the OP through out the last 100 years. Why do you pull in and out? Guys like you OP are the ones that lose BIG, I mean really BIG. You wait for a small retraction and then invest everything then boom a big retraction and you pull out.
Allocate in a manner that makes you feel comfortable for the next 10 years and go do something fun in life. No one can predict the market.
Posted on 8/31/16 at 1:26 pm to baldona
quote:
No one can predict the market.
Semantics, but Paul Tudor Jones can't hear you from atop his $100 million or so profit off of Black Monday.
In before you can't beat the market, dude was just lucky, and technicals don't work.
Posted on 8/31/16 at 1:34 pm to Fat Bastard
quote:
nope because we have no clue when a correction will hit thus you are currently missing out on gains and profits.
Posted on 8/31/16 at 1:53 pm to Joshjrn
No kidding.
I recently moved some money into cash but that had more to do with an upcoming home purchase than the stock market. Once I'm through closing and feel like nothing stupid will happen I'll move it back in.
I'm pretty much guns blazing until I'm 50 or 60. Modern medicine might change the timelines a bit.
I recently moved some money into cash but that had more to do with an upcoming home purchase than the stock market. Once I'm through closing and feel like nothing stupid will happen I'll move it back in.
I'm pretty much guns blazing until I'm 50 or 60. Modern medicine might change the timelines a bit.
Posted on 8/31/16 at 3:39 pm to Northwestern tiger
I'm about 40% cash. I'm mostly concerned about fake corporate earnings, and waiting for the election to get over with.
I've been toying with the idea of buying more bonds, but at this point, have no idea when is a good time to do this. Tax free private college offering mostly. I have some at 6%, so I'm not dissatisfied with this as a conservative place to dump cash for the short term.
I've been toying with the idea of buying more bonds, but at this point, have no idea when is a good time to do this. Tax free private college offering mostly. I have some at 6%, so I'm not dissatisfied with this as a conservative place to dump cash for the short term.
Posted on 8/31/16 at 3:42 pm to Northwestern tiger
quote:
Over 70% of my portfolio is now in cash.
sounds dumb af, no offense
Posted on 8/31/16 at 7:00 pm to Northwestern tiger
I'm net short the market right now, following the lead of a lot of big name investors. Volatility is so low lately that it's starting to look as though this market will never drop, but on the other hand, there's only so many quarters you can go with lower corporate earnings dropping below previous projections before prices have to follow.
I've made a few threads about it on here, two of the most notable being LINK & LINK. Since the thread at the end of October 2015, being out of the market has cost a little over 5%. That's not a lot though. There's been a sort of tug-of-war between bulls & bears for over a year now, and neither side can seem to break free.
I've made a few threads about it on here, two of the most notable being LINK & LINK. Since the thread at the end of October 2015, being out of the market has cost a little over 5%. That's not a lot though. There's been a sort of tug-of-war between bulls & bears for over a year now, and neither side can seem to break free.
Posted on 8/31/16 at 7:04 pm to Doc Fenton
doc, since nobody else answered me, and you seem to be a bear, can you please reply to what I posted earlier for short because Im trying to understand the train of thought on their thesis as to why it is they feel stocks are overvalued
quote:
The ONLY thing that actually measures the historical over/under value of the market is its 'yield' in relationship to the yield of bonds. The long bond in particular. The real yield of an equity is more or less the inverse of its p/e -- because all the profits of a company, regardless of whether they are returned as dividends, used to buy back shares, reinvested in growth or kept in the bank are the property of the companies stockholders. So a company with a p/e of 20 has a yield of 5%. Historically this yield usually follows the yield of the long-bond -- makes sense, right? By historical measures, with the 30 year at 2.xx, the market should yield something between 3.2 and 3.5% -- that is we ask a higher yield from the market than the treasury because the market is obviously filled with more risk.. Given the yield on the 30 year, the average p/e of the market should be over 30 imo and we're still at 18x on the SPY I think i.e. I think the MARKET BY ANY REASONABLE MEASURE IS UNDERVALUED ALMOST BY HALF with where rates are.
Posted on 8/31/16 at 7:14 pm to dabigfella
quote:
The ONLY thing that actually measures the historical over/under value of the market is its 'yield' in relationship to the yield of bonds.
That is a terribly mistaken statement.
I'm all for including as many metrics as you can, but of all the historical metrics I've seen people use (Shiller CAPE-10, PE-1, Forward PE-1, Market Cap to GDP, Tobin’s Q, Dividend Yield, Fed Model, price/book, price/sales, etc.), I think dividend yield might be the absolute worst of the bunch.
It's just not a good way to evaluate the long-term value of a future stream of earnings from equities. Interest rates will rise and fall, but the discounted value of earnings from stocks will either materialize, or they won't. You can say that lower interest rates increase the risk appetite for stock investors, so that the volatility discount will be reduced, but that's only part of the story. The much bigger core story is whether those corporate earnings will ever actually return back to their previously assumed upward trajectory. That's what bears like me doubt.
Posted on 8/31/16 at 7:18 pm to Doc Fenton
well my thing is more along the lines of in the old days with much higher rates stocks traded at P/E ratios that gave them an earnings yield close to the rate bonds and treasuries were giving. Today treasuries and bonds yield nothing thus the SPY which is still at over a 5% earnings yield and a 2% dividend is still incredibly cheap when you say that spits off a 7%+ yield vs bonds/treasuries way less.
So Im just trying to understand how stocks are overvalued in that sense, yes by traditional metrics its overvalued but we've never had rates this low so we cant just bring old metrics into a whole new ballgame. This new ballgame seems to be 20-30x earnings as the new normal and even if rates rise, it wont be anything meaningful 1/4 pt here and there but our hands are tied with where housing is and where the national debt is we cant just raise rates unless you wanna kill off the wealth effect thats driving our economy today. People are feeling richer than ever with real estate values soaring and a blip in that bc of higher rates will really send us into a recession/depression whatever
Whats the avg home today? $300k? So if we assume 6% interest rates ever again we're talking the avg home has $18,000/yr or $1500/mo in debt? Cmon thats not sustainable in anyway. So unless you want everyone to be upside down in their homes and cause an enormous crash, I see no way rates ever normalize. How many million dollar homes exist today? No way those can be financed at 6-8% rates you're talking a $20-40k annual difference vs today. Low rates are here forever I dont care what yellen or the fed says
So Im just trying to understand how stocks are overvalued in that sense, yes by traditional metrics its overvalued but we've never had rates this low so we cant just bring old metrics into a whole new ballgame. This new ballgame seems to be 20-30x earnings as the new normal and even if rates rise, it wont be anything meaningful 1/4 pt here and there but our hands are tied with where housing is and where the national debt is we cant just raise rates unless you wanna kill off the wealth effect thats driving our economy today. People are feeling richer than ever with real estate values soaring and a blip in that bc of higher rates will really send us into a recession/depression whatever
Whats the avg home today? $300k? So if we assume 6% interest rates ever again we're talking the avg home has $18,000/yr or $1500/mo in debt? Cmon thats not sustainable in anyway. So unless you want everyone to be upside down in their homes and cause an enormous crash, I see no way rates ever normalize. How many million dollar homes exist today? No way those can be financed at 6-8% rates you're talking a $20-40k annual difference vs today. Low rates are here forever I dont care what yellen or the fed says
This post was edited on 8/31/16 at 7:22 pm
Posted on 8/31/16 at 7:24 pm to dabigfella
quote:
Today treasuries and bonds yield nothing thus the SPY which is still at over a 5% earnings yield and a 2% dividend is still incredibly cheap
You're not getting the point. It's an apples-and-oranges comparison. You can't do a valuation of equities based on the opportunity cost of bonds at their current prices. It's a good way to model/predict/understand why prices have risen, but it's not a useful long-term valuation metric. They're two different things.
quote:
we cant just bring old metrics into a whole new ballgame
This time it's different!
Posted on 8/31/16 at 7:26 pm to Doc Fenton
You laugh but it is a whole different ballgame the fed controls it all and not just the fed central banks all over the world
Posted on 8/31/16 at 7:32 pm to dabigfella
We're all playing a strange game for sure.
Posted on 8/31/16 at 10:32 pm to dabigfella
quote:
doc, since nobody else answered me, and you seem to be a bear, can you please reply to what I posted earlier for short because Im trying to understand the train of thought on their thesis as to why it is they feel stocks are overvalued
Perhaps not quite the same discussion, but this was a couple of posts above yours:
quote:
That reminds me of my fundamental issue with this market. Ask anyone, and they'll tell you that equities are the only real game in town with interest rates so low, so you should be in equities. And while that is undoubtedly true for the present, investing is about the future. And the future calls for interest rate increases that will negatively impact equities. As interest rates normalize, I'm expecting that the stock market will either produce disappointing results or will correct itself.
Whether the market is currently overvalued or not is irrelevant to me if, fundamentally and technically, there is a decent probability that market prices will stay the same or decline in the next 6 months or so. And if the market takes off in another bull run, that's fine. I have strategies to make up for and exceed the missed market return if I know the trend. The most basic strategy merely involves 2x leveraged index ETF/N's since that leverage has, according to backtesting, outperformed the general market in spite of higher fees, leverage decay, etc., over the long run.
Posted on 9/1/16 at 8:26 am to Omada
quote:
2x leveraged index ETF/N's
Care to share the ones you like?
Page 2 of 7
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News