- 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
Posted on 2/10/20 at 8:01 pm to buckeye_vol
quote:Doesn't have to be. Value cost averaging on a strict periodic basis. If you allocate the appropriate amount in bonds (more required depending on volatility of security), you can still do quite well and beat 'buy and hold'. But what do I know?
You’re strategy is basically an attempt to time the market
Posted on 2/10/20 at 9:02 pm to RoyalWe
quote:Except he was describing something completely different altogether where he kept it 80/20 until the market crashed and presumably bottomed out, then used the 20% invested in bonds to buy stocks at their lows and essentially reallocate to a 100/0.
Doesn't have to be. Value cost averaging on a strict periodic basis. If you allocate the appropriate amount in bonds (more required depending on volatility of security), you can still do quite well and beat 'buy and hold'.
His approach is based on adjusting allocation at a specific and ideal point in time after an infrequent event (crash) that is unpredictable in its timing (housing crash occurred about 1 year after Dotcom crash recovered completely; almost 7.5 years since housing crash
recovery) as well as its severity, duration, time to recover, and the combination all three (Black Monday’s was more sudden with the sharpest decline but recovered quickly; Housing crash had the largest drawdown; and Dotcom lasted the longest and took the longest to recover). The only part that isn’t just hoping for some lucky timing is the predetermined allocation change the only works well if there is lucky timing.
What you’re describing (value cost averaging) is nothing like that since the “timing” portion is relates to the natural variation on a frequent basis with a predetermined target allocation and return strategy that keeps those targets based on what has happened not what one hopes will happen. I think dynamic rebalancing makes more sense (e.g., maximizing time in the market by putting as much in when you can as you can, but putting more towards underweighted assets to keep the target allocation instead of manually rebalancing at some specified time) Regardless, whether dollar cost averaging, value cost averaging, or dynamic rebalancing, these are more about taking advantage of the conditions at the time of the investment than about timing the investment so it occurs under the ideal conditions.
quote:I’m guessing you know a lot above investing in general, but I don’t think you know a lot about the strategy the OP was considering specifically.
But what do I know?
Posted on 2/11/20 at 2:38 pm to buckeye_vol
Just offering a different approach to consider. I can offer an alternative and still be knowledgeable about the OP’s proposal. I’m just not going to be an arse to him about it, but I guess some people are insecure and need to denigrate others. I feel sorry for those people — don’t you?
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News