Started By
Message

re: Stock vs Bond allocation in portfolio?

Posted on 2/10/20 at 7:47 pm to
Posted by JohnnyKilroy
Cajun Navy Vice Admiral
Member since Oct 2012
35690 posts
Posted on 2/10/20 at 7:47 pm to
quote:

S&P associated risk for retirees stinks.



How so?
Posted by RoyalWe
Prairieville, LA
Member since Mar 2018
3200 posts
Posted on 2/10/20 at 8:01 pm to
quote:

You’re strategy is basically an attempt to time the market
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?
Posted by buckeye_vol
Member since Jul 2014
35252 posts
Posted on 2/10/20 at 9:02 pm to
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'.
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.

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:

But what do I know?
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.
Posted by RoyalWe
Prairieville, LA
Member since Mar 2018
3200 posts
Posted on 2/11/20 at 2:38 pm to
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?
first pageprev pagePage 3 of 3Next pagelast page
refresh

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookTwitterInstagram