Just wanted survey of which assets everyone is investing in their personal portfolio currently and what’ your rationale. I think the markets are a little over priced; I’m investing in senior debt notes that are exchange traded (ex: CCW, I don’t own this, it’s just an example) as I think the markets are due for a pull back. Anyone still buying commodities, gold? oil? etc.
I think being long in commods is not a bad idea; I think buying on the dips is key though.
Zesty Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Anyone still buying commodities, gold? oil? etc. i’m waiting to sell, but there doesn’t seem to be an end to this libya conflict and sa is in the horizon
@mar350, I think if the U.S. attacks Libya and this evolves into a U.S. - Libya war prices will probably sustain their increased levels. But I think SA fears are over-blown; SA has enough money to keep it’s citizens happy.
the us isn’t attacking anyone. this is going to be a month-long (or maybe more) stalemate. the us doesn’t want to touch anything there.
50% cash 35% SLW 8% AG 7% UCO Moved to cash a week ago. I wouldn’t be surprised by a 10% pullback in the near future. I’m waiting for $50 silver (probably will trim some around $40 though), and I’ll keep oil until the middle east calms down.
50% UCO 50% BAL, my 1/n naive diversification is crushing the markets.
Let me know when it’s time to short BAL
Diversified portfolio of mostly index funds - 50% large/20% small-mid/20% international/10% fixed income. I don’t try to time the market…
farmland
I’m in 30% Energy Limited Partnerships, 50% in FI senior debt notes, 40% in high yield REITs.
It’s interesting to find that a good number of people are trying to time the market. As thought in finance theory and CFA isn’t this a losing game in the long run? Has anyone here had consistent long term success, over a period of 5 yrs or more, timing the market? (I personally got burned pretty bad once trying to time the market and I vowed never to do it again)
As noted above, I’m with you, Zesty. I find it fascinating that people claim to know what the market is going to do in the near term.
Zesty Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > It’s interesting to find that a good number of > people are trying to time the market. As thought > in finance theory and CFA isn’t this a losing game > in the long run? Has anyone here had consistent > long term success, over a period of 5 yrs or more, > timing the market? (I personally got burned pretty > bad once trying to time the market and I vowed > never to do it again) I never really got the vibe the CFAI is really that biased towards efficient markets. Doesn’t really make sense for a bunch of people trying to be portfolio managers to believe there are no opportunities for abnormal returns. More to your point, I believe there’s a big difference between market timing and making concentrated bets. You look at the PMs that have a record of beating the market over time and many of them are guys that take big bets on names they have a high degree of conviction in. No guts, no glory.
Sweep the Leg Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Zesty Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > It’s interesting to find that a good number of > > people are trying to time the market. As > thought > > in finance theory and CFA isn’t this a losing > game > > in the long run? Has anyone here had consistent > > long term success, over a period of 5 yrs or > more, > > timing the market? (I personally got burned > pretty > > bad once trying to time the market and I vowed > > never to do it again) > > I never really got the vibe the CFAI is really > that biased towards efficient markets. Doesn’t > really make sense for a bunch of people trying to > be portfolio managers to believe there are no > opportunities for abnormal returns. > > More to your point, I believe there’s a big > difference between market timing and making > concentrated bets. You look at the PMs that have > a record of beating the market over time and many > of them are guys that take big bets on names they > have a high degree of conviction in. No guts, no > glory. Simple math would suggest this: those who take the biggest risk are going to be the tails on both ends. I’m sure if you look at those who lost the most money for investors, they are also going to be the high-risk guys. Plus, don’t forget to factor in survivorship bias. The guys who lose investors’ money get fired and their funds get merged into the “winner” funds.
Correction to my percentages above, it should be 22%, 43%,35%
@sweep the leg, that’s why, in my opinion, insider trading is so pervasive. Look at the Goldman deals where they were essentially placing bets on a “fixed” race. This proves my point, I would think.
Sure, taking big positions is a big risk. But, look at funds like Fairholme, Yacktman, and Delefield; or managers like Paulson, Soros, Buffett, Tepper, et. al. None of them made their investors amazingly wealthy by building low cost, well diversified portfolios. Obviously I’m not saying the strategy is appriopriate for everyone. It’s just more fun.
You’re probably right about the “more fun” part. I don’t anticipate becoming “amazingly wealthy” with my strategy, but I doubt I’ll become “amazingly broke” either.
I think concentrated bets would lower risks if you’ve got a thorough understanding of what affects the securities in the portfolio and if they are massively undervalued. That’s basically my investment philosophy.