How much did you lose today?

[FIREd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecondCor521 I've been thinking for a while (Danger, Will Robinson!) that looking at one's portfolio too often may result in a more conservative allocation than is necessary. 2Cor521

A more conservative allocation than necessary relative to what standard? Relative to what generic models developped by people who know nothing about me recommend? Or should I choose an AA that reflects MY risk tolerance instead?

I find myself very comfortable with a 65% equity / 35% bond asset allocation, which is fairly conservative for somebody my age (33). But I don't see why I should venture into a riskier AA, when all I need to retire in my forties is a 3% real return on my money.

And I have to say, neither one of the two plots you posted here look scary to me. Show me a plot of the S&P from 2000 to 2002 and I might get scared.

[Andre1969]

I estimate I lost about $9800 yesterday. No big deal, really, but it's kind of annoying because if it had gone just $8900 in the other direction, I would've broken the $450K barrier.

[steve88]

to the ones who loses 20k and above, you guys must have sizeable protfolio. are your allocation 100% equity?

[FinanceDude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIREdreamer And I have to say, neither one of the two plots you posted here look scary to me. Show me a plot of the S&P from 2000 to 2002 and I might get scared.

Like this?:


S&P 500 INDEX ($INX) - Stock chart, Index chart - MSN Money

[LOL!]

Quote:

Originally Posted by steve88 to the ones who loses 20k and above, you guys must have sizeable protfolio. are your allocation 100% equity?

There are alot of retired folks here. Assume they have a safe-withdrawal rate of 4%. The stock market moved by about 2% yesterday. A $20K drop is 2% of a million, but assume retired folks are not 100% equities, but around 50:50, so they have a portfolio of $2 million. Also, 4% of $2 million is a reasonable $80,000 annual safe withdrawal.

Bottom line: nope folks don't have sizable portfolios around here. They are just average.
Corollary: Your portfolios needs to have drops of $50,000 on some days before you are allowed to retire.

[FinanceDude]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LOL! There are alot of retired folks here. Assume they have a safe-withdrawal rate of 4%. The stock market moved by about 2% yesterday. A $20K drop is 2% of a million, but assume retired folks are not 100% equities, but around 50:50, so they have a portfolio of $2 million. Also, 4% of $2 million is a reasonable $80,000 annual safe withdrawal. Bottom line: nope folks don't have sizable portfolios around here. They are just average.

Most of the retired ones on here have $500,000 plus,which puts them in the top 5% of all retirees...................

[JonnyM]

Now you went and did it. I was comfortable in my unknowing bliss, and you guys show me how easy it is to just list my funds where they can be seen each and everyday I go to read my email. Drat, why did I read this thread?

[FIREd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FinanceDude Like this?: S&P 500 INDEX ($INX) - Stock chart, Index chart - MSN Money

Yep, that'll do it. scary stuff...

[SecondCor521]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIREdreamer A more conservative allocation than necessary relative to what standard? Relative to what generic models developped by people who know nothing about me recommend? Or should I choose an AA that reflects MY risk tolerance instead?

I love this forum's pointed questions...they make me think. I was posting from my own POV and didn't generalize. In my own case, I wish to be as aggressive with my asset allocation as I reasonably can while still being comfortable with the volatility. Currently I am essentially 100% invested in the S&P, but admit that when checking it every day or nearly every day this year, I have a little too much heartburn for my liking. So I have been considering moving 10% to bonds. If I only checked monthly, maybe I would remain comfortable at 100% stocks because there have been quite a few times when the market has been up and down a few hundred points within a 5 trading day period and ended relatively flat.

I would say pick an AA that reflects your own risk tolerance. My point is that if you do a gut check on your risk tolerance by checking the market, the results you will get will depend on how frequently you check the market, and perhaps checking it less frequently will result in less apparent volatility, which will in turn affect how comfortable you feel.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIREdreamer I find myself very comfortable with a 65% equity / 35% bond asset allocation, which is fairly conservative for somebody my age (33). But I don't see why I should venture into a riskier AA, when all I need to retire in my forties is a 3% real return on my money.

The only reasons I can think of would be if you wanted to run up the score and retire even earlier or retire with a better standard of living or retire with more security or would want to leave more to your kids or charity and are comfortable with the added risk you'd have to take on to do so.

Quote:

Originally Posted by FIREdreamer And I have to say, neither one of the two plots you posted here look scary to me. Show me a plot of the S&P from 2000 to 2002 and I might get scared.

My comments were about the comparative level of scariness between the two plots, not the absolute level.

2Cor521

[jazz4cash]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FinanceDude Most of the retired ones on here have $500,000 plus,which puts them in the top 5% of all retirees...................

FD.........where does that stat come from? I've heard it on a radio commercial for Fisher(sp) Investments and wondered about it's validity. The context was not limited to retirees, tho. I am very interested in this sort of portfolio distribution data and don't know of any sources. That's a lot of money for the average US household, but being on this board makes it sound moderate.

As for the question at hand, I don't usually check when market is down, but I do compare % change for my managed funds vs. their index.

[retire@40]

Just to alleviate some of the pain from yesterday, I checked what I was up today: $5,700. Kinda makes me feel a little better from yesterdays (paper) loss of $18K.

[haha]

I don't really understand why, but my accounts are back to flat with the day before the Fed disappointed.

Going forward, I really don't feel particularly sanguine about things. It seems that the stuff that is cheap is also loaded with risk; while the rest is not exactly cheap. Not necessarily overpriced either, just not glaringly cheap.

However, if the government has its way things should go swimmingly. The new rule seems to be that markets shalt not go down.

I am really impressed by the $100,000+ one day draw-downs mentioned above. For the cheap livers on the board this world be 3 or more years of expenses. In one day! Not only that, I would be wondering if this can happen in one day, and not a particularly bad day historically, what would a truly bad day look like? Or week? Or year?

But of course, truly bad days may have been successfully banished. Seems to be working that way so far anyway.

Ha

[Dawg52]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LOL! Corollary: Your portfolios needs to have drops of $50,000 on some days before you are allowed to retire.

Nah. Many have good pensions and have very little in equities.

[dessert]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dessert I have to learn the art of "not looking at it" every day. I know this is a bad habit but right now I just can't seem to shake that. I admire all of you guys that "ignore" what's going on in the market, just check quarterly, or yearly etc. Gotta learn how to do that........anyway down 19K today but will probably get it back tomorrow!

Got back 6K today but I am still up 11.5% for the year so
"what? me worry?"

I'll just have to go "cold turkey" and just quit looking for a week, and then longer and longer between peeks.

[kumquat]

I dropped about 100K yesterday and got back, maybe, 70K today. It's just noise.