Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 08-31-2015, 12:05 PM   #221
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
NW-Bound's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 19,403
If the guy keeps on selling, after all these years what does he have left to sell?

Anyway, as for myself I think the upside to the market is more limited now at this valuation. Last month, I reduced my stock AA from 70% to 60%. I am looking to reduce it further to 50%. Then, I will tighten up my buy/sell threshold trying to make a bit more out of a flat market, and/or selling covered calls or puts to enhance the return a bitty bit.

That's the current plan anyway, and I will change my mind if something shocking happens.
__________________

__________________
"Old age is the most unexpected of all things that can happen to a man" -- Leon Trotsky
NW-Bound is offline   Reply With Quote
Join the #1 Early Retirement and Financial Independence Forum Today - It's Totally Free!

Are you planning to be financially independent as early as possible so you can live life on your own terms? Discuss successful investing strategies, asset allocation models, tax strategies and other related topics in our online forum community. Our members range from young folks just starting their journey to financial independence, military retirees and even multimillionaires. No matter where you fit in you'll find that Early-Retirement.org is a great community to join. Best of all it's totally FREE!

You are currently viewing our boards as a guest so you have limited access to our community. Please take the time to register and you will gain a lot of great new features including; the ability to participate in discussions, network with our members, see fewer ads, upload photographs, create a retirement blog, send private messages and so much, much more!

Old 08-31-2015, 05:46 PM   #222
gone traveling
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 1,135
The entire year has been a flat market and once again we are in that same trading range after the brief downdraft ...

Could this be the coming "double dip" of the Great Recession that pundits suspected could happen back in 2011 or 2012? We certainly have not hit escape velocity from 2008 in terms of overall economy (despite the market highs earlier this year). It happened in 1932 and 1933 as the fed began to raise rates post market crash of '29. It could happen again

Then again - a U.S. election is coming, China will find her footing, the euro zone is awash in QE money, emerging markets are devaluing currency to be competitive, global inflation is very low, and the dividend yield is higher than the yield on 10 year treasuries!!!!

I was mostly cash in 2007 and 2008. It felt good til around 2011 when, by then, i had stayed in cash and missed the solid bull run of more than a couple years. Doh!
__________________

__________________
papadad111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2015, 05:55 PM   #223
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
audreyh1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rio Grande Valley
Posts: 16,463
Too many years have gone by for a double dip, and markets reached new all-time highs and climbed even higher. The economy has recovered in several key areas even if it is not as robust as 90s or early 2000s. If we enter a recession soon - it will be a new and separate one.
__________________
Well, I thought I was retired. But it seems that now I'm working as a travel agent instead!
audreyh1 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2015, 11:25 PM   #224
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dawg52 View Post
He's predicting a 40-45% decline in stocks over the next 18 months. If you believe him, why not go all cash? I'm not suggesting he's wrong........just asking.
Because while I believe there is a likelihood that there will be a large decline in stocks there can never be certainty in a forecast like that, it is also possible that a large inflation could take hold and stocks would protect value better in that circumstance. In 2007 I was a whole lot more convinced and was at zero through most of 2007 & 2008 but that was not something I plan on doing in the future. I continue to believe in what Benjamin Graham sad that in analyzing markets one should develop a comfort on what they believe value to be and usually be 50/50 and if feeling values are very good go to 75/25 and if very poor go to 25/75.

25 percent for me is as low as I will ever go from now on and here I am at that level.
__________________
Running_Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 08-31-2015, 11:45 PM   #225
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by audreyh1 View Post
Isn't Hussman pretty much a perma bear managing funds that have performed very poorly - that is negative returns - over the last 3, 5 and 10 years?
Yes, those are valid criticism of him but I was not advocating for investing in his funds nor whether his advice over a long time is correct or not. That is irrelevant to me, the question I have is does his idea at present hold merit to me in view of everything else I am seeing. His article was not significantly different than Bogle's view that the market is fully valued. Yes the market can go up another 100% from here, but is the likelihood of gain greater than the risk of decline?

I advocate that individuals should stick with what they believe, but most individuals I have noticed tend to believe buy and hold and the tops and sell to a more comfortable percentage at the bottoms if their million dollar retirement fund has fallen to 600K. That is surely human nature and not the case for many on this site, who are pretty confident in their investments.

The market came back up close to the high giving me a chance to eveluate the odds and I prefer to watch for a while. I am willing to let Larry Swedroe tell me I told you so, but even if I turn out to be right he will still claim, just as Hussman claims today that he is still right.

Unless of course he turns into Bernstein and changes to a 20 year cash guy, the biggest example of an indexer as mentioned above as I have ever seen.
__________________
Running_Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2015, 05:14 AM   #226
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: May 2014
Location: Utrecht
Posts: 2,212
Quote:
Originally Posted by Running_Man View Post
Yes, those are valid criticism of him but I was not advocating for investing in his funds nor whether his advice over a long time is correct or not. That is irrelevant to me, the question I have is does his idea at present hold merit to me in view of everything else I am seeing. His article was not significantly different than Bogle's view that the market is fully valued. Yes the market can go up another 100% from here, but is the likelihood of gain greater than the risk of decline?
I like Hussmans analysis, and look at his writings every so often.

What he did worked well in the past (1998 - 2009), not so good afterwards. The issue he was hit with in my view was the classic "markets can stay irrational longer than you can stay solvent", together with the even more classic "past behavior is no garantuee for the future".

So he adjusted his approach and is now trying to gauge market sentiment. This to see whether he can detect the "trigger" point when an overvalued market starts to self-correct.

For him (financially) it won't matter much, the management fee in itself more than assured him a decent life.
__________________
Totoro is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2015, 07:05 AM   #227
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
Dawg52's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Central MS/Orange Beach, AL
Posts: 7,435
Quote:
Originally Posted by Running_Man View Post
Because while I believe there is a likelihood that there will be a large decline in stocks there can never be certainty in a forecast like that, it is also possible that a large inflation could take hold and stocks would protect value better in that circumstance. In 2007 I was a whole lot more convinced and was at zero through most of 2007 & 2008 but that was not something I plan on doing in the future. I continue to believe in what Benjamin Graham sad that in analyzing markets one should develop a comfort on what they believe value to be and usually be 50/50 and if feeling values are very good go to 75/25 and if very poor go to 25/75.

25 percent for me is as low as I will ever go from now on and here I am at that level.
Got ya. Although BG was very smart and successful, I can't buy into his AA style for my situation. I'm retired, single and have enough to get me to the house w/o taking on a lot of risk volatility. I deleted risk as a lot of people will say you are taking on more risk over the long haul by not being more aggressive. But that's another debate. So for me, the A percentages are much less in each level of value that you show.
__________________
Retired 3/31/2007@52
Full time wuss.......
Dawg52 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2015, 11:58 AM   #228
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
redduck's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: yonder
Posts: 2,053
Quote:
Originally Posted by audreyh1 View Post
... If we enter a recession soon - it will be a new and separate one.
OK, here's hoping for a shiny, brand-new and separate recession. How exciting! I never liked getting those hand-me-down recessions. Made me feel unimportant, insignificant and unloved. (duck, you might be taking this too personally).
__________________
Carpe cōleī
redduck is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2015, 12:07 PM   #229
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Seattle
Posts: 2,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by redduck View Post
OK, here's hoping for a shiny, brand-new and separate recession. How exciting! I never liked getting those hand-me-down recessions. Made me feel unimportant, insignificant and unloved. (duck, you might be taking this too personally).
Sometimes you can patch old recessions and they are really as good as new. When I was a kid, all we had was patched recessions. Had to walk uphill in the market too.
__________________
Fermion is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2015, 12:47 PM   #230
Full time employment: Posting here.
ESRwannabe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Posts: 629
This isn't good.

Canada officially enters recession
__________________
ESRwannabe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2015, 12:51 PM   #231
Moderator Emeritus
aja8888's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: The Woodlands, TX
Posts: 7,155
Quote:
Originally Posted by ESRwannabe View Post
Especially for Canada's oil industry.
__________________
......."Everybody has a plan until they get punched in the face." -- philosopher Mike Tyson.
aja8888 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reduced Stock holdings to 25% today from 50%
Old 09-01-2015, 03:34 PM   #232
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
nash031's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Coronado
Posts: 1,486
Reduced Stock holdings to 25% today from 50%

Quote:
Originally Posted by Running_Man View Post
Because while I believe there is a likelihood that there will be a large decline in stocks there can never be certainty in a forecast like that, it is also possible that a large inflation could take hold and stocks would protect value better in that circumstance. In 2007 I was a whole lot more convinced and was at zero through most of 2007 & 2008 but that was not something I plan on doing in the future. I continue to believe in what Benjamin Graham sad that in analyzing markets one should develop a comfort on what they believe value to be and usually be 50/50 and if feeling values are very good go to 75/25 and if very poor go to 25/75.



25 percent for me is as low as I will ever go from now on and here I am at that level.

It's been a long time since I fully read TII, but I believe his asset allocation recommendations between 25/75 and 75/25 were based on risk/volatility tolerance, not projected market valuation. I specifically recall his list of attributes for someone being 100/0 and don't remember anything about market valuation. I could be wrong, but what you cite above doesn't jibe with the Graham I recall. I Definitely could be misremembering...

I believe Graham would discourage the average investor from attempting to project market valuations. Perhaps he had other advice for the more aspirational investors in his audience.
__________________
"So we beat to our own drummer in the sun;
We ask for nobody's permission to run.
I just wanna live in a world like that;
Now I'm gonna live in a world like that!" - World Like That, O.A.R.
nash031 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2015, 04:12 PM   #233
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by nash031 View Post
It's been a long time since I fully read TII, but I believe his asset allocation recommendations between 25/75 and 75/25 were based on risk/volatility tolerance, not projected market valuation. I specifically recall his list of attributes for someone being 100/0 and don't remember anything about market valuation. I could be wrong, but what you cite above doesn't jibe with the Graham I recall. I Definitely could be misremembering...

I believe Graham would discourage the average investor from attempting to project market valuations. Perhaps he had other advice for the more aspirational investors in his audience.
CHAPTER 4 OF THE INTELLIGENT INVESTOR BY BENJAMIN GRAHAM
4th revised edition
page 41

"We have suggested as a fundamental guiding rule that the investor should never have less than 25% or more than 75% of his funds in common stocks, with a consequent inverse range of 75% to 25% in bonds. There is an implication here that the standard division should be an equal one, or 50-50, between the two major investment mediums. According to tradition, the sound reason for increasing the percentage in common stocks would be the appearance of "bargain price" levels created in a protracted bear market.

....
page 43
The investor's choice between between 50% or lower figure in stocks may well rest with his own temperament and attitude. If he can act as a cold blooded higher of odds, he would be likely to favor the low 25% stock component at this time

(running_man comment: this was written in 1972 and published in early 1973 , before 1973-1974 devastation)

with the idea of waiting until the DJIA dividend yields 2/3 of the bond yield.

(Running_Man Comment: he then describes how this would mean selling with DJIA @900 and waiting for 660 on the DJIA to go back to 50% stocks, actual low in 1974 was 584)


....
A program of this kind is not especially complicated; the hard part is to adopt it and stick to it not to mention the possibility that it may turn out to have been much too conservative."

I think Graham described exactly what I have spent my investing career trying to do and how it is actually a very conservative investment style, not a risky investment style. He does in the book describe how it is probably best for most people to adopt a 50/50 position and just stick to that and rebalance around 45/55 levels.
__________________
Running_Man is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2015, 05:23 PM   #234
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
nash031's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2013
Location: Coronado
Posts: 1,486
Thanks for the quotes. Maybe I'm just blocking that part out, but I distinctly recall him talking about other options for selecting your range between 75 and 25 tied to investment horizon and such. Anyway, thanks again!

Edit: I should add, I read the original text with "updates" written in the 2000s. I might be fusing what Graham actually wrote and what the Graham disciple wrote as his addendum. I don't have my TII in my current locale, but when I'm home in the next couple of days (and if I remember!) I'll look.
__________________
"So we beat to our own drummer in the sun;
We ask for nobody's permission to run.
I just wanna live in a world like that;
Now I'm gonna live in a world like that!" - World Like That, O.A.R.
nash031 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2015, 06:03 PM   #235
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Posts: 1,905
Quote:
Originally Posted by Running_Man View Post
<snip> I think Graham described exactly what I have spent my investing career trying to do and how it is actually a very conservative investment style, not a risky investment style. He does in the book describe how it is probably best for most people to adopt a 50/50 position and just stick to that and rebalance around 45/55 levels.
Since I ER'd back in 2002 I have kept to the 50/50 goal with a 45/55 re balancing band. I thought I had independently arrived at such an approach with the wide re balancing band but now that you mention it as a Graham tenet from long ago I realize that I must have read it somewhere and it stuck and made sense so I incorporated it into some kind of background guiding principle. It sure still makes sense to me.
__________________
ejman is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-01-2015, 07:41 PM   #236
Recycles dryer sheets
 
Join Date: Jun 2014
Posts: 433
The tricky part of any analysis is evaluating how much of it is selective filtering to enforce a pre-existing bias and how much of it is objective evaluation to arrive at a rational conclusion.

Humans tend to be really good at 1 while fooling themselves that they are doing 2. Worse... We don't really have good mechanisms for determining which one we'rd doing

Sent from my HTC One_M8 using Early Retirement Forum mobile app
__________________
petershk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2015, 04:44 AM   #237
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
audreyh1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rio Grande Valley
Posts: 16,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by ejman View Post
Since I ER'd back in 2002 I have kept to the 50/50 goal with a 45/55 re balancing band. I thought I had independently arrived at such an approach with the wide re balancing band but now that you mention it as a Graham tenet from long ago I realize that I must have read it somewhere and it stuck and made sense so I incorporated it into some kind of background guiding principle. It sure still makes sense to me.
I ended up with the same rebalancing bands (slightly higher midpoint - 53% equities) through an empirical method - the 2008 crash had me rebalancing too often while the market was dropping. I decided less often was better.

I used to rebalance when my equity allocation was up or down 2.5%. Now it takes 5%.
__________________
Well, I thought I was retired. But it seems that now I'm working as a travel agent instead!
audreyh1 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2015, 08:15 AM   #238
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
sengsational's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 3,832
Quote:
Originally Posted by audreyh1 View Post
I ended up with the same rebalancing bands (slightly higher midpoint - 53% equities) through an empirical method - the 2008 crash had me rebalancing too often while the market was dropping. I decided less often was better.

I used to rebalance when my equity allocation was up or down 2.5%. Now it takes 5%.
So your equities would need to drift 9.4% off your target before rebalancing (.094 * .53 = .05). That works for asset classes with big (50%-ish) allocations, but since I've got it split into more asset classes, I've got mine set (kind of arbitrarily) at +/-10% of the target. So for an asset class with a target of 50%, it would be the same as what you have (spanning 10% of the total), but for an asset class with a target of 25%, it would be half of that (spanning 5% of the total).
__________________
sengsational is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2015, 10:24 AM   #239
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
audreyh1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Rio Grande Valley
Posts: 16,463
Quote:
Originally Posted by sengsational View Post
So your equities would need to drift 9.4% off your target before rebalancing (.094 * .53 = .05). That works for asset classes with big (50%-ish) allocations, but since I've got it split into more asset classes, I've got mine set (kind of arbitrarily) at +/-10% of the target. So for an asset class with a target of 50%, it would be the same as what you have (spanning 10% of the total), but for an asset class with a target of 25%, it would be half of that (spanning 5% of the total).
I do have it set at +/-10% of target which works out to the above bands for the large equites/fixed income allocation.
__________________
Well, I thought I was retired. But it seems that now I'm working as a travel agent instead!
audreyh1 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 09-02-2015, 01:38 PM   #240
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Posts: 3,862
I'm using a +/-15% trigger. Doesn't always give me enough to do, so I might try 10% sometime.
__________________

__________________
Animorph is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Help Me Out with Gold Holdings retiringby50 FIRE and Money 16 03-11-2008 02:33 PM
Vanguard market neutral fund holdings cute fuzzy bunny FIRE and Money 2 12-07-2007 05:05 PM
Bond holdings - thoughts on switching funds? Lusitan FIRE and Money 6 04-04-2007 12:39 PM
Interesting target retirement holdings... cute fuzzy bunny FIRE and Money 2 05-06-2006 08:23 PM
HSBC Holdings PLC-American Depository Shares Dante FIRE and Money 1 09-13-2005 02:43 PM

 

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:34 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.