Join Early Retirement Today
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 03-01-2018, 05:29 PM   #721
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Boho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,844
I didn't mean that I'm a value investor. Just that it's a known strategy and it takes a long time to pay off so needing over a year doesn't indicate failure. I try to buy low, "on dips," which I define as...well, I don't define it because it's hard and it's a bit of a secret that you people don't care about anyway, but value ratings are sometimes one consideration.
Boho 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 03-01-2018, 08:19 PM   #722
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 26,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boho View Post
I didn't mean that I'm a value investor. Just that it's a known strategy and it takes a long time to pay off so needing over a year doesn't indicate failure. I try to buy low, "on dips," which I define as...well, I don't define it because it's hard and it's a bit of a secret that you people don't care about anyway, but value ratings are sometimes one consideration.
I think you are confused about the whole "takes a long time to pay off" issue (excuse?).

Any sector/style approach is very likely to sometimes do better than the Total Market, and sometimes worse. It's cyclic. But how can it "take a long time to pay off"? I suppose if you start out buying down and outers, with the idea that they will take time and then recover faster than the overall market over that time,.... maybe.

But why aren't those funds I posted doing OK? They've had time, and it seems they could have "wound back the clock" when they started, and bought the stocks that went down 6 month to a year previously. If that move typically happens at the start, it wouldn't hurt them not to own them in that time, they have newer ones that will pay off more/sooner. If the move is weighted towards the back, they'd be even better off buying 'late'. They've had time.

But you aren't holding stocks for long, right? You try to identify a drop, and turn for a quick run up after the drop, right?

That's fine, and it absolutely can work - after a fashion. The problem is that a bunch of small gains are wiped out by the occasional dog. This is exactly what you have experienced, from what I've gathered. From sengsational's table...biggest gain was ANW $25K 4%, biggest loss was RAD $-163K -26%. One loser wipes out almost 7 of your best winners.

I think you are very mistaken in thinking that you can identify enough of the down-and-outers that will recover, versus the plain old down and outers. Or the ones that recover after you give up on them.

It might be possible on occasion, with boots on the ground, observing details of a company that the average investor/analyst doesn't see. Real industrial espionage type work, camping out at suppliers, distribution centers and such, surveying customers and potential customers, getting a picture that others don't have. That's a lot of work, and you can still be wrong. Stuff happens. And it only helps if your research shows something out of line with expectations. That might be pretty rare.

If your method worked, it should be working. It's not.

-ERD50
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2018, 08:31 PM   #723
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
SecondCor521's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Boise
Posts: 7,865
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
If your method worked, it should be working. It's not.

-ERD50
Oh c'mon. After almost a year, a couple hundred trades, several dozen posts, and a handful of explanations and rationalizations, he's down less than $20K compared to doing literally nothing!

Let's see how this plays out.

(Here's a few extra if you run out, just cut and paste as needed: )
__________________
"At times the world can seem an unfriendly and sinister place, but believe us when we say there is much more good in it than bad. All you have to do is look hard enough, and what might seem to be a series of unfortunate events, may in fact be the first steps of a journey." Violet Baudelaire.
SecondCor521 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-01-2018, 08:56 PM   #724
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Boho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
But you aren't holding stocks for long, right? You try to identify a drop, and turn for a quick run up after the drop, right?

That's fine, and it absolutely can work - after a fashion. The problem is that a bunch of small gains are wiped out by the occasional dog. This is exactly what you have experienced, from what I've gathered. From sengsational's table...biggest gain was ANW $25K 4%, biggest loss was RAD $-163K -26%. One loser wipes out almost 7 of your best winners.
There's nothing about my current strategy that would tend to make my few losses larger than my 89% gains. That's what happened but it's less likely to happen now. There was a time when I had more serious liquidation issues from doubling down but I don't do that any more. At least not as often.

I'm Currently holding a big loser that I bought because I wasn't being careful. IRL, I'd be somewhat more careful. I don't want to make excuses so I won't say I'm certain I wouldn't have bought it IRL but I immediately had second thoughts and did more research (I think I tried Yahoo news instead of just Google and Fidelity) and I quickly found what I was afraid if. The cause of the drop was more serious than I had previously read. The order wasn't yet filled, I thought I could cancel, but I couldn't.

The above is different from something like a betting on red scenario.
Boho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2018, 01:30 PM   #725
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Boho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,844
I just tried to sell SYPR and it failed. Then I clicked "Show max" and saw "A maximum of 0 shares can be bought due to the game's minimum share price setting."
Boho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2018, 02:13 PM   #726
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
exnavynuke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Acworth
Posts: 1,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boho View Post
There's nothing about my current strategy that would tend to make my few losses larger than my 89% gains. That's what happened but it's less likely to happen now. There was a time when I had more serious liquidation issues from doubling down but I don't do that any more. At least not as often.

I'm Currently holding a big loser that I bought because I wasn't being careful. IRL, I'd be somewhat more careful. I don't want to make excuses so I won't say I'm certain I wouldn't have bought it IRL but I immediately had second thoughts and did more research (I think I tried Yahoo news instead of just Google and Fidelity) and I quickly found what I was afraid if. The cause of the drop was more serious than I had previously read. The order wasn't yet filled, I thought I could cancel, but I couldn't.

The above is different from something like a betting on red scenario.
As I mentioned before, you're largest problem is having no defined risk:reward strategy that anyone can possibly discern. If you're willing to wait until you have a 25% loss, you should be EXPECTING a gain at least double that much over in order to be operating under any "risk:reward" ratio I've ever heard of a successful trader using. Your "risk" tolerance, however, has been summed up as "whatever" and your "expected" gain seems to be "some", meaning you'll sell for a % gain a lot less than you'll sell a % loss on the same trade. Being willing to lose more than you think you'll gain if things go your way means that over time you will almost always lose out when your losers eat all your gains and then some (as has happened to you for the past year).

Until you change your trading style to control risk, you'll be net negative in the long run, even if you get lucky and go positive over any given time-frame. That's just how statistics work. In a more traditional market (with lower percentage "winners") you'd likely be doing much worse honestly.
exnavynuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2018, 03:50 PM   #727
Moderator
braumeister's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Flyover country
Posts: 25,198
Quote:
Originally Posted by exnavynuke View Post
That's just how statistics work. In a more traditional market (with lower percentage "winners") you'd likely be doing much worse honestly.
All very true. But the sad fact is that most people simply don't understand statistics. One of the big reasons why reporters create misleading headlines from scientific studies.

In my freshman year of college, I was very lucky to take a course called "Finite Math" that was mostly probability and basic statistics. The introduction to probability really opened my eyes and I have benefited enormously from it ever since.

Simple example that always stuck with me:
How many people do you need in a room for there to be a better than even chance that two of them have the same birthday?
The answer is 23. With 50 people, the odds are better than 90%.
Not at all obvious without a basic understanding of the math.
braumeister is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2018, 04:35 PM   #728
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Boho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by exnavynuke View Post
As I mentioned before, you're largest problem is having no defined risk:reward strategy that anyone can possibly discern. If you're willing to wait until you have a 25% loss, you should be EXPECTING a gain at least double that much over in order to be operating under any "risk:reward" ratio I've ever heard of a successful trader using.
That's not statistics. That's just saying that the successful traders you've heard of all expect at least 2x more monetary gains than losses. You don't need that ratio to be ahead.

Quote:
Your "risk" tolerance, however, has been summed up as "whatever"
Wrong

Quote:
and your "expected" gain seems to be "some"
Wrong

Quote:
meaning you'll sell for a % gain a lot less than you'll sell a % loss on the same trade...
You probably mean I don't sell for as high a percentage of the buy price as the percentage lost when I sell. That's probably true. I try to make up for it in numbers - 89% winning trades. You need to know particulars about how much I lose when I lose and how much I gain when I win before you can show that what I'm doing doesn't work statistically. You're better off just saying "it's not working."
Boho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2018, 06:42 PM   #729
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 26,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boho View Post
.... You're better off just saying "it's not working."
OK. "It's not working". But we already knew that.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Boho View Post
There's nothing about my current strategy that would tend to make my few losses ....

The above is different from something like a betting on red scenario.
Yes, very different. As exnavynuke is pointing out, there is a defined risk/reward in betting red. I really don't think you have any defined risk/reward, it appears to be just jumping from one shiny object to another, based on your "research", which seems to be mostly gleaned from widely available info from Yahoo news or Google or Fidelity.

-ERD50
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2018, 07:08 PM   #730
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Boho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,844
I'll tell you something about Dollar Tree...I just ordered my third thing from them and it's the third time they told me it's ready for pickup and it wasn't there. Last time it never showed up. Their online ordering isn't working out and whoever had expectations about it being good is wrong. I don't know how to short stock off hand but I might short it.
Boho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-05-2018, 07:22 PM   #731
Dryer sheet aficionado
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Posts: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boho View Post
I'll tell you something about Dollar Tree...I just ordered my third thing from them and it's the third time they told me it's ready for pickup and it wasn't there. Last time it never showed up. Their online ordering isn't working out and whoever had expectations about it being good is wrong. I don't know how to short stock off hand but I might short it.
It's a dollar store....
imp4 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2018, 09:52 AM   #732
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Boho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,844
Want to sell ANFI and I can't even sell 6000 shares when the volume is 106,501. Show Max says 0 just like SYPR, which I also want to sell.
Boho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2018, 10:20 AM   #733
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
exnavynuke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Acworth
Posts: 1,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boho View Post
That's not statistics. That's just saying that the successful traders you've heard of all expect at least 2x more monetary gains than losses. You don't need that ratio to be ahead.



Wrong



Wrong



You probably mean I don't sell for as high a percentage of the buy price as the percentage lost when I sell. That's probably true. I try to make up for it in numbers - 89% winning trades. You need to know particulars about how much I lose when I lose and how much I gain when I win before you can show that what I'm doing doesn't work statistically. You're better off just saying "it's not working."
Rephrase everything I said with "based on what you've said and done since you've been on this forum, everything appears to:" and it's all correct (even if you don't "get it").

Math doesn't lie, and being willing to "lose it all" (apparently) while only taking small gains is a statistical recipe for losing (like you've been doing). You don't have to like it, but that's how math works. Being right for 1-5% 89 times and being wrong for 30,50,75,100% 11 times results in a huge loss. That's simple math. I could draw a picture for you, but I'm not that invested in showing you how that works. That you don't get that, and thus haven't bothered learning to implement risk controls in your trading is one of the many reasons why your picking is going to lose pretty much every time. Your "strategy" is massively flawed because of your incorrect belief that being right most of the time will make up for being massively wrong other times. That's just not how math works, sorry.
exnavynuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2018, 10:44 AM   #734
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Boho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by exnavynuke View Post
Rephrase everything I said with "based on what you've said and done since you've been on this forum, everything appears to:" and it's all correct (even if you don't "get it").

Math doesn't lie, and being willing to "lose it all" (apparently) while only taking small gains is a statistical recipe for losing (like you've been doing). You don't have to like it, but that's how math works. Being right for 1-5% 89 times and being wrong for 30,50,75,100% 11 times results in a huge loss. That's simple math. I could draw a picture for you, but I'm not that invested in showing you how that works. That you don't get that, and thus haven't bothered learning to implement risk controls in your trading is one of the many reasons why your picking is going to lose pretty much every time. Your "strategy" is massively flawed because of your incorrect belief that being right most of the time will make up for being massively wrong other times. That's just not how math works, sorry.
I day trade and I've been selling for between 1/4% and 1/2% gain, usually within a day or two. I don't know what my average loss was. We just know that I'm not one of the leaders any more (I was for months but people seem to forget that). I'm not in the red either though. I don't think I suffered any 70 or 100% loss. I don't think "being right most of the time will make up for being massively wrong other times" but it could happen.
Boho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2018, 11:00 AM   #735
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
exnavynuke's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Acworth
Posts: 1,214
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boho View Post
I day trade and I've been selling for between 1/4% and 1/2% gain, usually within a day or two. I don't know what my average loss was. We just know that I'm not one of the leaders any more (I was for months but people seem to forget that). I'm not in the red either though. I don't think I suffered any 70 or 100% loss. I don't think "being right most of the time will make up for being massively wrong other times" but it could happen.
No one cares that you were the leader for a short period of time long ago because it's irrelevant. For a much longer period of time than that, you were in the red despite a bull market happening for most of that period. When you're busy trying to convince yourself you're doing great, try to look at all the ways it can be seen that you're not actually doing great. Not recognizing and trying to correct errors in your strategy (whether stock picking or life in general) is not a path to success usually.
exnavynuke is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2018, 11:09 AM   #736
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Boho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by exnavynuke View Post
For a much longer period of time than that, you were in the red
That hasn't been established, and when I posted some details about how many months I was number 1 someone made a mockery of it.

Quote:
Not recognizing and trying to correct errors in your strategy (whether stock picking or life in general) is not a path to success usually.
I corrected a couple. I was criticized for that too.
Boho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2018, 01:52 PM   #737
Moderator
sengsational's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 10,656
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boho View Post
I just tried to sell SYPR and it failed. Then I clicked "Show max" and saw "A maximum of 0 shares can be bought due to the game's minimum share price setting."
The rules of the game, which are flexible when the game is created, have a 10% volume limit. You've already sold 3640 shares today. You are up against the 10% volume per day limitation.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boho View Post
Want to sell ANFI and I can't even sell 6000 shares when the volume is 106,501. Show Max says 0 just like SYPR, which I also want to sell.
You should be able to buy or sell 10650 shares in one day, based on that volume. You've already sold 10399 shares today. You are up against the 10% volume per day limitation.
sengsational is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2018, 01:57 PM   #738
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Boho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
Fascinating! 4% is the best of 100 trades?
I think the "best" column lists the highest dollar amount regardless of percent. I buy big sometimes and 4% could be a lot.

Currently I have SYPR with a total gain of 10.56%. I don't know whether that's a record for me.
Boho is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2018, 06:13 PM   #739
Give me a museum and I'll fill it. (Picasso)
Give me a forum ...
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Northern IL
Posts: 26,821
Quote:
Originally Posted by exnavynuke View Post
No one cares that you were the leader for a short period of time long ago because it's irrelevant. For a much longer period of time than that, you were in the red ....
Not only in the red, but even further behind our Total Market B&H reference point nunnun.

If a 'strategy' can't easily and consistently beat doing nothing at all, what's the point?

-ERD50
ERD50 is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 03-06-2018, 06:26 PM   #740
Thinks s/he gets paid by the post
Boho's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2017
Posts: 1,844
Quote:
Originally Posted by ERD50 View Post
If a 'strategy' can't easily and consistently beat doing nothing at all, what's the point?
To make more money. I don't need easy and I wish people would stop using "consistently" because I don't even know what you mean by it.
Boho is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
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
Stock Picking ("Beat Boho") Contest easysurfer Active Investing, Market Strategies & Alternative Assets 235 04-20-2017 10:06 AM
Ohio waitress wins CNBC stock picking contest cute fuzzy bunny Active Investing, Market Strategies & Alternative Assets 21 07-20-2007 10:22 PM
Stock Market Contest 2005 Danny Other topics 103 12-31-2005 02:50 PM

» Quick Links

 
All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:00 PM.
 
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.