# If you were to begin again what would you do different?



## jank

I know there are alot of old expereinced heads here who have been around the block a few times in relation to all things regarding investing and saving.

So as a young would be investor who is just starting out with investing here is my question.
Given all the years experience you have what is the ONE thing you would do different?


----------



## Smurf1976

1. Remember that the markets will still be there tomorrow. There's no need to rush in and lose a lot in the process.

2. Leverage works both ways. It magnifies your gains and your losses. Don't over leverage.


----------



## medicowallet

1. Recognise that in an awful lot of circumstances, history repeats itself / trends are maintained.

2. Have a longer engagement to my wife.

3. Proof read titles before posting


----------



## tech/a

> 2. Have a longer engagement to my wife.




Yeh

That would definately help my trading!!


----------



## notting

Get a partner to do the opposite of everything I do ie if I go long they go short, if I go short they go long.
Go totally gun ho at everything I think looks good trusting my instincts, my wiser than thou intelligence and perception etc using all my money.
At the end of the 18 months, marry the partner for their money and be grateful for the lesson.

Alternatively, if your too unacceptable as a character to get a partner.  Set up a good day trading account, then get a genius computer programmer to rig your computer so when ever you make a buy it sells and when ever you make a short it buys.  The computer shows up as if it is buying when you buy and selling when you sell.  Your bank accounts also reflect this as if your buying as you buy etc.
Then have a hypnotist brainwash you so you cannot remember that your computer has been reversed like this.

In 18 months the hypnoses runs out you are lifted out of despair and you find you are in fact the greatest trader that ever lived!!


----------



## hedgetrader

More testing, and patience.

I only trade forex so this is a bit specific.

After trading forex for a while and losing some money,  I stopped trading and started designing automated systems.
I decided to work full time(all the time) to find/make systems that worked autonomously with stable results. 2 years later I have a couple of systems that actually work.  I have designed and tested 1000's of systems and have multiple VPS's running many forward tests.
For me 2 years of coding, simulations and testing have paid off in a big way.  That is the one thing I did right.


----------



## sptrawler

Buy quality, just have patience and wait for the opportunity. 
The once in a life time buying opportunity seems to come around every 2 - 5 years.


----------



## Julia

1.  Not get married.  Did it twice and it cost me significantly financially both times.

2.  Learn about the sharemarket earlier.  I was too biased toward property in the early days.

3.  Be quicker to adopt the maxim  "It's not being wrong that's the problem, but how long you stay wrong".

4.  Be extremely selective about from whom you take advice.


----------



## Glen48

Give 10 k to two girls one to invest and one to spend and marry the one with big breasts ..
Do you get another belly button or is that only for  born again Christians
Trouble   is if you are say 18 could talk to some one 60 would you listen or say this time its different  .
 Nothing repeats like history as we are about to find out when the next depression is well under way.
Marriage either stay married or don't' my Ex cost us about 2 m and we both are living on the date's from the calender now.
We   are about to enter a new phase of money making and do things so stupid no one will believe in 50 yrs time.
 I still think luck plays a big part like Brad Pitt went with his mate to help him get an acting job Brad got the job his mate  lose  out.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

LOL notting.

If I were to begin again what would I do differently?  Hmmm...not start perhaps.


----------



## tinhat

I'd be a lot more judicious about how I handled money. Don't spend on utter crap, pay stupid prices for booze in night clubs and instead save a little more. If I could speak with myself from twenty years ago, I would tell myself to just go with the flow more and never miss an opportunity to have sex.


----------



## Smurf1976

Recognise early that 99.9% of young people will blow a relative fortune on _something_. Cars, women, out all night partying, dud investment ideas and on it goes.

First thing, make sure you don't get physically hurt in a permanent manner during any of this. Don't get yourself a criminal record either (I don't have one by the way, just saying).

Second thing, have some fun. Most of those who don't go out partying etc are still going to blow their money on something of little or no lasting value. The only real exceptions would be the minority who either buy real estate or who make other successful investments at an early age. The rest end up blowing the money on _something_.

If I could rewind the clock then I'd party harder. Seriously, that's exactly what I'd do. May as well have some fun given that I ended up blowing every cent I earned in my first few years working anyway.


----------



## joea

In life, get a mentor who has been around the block.
In sport follow your gut feeling.
In health, an active body is a happy body.
Always have  a dog, it brings out the best in you. Always walk the dog - Thinking time!!
On a career, think integrity, respect and fairness.
On politics. Don't read it!
On people, everybody is equal.
On the stock market, join ASF to sort  the "the chaff from the wheat".
On family, they are your greatest asset.
joea


----------



## howmanyru

What would i do differently financially? Get a real education after leaving high school - Man, school just brain washes us to conform, you wont be successfull if you follow the herd. The real information you need is not taught in schools. Hang around people who know the stock market & realestate, TAKE RISKS at a young age, when you have time to make mistakes and recover.


----------



## So_Cynical

tinhat said:


> I'd be a lot more judicious about how I handled money. Don't spend on utter crap, pay stupid prices for booze in night clubs and instead save a little more. If I could speak with myself from twenty years ago, I would tell myself to just go with the flow more and never miss an opportunity to have sex.




Ill go with the above and add buying BHP and CBA way back when in the 80's, these two stocks in particular because they really were no brainers...just $500 a year in each and id be laughing now.


----------



## IFocus

1. Learn about a trading method

2. Test it and any other method to death manually or other wise

3. Sim trade for 6 months

4. Start with a size able account


----------



## sptrawler

Smurf1976 said:


> Recognise early that 99.9% of young people will blow a relative fortune on _something_. Cars, women, out all night partying, dud investment ideas and on it goes.
> 
> First thing, make sure you don't get physically hurt in a permanent manner during any of this. Don't get yourself a criminal record either (I don't have one by the way, just saying).
> 
> Second thing, have some fun. Most of those who don't go out partying etc are still going to blow their money on something of little or no lasting value. The only real exceptions would be the minority who either buy real estate or who make other successful investments at an early age. The rest end up blowing the money on _something_.
> 
> If I could rewind the clock then I'd party harder. Seriously, that's exactly what I'd do. May as well have some fun given that I ended up blowing every cent I earned in my first few years working anyway.




Yes smurph, I still regret not buying that HG 350 Monaro when I was an apprentice. sigh


----------



## Mistagear

sptrawler said:


> Yes smurph, I still regret not buying that HG 350 Monaro when I was an apprentice. sigh




I still regret selling the HG 350 Bathurst, the L34 Torana, the ex HDT XU1, the ex Brock VN Commodore 12hr car, the 2 Group C Commodores I ran in the 80's.
I regret not being nicer to my ex-wife prior to my car collection being sold, but most of all i regret not taking up an opportunity to move to Britain to race. At least I kept #7 
Whoops, sorry this is a trading site, not a car forum....
What I would do differently is... spend the last decade on a treadmill while I trade


----------



## Wysiwyg

Mistagear said:


> I still regret selling the HG 350 Bathurst, the L34 Torana, the ex HDT XU1, the ex Brock VN Commodore 12hr car, the 2 Group C Commodores I ran in the 80's.



Do you know of David Bowden? He collects those classics.


----------



## Wysiwyg

There were two people that influenced my life negatively and I would not meet them again. People really need to let go and move on.

Trading wise I would have learned at an early stage about position sizing and "when to sell". When to sell is the trick.


----------



## sptrawler

Mistagear said:


> I still regret selling the HG 350 Bathurst, the L34 Torana, the ex HDT XU1, the ex Brock VN Commodore 12hr car, the 2 Group C Commodores I ran in the 80's.
> I regret not being nicer to my ex-wife prior to my car collection being sold, but most of all i regret not taking up an opportunity to move to Britain to race. At least I kept #7
> Whoops, sorry this is a trading site, not a car forum....
> What I would do differently is... spend the last decade on a treadmill while I trade




Classic.


----------



## Agentm

try not to pick partners as badly as your stocks..

lol

only kiddin, doin fine both ends


You better not short 
You better all buy
Better invest
I'm telling you why 
Bernanke Claus is printing right now
He's says he won't be printing
But you know he’ll do it twice; 
Gonna bail out Who's naughty not nice 
Bernanke Claus is printing right now
He calls it quantitative easing
ZIRP a QE fake 
He knows what interest rates should be
So buy treasuries for goodness sake! 
O! You better not short! 
You better xxxxing buy
Better invest
I'm telling you why 
Bernanke Claus is printing right now
Bernanke Claus is printing right now!

 Merry quantitative easing to all, you'll be millionaires tonight.


----------



## Whiskers

That's good 'poetic' license, Agentm. 

as for _"try not to pick partners as badly as your stocks.."_

notting suggested earlier to get a partner to do the opposite to you... I tried that, opposite personalities attract rationale. It sometimes does work, but when it goes wrong, it tends to go quite spectacularly_. _

As for Julia... once bitten, twice wise... I ain't considering risking it again_. _


----------



## matty77

Don't listen to neighbors "hot tips" on shares
Don't listen to work colleges "hot tips" on shares
Don't listen to family members "hot tips" on shares

Buy a house when I was  younger instead of trying to be smart and wait for a correction.


----------



## jank

Interesting responses. A lot of people seemed to have been almost wiped out by a failed marriage! GULP!!


----------



## young-gun

jank said:


> Interesting responses. A lot of people seemed to have been almost wiped out by a failed marriage! GULP!!




im getting married next year, will let u know how it goes.

and for all u oldies dont try and discourage me...ive heard it all


----------



## JimBob

I would have invested more than $1000 in Sausage Software when they were 20c in the dot com boom days and definitely sold them for $6+ instead of 40c.  Doubling your investment is a nice feeling except when they surge several thousand percent afterwards.


----------



## So_Cynical

jank said:


> Interesting responses. A lot of people seemed to have been almost wiped out by a failed marriage! GULP!!




Its probably one of the top 3 if not number 1 reasons for being happy, successful and wealthy...or melancholy and average.


----------



## ROE

According to the book the millionaire next door
having a successful partner is one of the key to wealth.
I'm lucky to have a good one....she doesnt' spend much...she gives me all her money 
to invest and never question it. we have join account for everything....she can see the result..

I would do the same buy house in my early 20's
paid off fast then plenty cash left over to invest.

All the little mistake you made a long the way is good life lesson so I wouldn't change it.
be it investment mistake, buy useless stuff

If it wasn't for borrowing to buy a car when I'm 19 I wouldn't learn compounding works better when you on the other side of the equation


----------



## Glen48

Its not a failed marriage that's the problem its the government backing the ex  wives to fleece the husband and leave the husband with no way to crawl back is the problem
.
Best thing to do is have a stash some where  and if in 40 yrs you are still married break it open an hope she does not decide to get a divorce then and there and take it.


----------



## Julia

jank said:


> Interesting responses. A lot of people seemed to have been almost wiped out by a failed marriage! GULP!!



   Don't let that put you off, jank.   Just because I, as one example, showed woeful taste in husbands, that shouldn't reflect on the benefits of a good relationship.  Just acquire some maturity before letting the hormones take over, maybe.



So_Cynical said:


> Its probably one of the top 3 if not number 1 reasons for being happy, successful and wealthy...or melancholy and average.



Well put.  I agree entirely.


----------



## johenmo

This is not different:
- Marry the same person
These are different:
- travel the same amount but not back to the home base to relatives.
- rent when I moved for work, keeping the first house with the tiny mortgage as prices went up.  Then buy 5 acres about 10 years growth from the edge of the metro area.
- learn about stocks and shares 20 years earlier.
- start up the cider company 3 of us talked about.
- go into boutique brewing which is where I wanted to go back in 1982 (boy did I miss out on an opportunity there!!!) and why I studied what I did.  That's the sort of work I'd like to take home.
- Not work as many hours per week for so long for *someone else*.
- Live & work in asia for a few years.
- buy better quality guitars earlier.  And play them more often.
- Take a year and have a working holiday in Europe after Uni.
- Develop the peace and calmness I have now 20 years ago.
- eat more chocolate


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Julia said:


> Don't let that put you off, jank.   Just because I, as one example, showed woeful taste in husbands, that shouldn't reflect on the benefits of a good relationship.  Just acquire some maturity before letting the hormones take over, maybe.
> 
> 
> Well put.  I agree entirely.




Hormones win out every time.

gg


----------



## AussieBoy

I'll respond to this thread in reference to a post I did in another thread here:

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/forums/showthread.php?t=3140&page=4&p=726228&viewfull=1#post726228

Basically, if I were to begin again, what would I do diferrently: I would've began earlier than when I began in January 2011.

The first half of the 2000s decade was an interesting time on the ASX, and more importantly, a time of many golden opportunities.  I was in high school during 2000-05 and remember the One.Tel collapse (I had friends whose parents had One.Tel shares and One.Tel internet.  Still remember those Shane Warne ads they used, lol!), HIH collapse, the dramatic dive followed by increase in shares post-September 11 2001 and then, of course, 2003 being the start of the boom in the Australian economy (2005 being the start of the mining boom).  

I mentioned in that link above that my first exposure to the ASX was in 2002 through the ASX sharemarket game we played in year 9 Commerce class.  Around 2003/04, I knew of a few ppl in my grade and the grade above me that had shares (although not much).  I had a few thousand $ back then and looking back at it now, I regret not getting in during that time.  Waiting until I completed my Bachelors degree at the end of 2010 was a mistake and even if I didn't succeed and did screw up had I started back a few years earlier (i.e. I'm not saying that by starting in 2003/04, I would've had guaranteed success), the experience would've been invaluable and I would've benefitted from it in the long-term.  I don't regret not getting during the Dot Com boom as I was too young at the time (was still in primary school), but the 2003-07 Australian economy boom was definitely a missed opportunity, given the age and $ I had at the time.

So, if I ever did have children in the future, I'd give them the opportunity of letting them start earlier than when I did, as there is no substitute for time and experience.


----------



## matty77

Start investing earlier

Start investing earlier

Start investing earlier

Instead of waiting until I have bought my own house, paid for the wedding etc


----------



## bailx

I'm a bit like cumnuts, don't let emotions get the better of your trading. When I begun, learning the hard way I guess. And before I really new what I was doing I had sold some very profitable stock on a whim I was going to lose because I was a eager testicle sort of bloke. Trust your instincts and have faith in yourself and what you are doing.  ( If your on a good wicket stay behind the crease. )


----------



## Toeknee

joea said:


> In life, get a mentor who has been around the block.
> In sport follow your gut feeling.
> In health, an active body is a happy body.
> Always have  a dog, it brings out the best in you. Always walk the dog - Thinking time!!
> On a career, think integrity, respect and fairness.
> On politics. Don't read it!
> On people, everybody is equal.
> On the stock market, join ASF to sort  the "the chaff from the wheat".
> On family, they are your greatest asset.
> joea




^ This post is full of win!


----------



## stewiejp

1. As has been said before - get in the market *early*. Put an amount of $ into a share trading account each payday and when it hits a certain amout - buy shares with it, and don't touch it.

2. Budget wisely so the above is achievable.

3. Don't go into debt, other than *maybe* for a house, and if you do - don't over borrow. Nobody needs 5 bedrooms when they have no kids. 

4. "Interest Free" means shop somewhere else.

5. If you can't afford it, don't buy it.

I'm lucky, I haven't fallen into any of the above traps, but I know a lot of people who have, and it generally costs them more than just money.


----------



## matty77

I have been doing just that for maybe 5 years now, its finally starting to get traction now days which is great. Only sold one share in that portfolio in the last 5 years.

Wish I started doing that when I was 18.



stewiejp said:


> 1. As has been said before - get in the market *early*. Put an amount of $ into a share trading account each payday and when it hits a certain amout - buy shares with it, and don't touch it.


----------



## Bill M

stewiejp said:


> Put an amount of $ into a share trading account each payday and when it hits a certain amout - buy shares with it, *and don't touch it.*.







matty77 said:


> I have been doing just that for maybe 5 years now, its finally starting to get traction now days which is great. Only sold one share in that portfolio in the last 5 years.
> 
> Wish I started doing that when I was 18.




That guys is the easy part. What is harder is knowing when to sell. I blew it and if I were to do something different I would want to know when to get out. My biggest mistake was not getting out of the market when the All Ords was at 6,800 points. Yes it's hard to believe but we were there and if I had got out at that time I would be much better off right now. Anyhow guys, well done for saving and buying but as I said, not getting out at the right time was my biggest mistake.


----------



## Julia

matty77 said:


> I have been doing just that for maybe 5 years now, its finally starting to get traction now days which is great. Only sold one share in that portfolio in the last 5 years.



If you mean saving up and then buying in "when you have a set amount", if that's your only criteria to buy then I'm not surprised you are only now 'starting to get traction' after five years.  Five years included a rampant time of the end of the bull market when everyone was making lots of money without even trying.
Perhaps I've misunderstood your post but it reads as though you entered the market because you had $X, rather than choosing an entry point from the price action.



Bill M said:


> That guys is the easy part. What is harder is knowing when to sell. I blew it and if I were to do something different I would want to know when to get out. My biggest mistake was not getting out of the market when the All Ords was at 6,800 points. Yes it's hard to believe but we were there and if I had got out at that time I would be much better off right now.



Exactly.   So easy to give back your profits.  What's your plan for an exit, Matty?


----------



## matty77

Certainly when I first started putting money in I didn't really know what I was doing and it was a fairly large learning curve with the first GFC hitting etc. You also need to consider that this investment is long term and not a buy sell account - I have other accounts for that sort of stuff, this is purely a buy and hold account. So I really think an average return on that is ok if you consider how volatile the last 5 years has been. Like I said, this only forms part of my investment strategy as a whole.

Buy in is when I have a set minimum amount - it doesnt mean I will buy in then and there, it means I am now ready for the next opportunity that comes along.

Im glad you have made lots of money "without even trying" I guess we all cant be as good as you, maybe you can give us some of the secrets if its that "easy".

Oh also on a side note, what is "starting to get traction" for you? Is that 5% return? 10% return? 50% return? I think its a bit open to interpretation which I did deliberately as I dont need to run around telling everyone what my profit/loss is.


----------



## CanOz

Knowing what i now know....i would have completed a masters in Economics and then joined a prop trading firm. I would have an education in something that I'm interested in and a career in an industry that I'm more passionate about. This would have given an earlier start in the markets as well i believe.



CanOz


----------



## Julia

matty77 said:


> Certainly when I first started putting money in I didn't really know what I was doing and it was a fairly large learning curve with the first GFC hitting etc. You also need to consider that this investment is long term and not a buy sell account - I have other accounts for that sort of stuff, this is purely a buy and hold account. So I really think an average return on that is ok if you consider how volatile the last 5 years has been. Like I said, this only forms part of my investment strategy as a whole.
> 
> Buy in is when I have a set minimum amount - it doesnt mean I will buy in then and there, it means I am now ready for the next opportunity that comes along.



Thank you for explaining.  And my apologies for being less than courteous in my earlier post.  Good luck.


----------



## craft

stewiejp said:


> 1. As has been said before - get in the market *early*. Put an amount of $ into a share trading account each payday and when it hits a certain amout - buy shares with it, and don't touch it.




This will beat the performance of 99%+ of the people who dismiss it.


----------



## Julia

craft said:


> This will beat the performance of 99%+ of the people who dismiss it.



Interested to understand how you know that, craft?
Performance over what period of time?


----------



## craft

Julia said:


> Interested to understand how you know that, craft?



History


> Performance over what period of time?



Poster bolded 'early' so say 20’s and leave it there,  so God willing that’s about 60 years I guess we are talking about.

Shares are historically the best returning asset class over longer periods. Outperformance is a zero sum game – actually less than zero sum when you take into account costs.

Not too many outperform consistently over long periods and those that do I bet would not dismiss the concept outlined.


----------



## Ves

A few things that I have picked up on my short journey so far (appropriate to my method of long-term investment):

1. Motion does not always mean action 

_ie.  don't watch the tickers all day - you will confuse random movements with substance more often than not - a long-term holder should only need to check prices on holdings every one or two days at the very most.  Price action is at best a distraction unless you are a shorter-term trader. I have done much better after I turned most of the market noise off._ Time better spent looking at annual accounts.

2. Stop looking for the secret or holy grail

_There is no secret or magic formula, the only method to success is hard-work, persistence, a strong temeprament and plenty of patience.  You cannot hope to predict the future with ultimate accuracy - but knowing that by making assumptions that are in the right ball-park you will get reasonable returns is the biggest "secret."_

3. Don't worry about what everyone else is doing

_Fads, manias, panic and general hysteria won't make you rich - unless you learn how to ignore them and discover your own decision making skills (often you will inadvertantly use the emotions of others to your advantage)_

_The market will often be looking at a company from a different angle to you - so why bother justifying your decisions by weighing them against its reactions? It is impossible to tell from price action alone why other people are selling or buying! So why bother!_

4. Turn off the noise  

_If you are not a macro investor  (ie. you are a stock picker) then it is often pertitent to forget about the unpredictable nature of the economy or the All Ords and focus on picking quality businesses as befits your strategy.  More often than not you will be completely wrong about the economy and you will lose (actual or from missed opportunity) more money than you will make by trying to pick its future._ _A quality business should thrive in conditions that see the demise of other companies._


----------



## Smurf1976

Remember that the market will still be there tomorrow. 

There's no panic to throw every last Dollar you have into shares. Learn what you are doing first - start small.


----------



## Julia

craft said:


> History



Actual evidence that buy and hold beats selling at or close to peaks and buying back in at or close to bottoms?
If you do this, you have the cash available to buy back into your same chosen shares (if they are still a valid choice) at a much lower price, thus increasing your potential capital gain plus dividend yield because you own more shares than you did before.

If you'd bought in during 2003, when the XAO was around 3000, you could have used your buy and hold strategy right through to Nov 07 when the market peaked at a bit over 6800.  Then, as the GFC became obvious, even if you gave back a little of your profits, you would still be holding on to a very healthy gain.  Market then fell right back to around your original buy in price, so you could buy back what you sold, only in greater numbers,  waiting for the next run up.

I know the fundamental fans love to say that buy and hold beats any other strategy, and it may have been true when you have a reasonably long term bull market.  But you can actually make much more money by doing as suggested above.

Even now, in 2012, we're struggling to reach 5000 and the global signs for any significant and sustained improvement are pretty hard to find.

As Bill said earlier, it's knowing when to sell that makes all the difference.


----------



## Bill M

Julia said:


> I know the fundamental fans love to say that buy and hold beats any other strategy, and it may have been true when you have a reasonably long term bull market.  But you can actually make much more money by doing as suggested above.
> 
> Even now, in 2012, we're struggling to reach 5000 and the global signs for any significant and sustained improvement are pretty hard to find.
> 
> As Bill said earlier, it's knowing when to sell that makes all the difference.




To add a real case to this I will refer to my super fund. I have a super that is in the Growth Fund. It is about 75% shares. My mid year statement in 2007 is what my current statement is now. So for 5 years doing the "buy and hold" the fund has gone no where. If I was smart enough to go into bonds and cash at the time and sat on it and collected interest until March 2009 I would have avoided the crash and saw my money grow. Had I have gone back into the Growth Fund in March 2009 then by now I would have doubled my money. 

I did a "buy and hold" and after 5 years in professionally run Super Fund it went no where. So now I take more notice of what is going on around me and will move my assets where I think I can achieve more growth/income.


----------



## craft

Julia said:


> Actual evidence that buy and hold beats selling at or close to peaks and buying back in at or close to bottoms?
> If you do this, you have the cash available to buy back into your same chosen shares (if they are still a valid choice) at a much lower price, thus increasing your potential capital gain plus dividend yield because you own more shares than you did before.
> 
> If you'd bought in during 2003, when the XAO was around 3000, you could have used your buy and hold strategy right through to Nov 07 when the market peaked at a bit over 6800.  Then, as the GFC became obvious, even if you gave back a little of your profits, you would still be holding on to a very healthy gain.  Market then fell right back to around your original buy in price, so you could buy back what you sold, only in greater numbers,  waiting for the next run up.
> 
> I know the fundamental fans love to say that buy and hold beats any other strategy, and it may have been true when you have a reasonably long term bull market.  But you can actually make much more money by doing as suggested above.
> 
> Even now, in 2012, we're struggling to reach 5000 and the global signs for any significant and sustained improvement are pretty hard to find.
> 
> As Bill said earlier, it's knowing when to sell that makes all the difference.




I’m reluctant to go here – but being a gluten for punishment....

Nailing the major highs and lows whilst still avoiding being whipsawed on the minor ones is much easier in hindsight then real time.   Do it and obviously you will outperform – however outperformance is a less than zero sum game and with a huge amount of technology, intellect and man power all trying  to outperform –  doing so in real-time is not as easy as hindsight bias may make it look.

Those that do outperform generally have explicitly documented statistics to record their comparative performance and know the skill, judgement and time it takes to equip yourself for outperformance.   They understand the performance that can be achieved by dollar cost averaging a low cost equity fund has to mathematically beat at least 50% of everybody that tries to outperform by either timing or stock selection – thus they respect that approaches power even if they don’t say so openly for various reasons.

The ASX passed through 3000 at the beginning of June 2003 at the time the Accumulation index was 15620, today it’s 35027. That is an annual compound return of approx 9% and that does not include franking credits.   The strategy today would have you still fully exposed to a long term growth asset paying a current grossed up dividend yield of 6.2%. 

Picking one occurrence where with hindsight it paid to get out and pay tour CGT does not negate the power of dollar cost averaging over a lifetime – the concept the referred to  poster stated.

I wonder how many actually got the major top and bottom right and managed to have no other whipsaws in the process of trying to time it? How many think they got it right but have completely missed the bottom and are sitting petrified in cash still, even though the accumulation index is 65% higher then it’s lows.


ps



> I know the fundamental fans love to say that buy and hold beats any other strategy




I have an issue with this staement too - but due to lack of time now I will come back to it.


Cheers


----------



## Ves

Bill M said:


> To add a real case to this I will refer to my super fund. I have a super that is in the Growth Fund. It is about 75% shares. My mid year statement in 2007 is what my current statement is now. So for 5 years doing the "buy and hold" the fund has gone no where. If I was smart enough to go into bonds and cash at the time and sat on it and collected interest until March 2009 I would have avoided the crash and saw my money grow. Had I have gone back into the Growth Fund in March 2009 then by now I would have doubled my money.
> 
> I did a "buy and hold" and after 5 years in professionally run Super Fund it went no where. So now I take more notice of what is going on around me and will move my assets where I think I can achieve more growth/income.



Don't most of these growth funds have an internal portfolio turnover upwards of 80%?  Whilst _you_ might be buying and holding the actual managed growth funds, the underlying assets that those funds possess are certainly not doing anything that comes close to approaching a buy and hold strategy.

Perhaps not directed at anyone in particular - but I have lost count of the people that rave about how "buy and hold" is dead and how it was so easy to make money by selling at the top of the GFC and then buying back in near bottom. I guess the same people sold at 5000 and bought again at 3800 last year too. Yet more often than not 99% of these people did not actually do it themselves. Hindsight gives people endless amounts of false knowledge it would seem.

In any event, trying to disapprove a selective buy and hold approach by using an index as a proxy for performance is naive at best.  

Most people with long-term strategies lost massive amounts of money during the GFC for two reasons in my opinion:  

1.    They were in the wrong stocks  (bull markets famously leave people naked when the tide goes back out and they are left standing without any clothes)

2.    Their portfolio had little or no liquidity to take advantage of the countless opportunities that the market threw up



			
				Julia said:
			
		

> I know the fundamental fans love to say that buy and hold beats any other strategy, and it may have been true when you have a reasonably long term bull market. But you can actually make much more money by doing as suggested above.



I disagree.  Bull markets are garbage for most active buy and hold strategies (this obviously does not include those that have for whatever reason, finished accumulating).  The opportunties to buy quality companies at reasonable prices are few and far between, progressively deteriorating until the peak is reach.

A decent long-term investor will be better in a bear market, because to put it in simple terms, their defense will be much better than their offense.


----------



## Ves

Julia said:


> If you do this, you have the cash available to buy back into your same chosen shares (if they are still a valid choice) at a much lower price, thus increasing your potential capital gain plus dividend yield because you own more shares than you did before.



As mentioned in my post above.

PORTFOLIO LIQUIDITY avoids the "not being able to buy back in" argument.   This comes from new money and dividend streams. 



> If you'd bought in during 2003, when the XAO was around 3000, you could have used your buy and hold strategy right through to Nov 07 when the market peaked at a bit over 6800.  Then, as the GFC became obvious, even if you gave back a little of your profits, you would still be holding on to a very healthy gain.  Market then fell right back to around your original buy in price, so you could buy back what you sold, only in greater numbers,  waiting for the next run up.



This is a red herring.

You are talking about buying at a single point of time and holding forever.  The original discussion was regarding a longer term dollar cost averaging process as a starting point.   Two things would change in your answer:   you would be buying at both highs and lows (although a long term value investing strategy would stop buying well before the highs)  and  you would have a performance closer to the accumulation index.



> Even now, in 2012, we're struggling to reach 5000 and the global signs for any significant and sustained improvement are pretty hard to find.




The proxy value investing systems over at www.gurufocus.com have some interesting performance records over the last few years.  These are all mechanical, so there is no stock picking bias.

Go have a look if you are interested.


----------



## Bill M

Ves said:


> Don't most of these growth funds have an internal portfolio turnover upwards of 80%?  Whilst _you_ might be buying and holding the actual managed growth funds, the underlying assets that those funds possess are certainly not doing anything that comes close to approaching a buy and hold strategy.




Yes you are right, they do have turnover and they did manage it and the fund itself was probably not really a buy and hold strategy. However if that is the case why are 95% of such funds only just now breaking even after 5 long years? The point I was trying to make was that there is a time to get out. For me not knowing when to get out cost me a lot of money. That is something I would like to do differently.

All I had to do to get out was fill in a form, send it in and have the entire account switched into fixed interest and cash. I had the flexibility and I didn't do it. But the old school learning of, you're in it for the long haul, it will be ok and it will go back up again is not the head in the sand approach I would suggest to anyone. All I'm saying is be active, look at your unit prices daily if you have to, keep your eyes on the ball, do not trust others and do what is necessary to protect your capital.


----------



## Julia

craft said:


> I’m reluctant to go here – but being a gluten for punishment....



No need to be a glutton for punishment, craft.  I have zero interest in squabbling with you.  The thread title indicates that the OP was interested in various approaches to making money.  I have simply offered the trend following strategy, as distinct from long term buy and hold or short term trading.
It's immaterial to me whether you regard such an approach as valid or not.  I'm not here to be evangelistic about it.  Everyone should follow whatever approach they find suits them best.  So no real need to be so defensive.

I'll just clarify a few points below and leave you to it.  Hope, jank, that amongst the responses on your thread, some of it has been useful to you.



> Nailing the major highs and lows whilst still avoiding being whipsawed on the minor ones is much easier in hindsight then real time.



I made no claim to 'nailing the major highs and lows'.  Please don't distort my comments.

Prior to the GFC, as I have pointed out earlier, the market essentially doubled from 2003 to a peak at November 2007.   I have taken ten years as a reasonable period.  I'm very conscious of what happened during this time because I started my SMSF in early 2004, putting about 85% of my available funds into equities.
As the run up continued, the news started to appear here and there about the subprime situation in the US.
Then there were the accounts of the CDOs and CDSs arising out of those dubious mortgages, now floating all over the world.   During 2007 there was considerable reason to be watching your holdings carefully.

We all know what happened then.

I went completely to cash at the beginning of 2008, so absolutely gave back some profit, just as I missed that profit to be had at the start of the period I'm quoting.



> Do it and obviously you will outperform



So you agree with my basic premise.   You do not have to absolutely nail the top.  Some people may be able to exactly sell at the peak but I'm not one of them.  However, having more than doubled my original invested sum, I wasn't too upset at getting out with most of that profit intact.


> doing so in real-time is not as easy as hindsight bias may make it look.



I don't think anyone said it was easy.  Any decision is made by weighing up the alternatives, taking due consideration of one's personal circumstances, and going with what seems like the best option at the time.

(If you're working and drawing a salary (which I gather is the case for most of the posters here other than Bill) then you have an assured source of income.  If you took early retirement and do not want to go back to work, then capital preservation becomes much more important imo.   I suspect many who advocate such practices as averaging down, letting losses run because you still believe in the intrinsic value of the company, might be forced to reconsider if they were dependent on their capital actually generating sufficient to live on.)

Given the decreasing availablity of credit globally, it was my guess that interest rates would soon be going up.
I sat the funds at call for a while until an 8% for five years came up.  The risk in taking this is obviously that you're tying the funds up for a long time.  A simple calculation showed that the interest on a portion of my available funds would generate quite a lot more than I need to live on at that 8%, and the rest could go into at call accounts.  So I chose to take that stress free option rather than be exposed to the potential of the whipsaw type difficulties you refer to above.   If I had my time over again, I'd make exactly the same decision.



> Those that do outperform generally have explicitly documented statistics to record their comparative performance and know the skill, judgement and time it takes to equip yourself for outperformance.



I think you're over-complicating the approach.  If you are only going to be satisfied with a perfect target of selling at the exact peak, you will likely be disappointed.  A decision about when to sell should not just depend on what share prices are doing at the time, but should also take into account the global and national situation in every sense, financial, political, and levels of confidence.  



> The ASX passed through 3000 at the beginning of June 2003 at the time the Accumulation index was 15620, today it’s 35027. That is an annual compound return of approx 9% and that does not include franking credits.   The strategy today would have you still fully exposed to a long term growth asset paying a current grossed up dividend yield of 6.2%.



We will all have our individual personal targets for what we need to achieve.  If you're happy with the above result, then that's all that matters.




Ves said:


> Perhaps not directed at anyone in particular - but I have lost count of the people that rave about how "buy and hold" is dead and how it was so easy to make money by selling at the top of the GFC and then buying back in near bottom. I guess the same people sold at 5000 and bought again at 3800 last year too. Yet more often than not 99% of these people did not actually do it themselves. Hindsight gives people endless amounts of false knowledge it would seem.



That's a fairly unpleasant assertion in the face of a simple suggestion that when to sell is more important than when to buy.
The following post was made by McLovin in the "Tips for Saving Money" thread in September.  Are you similarly going to accuse him of being untruthful?


> One of the best investments I ever made was going almost all to cash in late 2006 (I held onto some CSL that I'd had since about 1996). I had plenty of people telling me I was an idiot for getting out. I was working in finance at the time too and much smarter heads were telling me this. Didn't lose a cent through the GFC. And then in early 2009 I was cashed up and made a killing, enough that I can now concentrate on my investments full time. Doing it full time, I have found that my knowledge and understanding has expanded exponentially.
> 
> Sometimes cash is the best investment.







> In any event, trying to disapprove a selective buy and hold approach by using an index as a proxy for performance is naive at best.



The great majority of people who adopt a buy and hold approach do so either via an index fund or by taking a representative group of popular 'mum and dad' shares.  They are the people who are still well and truly down in their Super accounts *because they didn't consider the possibility of selling when they could hold on to most of their profits.* 



> Their portfolio had little or no liquidity to take advantage of the countless opportunities that the market threw up



If you'd sold $1M worth of shares reasonably close to the peak, I doubt an amount you're keeping in 'liquidity' is going to be equivalent in terms of purchasing power.


----------



## burglar

Bill M said:


> ... The point I was trying to make was that there is a time to get out. For me not knowing when to get out cost me a lot of money. ...




No-one sends you a telegram when the lift reaches the top floor.

(Basics should be taught at school ...)


----------



## Ves

Julia said:


> That's a fairly unpleasant assertion in the face of a simple suggestion that when to sell is more important than when to buy.
> The following post was made by McLovin in the "Tips for Saving Money" thread in September.  Are you similarly going to accuse him of being untruthful?



My apologies for not being clear - but I did not mean it as you are suggesting, but more like this:

Many people told me in hindsight that the best strategy was to buy at 3000 and then sell at 6800.  Then buy again at 3000.

Yet, 99% of the people who told me that this was a wonderful idea *did not actually do it at the time themselves but they know of someone who did*.  You ask them why not and they come up with a whole raft of excuses as to why they did not at the time, but they will next time when given the chance!!! I have had the very same conversation with a lot of people in real life.

I am not at all accusing anyone who said that they actually did it as a liar. I am sure people did do as you suggested, but my observations tell me that they are in the absolute minority.

Again many apologies for the confusion that I caused - the point that I am trying to make that decisions of this nature require a truck load of conviction which is easy to forget when we are talking in hindsight.


----------



## tech/a

burglar said:


> No-one sends you a telegram when the lift reaches the top floor.
> 
> (Basics should be taught at school ...)




Don't know about that
I got mine in *bold* type.
It's well documented here and on 
" The Chartist "


----------



## burglar

Ves said:


> ... decisions of this nature require a truck load of conviction ...




It's hard to breathe when your heart is in your throat!!


----------



## Ves

Julia said:


> The great majority of people who adopt a buy and hold approach do so either via an index fund or by taking a representative group of popular 'mum and dad' shares.  They are the people who are still well and truly down in their Super accounts *because they didn't consider the possibility of selling when they could hold on to most of their profits.*



Here the emphasis is on the poor implementation of the investment philosophy (and lack of understanding of these "mum and dad" investors) rather than the actual strategy itself.

The two are often easy to confuse, but there is a subtle difference. The skill is not so much in being able to "buy and hold" but being able to "buy and hold the right shares."

Put it this way:  if I was a technical analyst and got whipsawed constantly, missed every high and did not sell at every low - is it the fault of that method, or is it the implementation of that method?

Did you know that there are lots of good companies that are trading higher than they were before the GFC and you had plenty of dividend income with which to re-invest back into them at their lows? It's not all doom and gloom out there, you know!

Do you not agree that a 9% annual return on the ASX accumulation index for the last ten years is something that should not be scoffed at so quickly?



> If you'd sold $1M worth of shares reasonably close to the peak, I doubt an amount you're keeping in 'liquidity' is going to be equivalent in terms of purchasing power.



The longer period of time over which you invest, and the more that you invest incrementally over that period of time, the more annual liquidity you will be able to draw on.  What starts small acorn can grow into a very big tree within an investing career.  There are most likely people who now earn an annual income greater than the original sum that they started with.


----------



## craft

Hi Julia

The reason I was/am reluctant is because everybody personalises things. My intention is just to talk on a general basis about the power of dollar cost averaging over a life time. 

I believe the points I made in relation to supporting the strategy are correct in a general sense.

I was responding to you but I was not talking about you. You may be an exception to the general rule – I really wouldn’t know.

And I am certainly aware of some people’s desires/needs to get out of the market near retirement – Market volatility over even the medium term is very real. Bills point is well made.

The two points of views don’t have to be mutually exclusive. 


Now to pick up on your statement.  


> I know the fundamental fans love to say that buy and hold beats any other strategy.




Fundamental is a very broad school. I attack stock selection from a fundamental perspective but I suspect I am actually a lot closer aligned to your approach then to buy and hold. You hold whilst market prices trend positively in an attempt to outperform the market.  I hold whilst underlying business performance trends positively in an attempt to outperform the market. Whilst I ignore market timing – I achieve stock timing to some degree by default by attempting to buy undervalued and sell overvalued.

So whilst it is not exactly what I do, I am supporting the strategy of dollar cost averaging over an entire life as a very powerful approach for anybody that would rather get on with things in life other than do what it takes to win in a very competitive less than zero sum game of chasing stock market outperformance. 

Trying and losing as the majority must do according to the laws of maths is big waste of both time and money. Some  who are in the majority probably don't even realise it because they fail to keep accurate records of comparison against the passive alternative and then the brain does what the brain does.

Happy investing - my queue to return back to my box has arrived.


----------



## Julia

Ves said:


> Here the emphasis is on the poor implementation of the investment philosophy (and lack of understanding of these "mum and dad" investors) rather than the actual strategy itself.
> 
> The two are often easy to confuse, but there is a subtle difference. The skill is not so much in being able to "buy and hold" but being able to "buy and hold the right shares."



OK, fine.  But I doubt that the vast majority of people who hold shares via their Super have any interest in determining what are 'the right shares'.   I've personally had more than 30 years' experience in investing, whether in real estate or shares, and have no interest in micro analysis of any company when I can achieve a decent result much more simply.  I do understand, however, that for some of you, there's a very real satisfaction in crunching numbers etc.  Fine.  I have no quarrel with that at all.  Just get a bit irritated when you all so aggressively dismiss any alternative approach, especially when it's unlikely you've ever actually tried it in practice.



> Put it this way:  if I was a technical analyst and got whipsawed constantly, missed every high and did not sell at every low



Um, "did not sell at every low"????? That's the last point at which you should be selling!!  That's when you should be buying.  



> Do you not agree that a 9% annual return on the ASX accumulation index for the last ten years is something that should not be scoffed at so quickly?



I don't believe I've scoffed at anything.   Individuals will seek a return which meets their needs and circumstances at any given time, hopefully weighing up preservation and growth of capital in the process.  I have no interest in entering into any sort of p****ing contest as to who can achieve the best return.  
Neither do I have any interest in being drawn into commenting on whether 9% is an adequate return.



craft said:


> Hi Julia
> 
> The reason I was/am reluctant is because everybody personalises things.



On the contrary, craft.  I was simply attempting to offer the OP an alternative to the chorus of value investing being the only approach.
I think we should be mindful of the people who join this forum every day and put up posts along the lines of "I want to get into the stock market but have no idea where to begin".
If we genuinely want to be helpful, then I think it's more useful to offer a selection of approaches and to avoid the apparently inevitable aggressive squabble about why "my way is better than your way".  No such thing, imo.  Different approaches will suit different personalities and circumstances at different life stages.

I've been a member of ASF for about eight years and am absolutely over all the squabbling about FA v TA and everything in between.  It adds little of use for newcomers and little of quality to the forum.



> So whilst it is not exactly what I do, I am supporting the strategy of dollar cost averaging over an entire life as a very powerful approach for anybody that would rather get on with things in life other than do what it takes to win in a very competitive less than zero sum game of chasing stock market outperformance.



Again, you are over-complicating the simplicity of a trend following approach.
If you are happy to apply a given strategy over a whole lifetime and it works for you, then that's fine.

One of the reasons I put forward the trend following approach was in response to the number of posts I've read quite recently where people have said they lost amounts like $30,000 etc, or had never made a profit over several years.   This just astonishes me.  If you started to lose real money, why wouldn't you stop what you were doing before it got to be a loss of $30K?  And if over several years, you'd yet to make decent profits, wouldn't you go back to paper trading or in some other way re-evaluate what you were doing?


----------



## Ves

Julia said:


> Fine.  I have no quarrel with that at all.  Just get a bit irritated when you all so aggressively dismiss any alternative approach



Perhaps we are reading things differently - but no where in this thread has anyone done such a thing.

Dismissing as opposed to discussing some of the risks or traps of a certain strategy are two completely different things.  It seems fine for you to blantantly say that you could do better than "buy and hold" by doing this and that, but apparently any alternative is not welcome.  Honestly about all I got from this exchange was that you wanted to accuse me of doing things that I haven't done  (and for some reason quoting other forum posters that you know I get along with - and claiming that I am calling them a liar) without bothering to even ask me to clarify if that was the intention of my comment.

If divergent strategies did not work then there would be no market in the first place.  I thought that this much was obvious - so I never mentioned it. Perhaps I need to disclaim all of my posts better in future before being accused of being aggressive and irritating and trying to engage people in pissing contests.


----------



## Julia

Ves said:


> It seems fine for you to blantantly say that you could do better than "buy and hold" by doing this and that, but apparently any alternative is not welcome.



Sigh.  I just offered the idea that more money could be made by an alternative strategy.  Craft subsequently acknowledged that that was true.



> Honestly about all I got from this exchange was that you wanted to accuse me of doing things that I haven't done  (and for some reason quoting other forum posters that you know I get along with - and claiming that I am calling them a liar)



1.  I have no idea which posters you 'get along with' or otherwise.
2.  McLovin's post was put up as an example of what I was talking about.  BillM had already made the same point.
3.  I did not claim that you called anyone a liar.  I did, however, resent your implication that anyone, obviously myself included, who suggested selling to preserve profits etc, was describing something that had not actually been done and which was only obvious in hindsight.  That was just rather rude imo.  I've not at any stage suggested you are similarly making claims that I doubt.
You did, however, apologise for any such inference and I should have acknowledged that apology earlier.
I do so now and thank you for it.

Let's just move on.  I have neither the inclination nor the energy to feel obliged to defend a position that I simply put up in an attempt to broaden the input for the OP.  Craft, you are correct in suggesting these discussions are a form of punishment.


----------



## nulla nulla

jank said:


> I know there are alot of old expereinced heads here who have been around the block a few times in relation to all things regarding investing and saving.
> 
> So as a young would be investor who is just starting out with investing here is my question.
> *Given all the years experience you have what is the ONE thing you would do different?*




Sounds like a few posters have gotten off track from the original posters question. 

The one thing I would do differently, "as a young investor starting out", is appreciate that when a bear market commences, such as this one which started in November 2007 (caused by the impact of the collapse of a major bank and the subsequent international credit squeeze as banks stop trusting & lending to each other) is sell all those "buy & hold" investments and sit on cash until the market bottoms. 

They key premise behind my "one thing I would change" perspective is that a young investors starting out has time to ride out corrections and would be able to come back into the market in a better cashed up position than if they elected to continue to hold rather than sell.


----------



## So_Cynical

Ves said:


> The longer period of time over which you invest, and the more that you invest incrementally over that period of time, the more annual liquidity you will be able to draw on.  What starts small acorn can grow into a very big tree within an investing career.  There are most likely people who now earn an annual income greater than the original sum that they started with.




True: My acorn has more than doubled in size (approx 130%) in the 5+ years i have been in the market, started in July 2007...before the peak and held.



nulla nulla said:


> The one thing I would do differently, "as a young investor starting out", is appreciate that when a bear market commences, such as this one which started in November 2007 (caused by the impact of the collapse of a major bank and the subsequent international credit squeeze as banks stop trusting & lending to each other) is sell all those "buy & hold" investments and sit on cash until the market bottoms.




And if i had done that, my acorn would probably be triple the size it is now -  200% larger or more.

--

Investment success comes with just getting a couple or 3 big picture investment decisions right and repeating, and a conservative, indisciplined capital strategy.


----------



## stewiejp

stewiejp said:


> 1. As has been said before - get in the market *early*. Put an amount of $ into a share trading account each payday and when it hits a certain amout - buy shares with it, and don't touch it.




I'll adjust/clarify what I advised earlier, since there are obvious benefits to buying low and selling high etc. Bearing in mind this is advice aimed at someone younger (get in early) with possibly not a lot of experience/knowledge in the stock market. At that early stage in the stock trading experience the best strategy IMO is to "buy and hold" at least until you have a few stocks you are comfortable with, and at decent values. Continually trading at $500 parcels - the brokerage will kill you quickly.

By "don't touch it" - what I was getting at was don't be tempted to sell the shares to buy that new iphone/car/set of speakers you may be tempted to get because it's "on sale". Whatever money you put into the stock market - leave it in the stock market. It's a strategy I've used since day one, and recommend to anyone - whatever funds I earmark for share trading stay that way. Either as cash in a higher interest account, or shares - it never goes back into my everyday shopping/expenses account.


----------



## john12

1, make all your in-out decisions on price only, never opinions, use opinions only to identify which instruments interest you, but always wait first for a price signal
2, start investing as early as possible, i was 40 when i began, but first thought of it when still in my teens, sadly i felt it was more "cool" to be a capitalist-hating bohemian at that time, ah the joys of youth 
3, dont waste your money, grow it from a variety of sources and slow-feed your trading accounts from them


----------



## Julia

john12 said:


> sadly i felt it was more "cool" to be a capitalist-hating bohemian at that time, ah the joys of youth


----------



## sinner

For anyone who has actually tested it and traded it, you will know some things about trend following versus buy and hold.

Trend following the index: will underperform in a bull market *it will never outperform* simply due to the nature of the trading mechanism. Over a long timeframe (10+y) you will see returns are similar, if not identical for buy and hold versus trend following the index. The difference is in the volatility of returns, where volatility in trend following returns is significantly lower. So you give up 1-2% a year of returns in exchange for a 30-50% reduction in volatility.

Everyone uses XAO or XJO as the example, why don't we try a buy and hold approach on the Nikkei 225 or Greek Bank Index and see how it performs versus trend following? Heck, how are all the buy and holders of the NASDAQ-100 from 1999 doing?

That is the second point. Recency bias of the last 30-50 years has convinced everyone that stocks, property and bonds are always a buy over the long term. Over the really long term you can see the last 30-50 years has been an outlier of growth, where we would need to return to high EREOI energy, another demographic the size of women joining the workforce, another technological innovation like the internet, etc *just to see a repeat of the last 30 years* not even an improvement.

Trend following and buy and hold are *completely irrelevant* compared to asset selection.

If you have good asset selection then you theoretically can discard trend following as redundant and costly. In practice it's a little different, often trend following can inform you of whether your asset selection is "good or not". 

But the core idea remains the same: the alpha does not come from "dollar cost averaging" or "trend following" or "market cap weighting". *The alpha in returns on an investment timescale comes from asset class selection,* stocks in this case, which have benefit from a 30 year bull market. But this doesn't apply across the board, again just take a look at Japan or Spain or Greece to see how their stock and bond markets are doing while the SP500 and US10Y make new highs.

and that is all there is to it.


----------



## odds-on

craft said:


> Trying and losing as the majority must do according to the laws of maths is big waste of both time and money. Some  who are in the majority probably don't even realise it because they fail to keep accurate records of comparison against the passive alternative and then the brain does what the brain does.




Craft,

Some people do understand the odds of investment success and instead get busy with the hardcore saving!

http://www.mrmoneymustache.com/2011...-much-more-powerful-than-masterful-investing/

Cheers 

odds-on


----------



## gav

Sinner, do you have a  theory about the long-term success and out-performance achieved by many trend followers? Do you have any evidence that trend following doesn't work?


----------



## sinner

gav said:


> Sinner, do you have a  theory about the long-term success and out-performance achieved by many trend followers? Do you have any evidence that trend following doesn't work?




I didn't say it doesn't work. What I said was that trend following the index can never outperform the index in a bull market.


----------



## Julia

> Trend following and buy and hold are completely irrelevant compared to asset selection.



Sinner, I'd have thought that was a given.


----------



## gav

sinner said:


> I didn't say it doesn't work. What I said was that trend following the index can never outperform the index in a bull market.




Sorry, I must have misread your post.


----------



## burglar

tech/a said:


> Don't know about that
> I got mine in *bold* type.
> It's well documented here and on
> " The Chartist "




hi tech/a,

I finally get what you tried to tell me here.

We all get a telegram (yours in bold type)
when our lift reaches the top floor.

Just some of us can't read TA patterns.

Not as dismissive as some, I try to pick up a little at a time.

Recently an outage with accompanying power surge kinghit my TV
I went to the library and borrowed Louise Bedford's "Candlestick Charting".

Ok So this stuff started out as Japanese rice markets trading.
The patterns were named 200 year ago with Japanese 'warrior terms'.
Doji, Harami etc.
I tried to visualise these patterns, rather than learning the names.
Some of the patterns are bearish reversals.
They tell you that the share price is due for a tumble.

So when a talking duck says he knows your 
investment is reaching the top floor, you'd better believe it!


----------



## Bort

Instead of playing Wolfenstein, Duke Nukem and chatting on ICQ I would have started a stock forum and made money from advertising!

Or figured out how to trade myself 10 times faster. 

 Water you touch in a river is the last of that which has passed and the first of that which is coming. Thus it is with time. ~ da Vinci


----------



## Wysiwyg

jank said:


> Given all the years experience you have what is the ONE thing you would do different?



Set up real estate first. That is buy first home in early-mid twenties, build equity, buy investment property, build more equity. Learn value investing in share market and buy stocks for dividend income stream. As the great Warren said -



> People make money by staying invested for the long-term and without doing much "dancing in and dancing out" i.e. changing portfolios frequently.


----------

