Fundamental Positions II

ducati916 said:

tech/a



Fundamentally sound stocks, correct.
Their value has improved, and I would have no problems buying more, and may well have done so. However the thread started on Reef, where I was challenged to provide a portfolio by MB, who as you remember stated that he would keep track of, and update the portfolio.

That he has signally failed to so, has meant that I have to update it each week, which is fine, but in the initial agreement I stated that "no averaging down would take place" therefore I am simply sticking to my agreement.

Every single stock will upon exit, show me a profit, and unleveraged returns will aggregate circa 30%, but, it will run for the 12 months+ and we shall see the results.



jog on
d998

Click to expand...

Hello Mr Ducati

Are you able to provide an update for us on this thread?

Cheers
Happytrader

Seemed like a good time to resurrect this thread given the recent discussions on averaging down.

The results are...interesting. I have interspersed the last position statement that Ducati provided with the current status of the positions and then provided a summary at the end.


CALL......$4.76........................$3.29...... ...................(-30.8%)
it is now 2.76 (-42%)
FORD......$10.74.....................$4.17....... ..................(-61.1%)
it is now 2.46 (-77%)
CTT......$4.00.......................$3.44........ ..................(-14.0%)
it is now 2.50 (-37%)
CQB......$17.47.....................$14.42........ .................(-17.4%)
it is now 15.10 (-13%)
TOL......$29.78.....................$29.62........ ..................+0.00%
it is now 19.71 (-34%)
SGTL....$10.30.....................$3.79...... .....................(-63.2%)
acquired by Freescale at $3 per share. (-71% lost on closed trade).
EVCI....$1.44.......................$0.49........ ...................(-65.9%)
it is now 0.06 (-96%)
SEPR....$92.50.................................... ..............................
it is now 19.29 (-79%)
WON....$6.65.....................$6.75............ ...................+1.5%
it is now 1.05 (-84%)
CHDW.$0.32.....................$0.21.............. ..................[-34%]
it is now delisted. Last traded price $0.20. (-38%)
CENT..$14.71...................$14.79............. ..................+0.0%
it is now 4.41 (-70%)
HMA..$10.99
it is now 6.46 (-41%)
Aggregate......................................... ....................[-23.7%]


Closed Trades

ISSC...................+8.1%
HNR....................+21.6%
EGY....................+61.8%
LRT....................+29.2%
KND....................+34.0%
GKIS..................+37.8%
DRYS..................+34.0%
UST...................+35.2% [not inc. dividends]
NAFC.................+29.0%
OFIX..................+27.8%
CAR...................+51.1% [not inc divs]
LNX...................+36.5%
SAFM................+33.8% [not inc. divs]
TELOZ...............+5.0%

---------- Overall Summary of Results

Results
ISSC...................+8.1%
HNR....................+21.6%
EGY....................+61.8%
LRT....................+29.2%
KND....................+34.0%
GKIS..................+37.8%
DRYS..................+34.0%
UST...................+35.2% [not inc. dividends]
NAFC.................+29.0%
OFIX..................+27.8%
CAR...................+51.1% [not inc divs]
LNX...................+36.5%
SAFM................+33.8% [not inc. divs]
TELOZ...............+5.0%

CALL -42%
FORD -77%
CTT -37%
CQB -13%
TOL -34%
SGTL -71%
EVCI -96%
SEPR -79%
WON -84%
CDHW -38%
CENT -70%
HMA -41%

14 winners - 445%
12 losers - 682%



The numbers speak volumes.

Please don't confuse Ducati with either:

a. A good fundamental analyst
b. A good money manager

On these points, his numbers do speak for themselves.

All failures seem to be judged that way.
At least he had the guts to do it.

More so than some critics.

MD/BSD/tech-a

I stop by every now and then, so this just caught my eye.

Judged purely on the numbers generated by MD, the experiment must be judged a failure, no question.

However, as tech-a suggested way back when... a simple exit criteria could turn these numbers around very quickly, so an easy lesson to be absorbed.

However, the initial argument that I promulgated was the absence of a stop-loss. In it's current form, as previously stated, that must be judged a failure.

However, again, there are some easy lessons learned, that allow a "no stop" rule, that does not result in the above numbers.

jog on
duc

tech/a said:

All failures seem to be judged that way.
At least he had the guts to do it.

More so than some critics.

Click to expand...

Some people get paid for their views mate.

You give them for free.

BSD said:

Some people get paid for their views mate.

You give them for free.

Click to expand...

Not meaning they are worth that payment.

F/A or T/A.

Very few worth handing a cent too, or spending a minute even thinking about it.

BSD said:

Some people get paid for their views mate.

You give them for free.

Click to expand...

Haa

"If stock market experts were so expert, they would be buying stock, not selling advice."

and another favorite.

'An economist is an expert who will know tomorrow why the things he predicted yesterday didn't happen today."

tech/a said:

Haa

"If stock market experts were so expert, they would be buying stock, not selling advice."

Click to expand...

thats so true...

Wow, Awesome thread to read and prob a thread that those new to trading/investing should browse. It really shows that having no clear stop loss can smash your trading/investing system.

What ever happened to this guy? did he just stop updating and slip into the background?

No Duc's still around.
He wont be far away and will see this post.

In all fairness Duc had an idea which failed.
Had the guts to put it out there and the guts to admit it didnt work.

As far as I can work out the only form of trading Duc is involved with is arbitrage.

I wonder how these positions will look in 10 years time.

investorpaul said:

Wow, Awesome thread to read and prob a thread that those new to trading/investing should browse. It really shows that having no clear stop loss can smash your trading/investing system.

What ever happened to this guy? did he just stop updating and slip into the background?

Click to expand...

IP,

I'm still about.

Stoplosses, or some form of money management, including an exit strategy, that allows winners to run, would have transformed the basic strategy. Of course, at the time it was implemented, we were in a strong cyclical bull market, that helped.

Buy and hold, with no stops etc, would work well only in one market scenario, buying at the bottom of a secular bear market, and joining a new secular bull market.

jog on
duc

ducati916 said:

Buy and hold, with no stops etc, would work well only in one market scenario, buying at the bottom of a secular bear market, and joining a new secular bull market.

Click to expand...

I would think that there's some possibility that the above scenario is what we have just seen (October 08 to April 09) assuming this/now is the beginning of a new bull.?

So_Cynical said:

I would think that there's some possibility that the above scenario is what we have just seen (October 08 to April 09) assuming this/now is the beginning of a new bull.?

Click to expand...

Well that's debateable, personally I see this as a cyclical bull move [again] on a secular bear market.

Actually, buying Preferred shares, on a fundamental basis, or Convertible Bonds on a fundamental basis can work out well.

jog on
duc