- Joined
- 30 May 2017
- Posts
- 2,513
- Reactions
- 4,140
My interest rate is 4.49 for the share loan but point is good. The problem is that I built a new house and have to pay that off also at 3.59%.
I am better to concentrate on that while making money through the shares and negative gearing the interest.
Both loans have dropped due to payments and successful share trading so my share gearing has been dropping. The longer it goes the less risk.
If I didn't do it this way I wouldn't be able to take decent share positions and make much money.
Trading at $3000 for instance has its own costs.
The typical, conservative investor would go for blue chips and not use a margin loan. So that's probably the majority of investors. But I agree with the sentiment running through your whole post.I wonder if it's valid to say that those not using margin loan tend to go for stocks with a greater volatility.
Yes. A very well-put statement, and one I can identify with.Non-margin use is not necessarily conservative. A non-margin user in fact faces risk of their own recklessness due to feeling safe from margin calls. On flipside, they can also be intelligently adventurous and risk-taking in their stock choice in ways that that a margin user can't (or shouldn't). Being without any leverage frees you up to be speculative.
@StockyGuy
Are you talking about investing for the long term or a short term trade?
I am into small caps too and you are right, if you pick the right ones you can easily get double-digit and the occasional triple-digit winner in your portfolio without using any form of leverage. Picking the right ones amongst all the duds out there is the challengeBut volatile stocks are probably not suitable for the average investor.
I traded with BT margin** for over 7 years in the days of Tech Trader.
(Un Holy Grails Page 109-115 Nick Radge ). With a starting capital of
$30,000 and trading on margin as shown above Had an equity peak
of $479,000 and when I closed the system permanently $387,000
In 7 years Id increased my $30,000 x 12.69 Times in 7 years using
the power of Leverage and Compounding--that's 1,290 % Increase.
It DOESN'T mean getting $500,000 @ 7% to trade with --- with an equity of $25,000 and buying $500,000
of shares!!
So true. Who can sleep at night with that kind of leverage...
1000s do it every single day.
I do it.
But I do it with no more risk than trading my $X----Insert amount
you use for me its 35K or max 6 contracts of the DAX.-- (Futures ).
Property at one time 12 at the one time often with zero down.
Just using gained equity.
Business with machinery all the time. (7 figures).
I sleep fine I've quantified the risk
Lived through 1987/1993/2008/9.
I know how to avoid ruin---everyone should.
I know how to use other peoples money---everyone should.
Although I have some reservations about the risk taking / leverage, your sense of humour is outstanding !GG
I agree
Most people are not Business minded and most people
here shouldn't be trading.
80% fail in business and higher in trading.
Its not for everyone as a wealth creation tool.
I have no problems with Black swans--I'm a duck!
Very interesting finding @Dona Ferentes , I guess we are all searching for those rare outperforming stocks, trying to find that gem or golden nugget in the crap heap...And something to consider;
..... There have been a multitude of studies of long-term returns, but it was Bessembinder’s results which shocked, and he outlined them in a recent presentation in Sydney. Out of 26,000 US listed companies:
Only about 1,000 stocks out of 26,000 accounted for all the US$35 trillion of wealth created (above the Treasury Bill rate). This is far from a coin toss as 96% of companies did not contribute to growing net shareholder wealth....
- A few stocks have very large compound long-run returns.
- The large positive ‘market risk premium’ is attributable to relatively few stocks.
- The top 90 firms (1/3 of 1%) account for half of the shareholder wealth enhancement (relative to US Treasury Bills) since 1926.
- The top 4% of firms account for all of the net shareholder wealth creation since 1926.
(And much further on)
.... But for most retail investors, the man who spends his life studying the numbers says buy a low-cost and diversified portfolio. Manage risk tolerance through asset allocation and the mix of defensive and growth assets rather than worrying about individual stocks. Shares will rise over time but with painful periods along the way, and everyone reacts differently to underperformance, either by their own stocks or a selected fund manager...
Only 2.4% of companies deliver all net shareholder wealth
Over decades, relatively few companies generate all the stockmarket's outperformance. Is this an argument for passive investing or does it prove active investing is rewarded? Bessembinder lets you decide.www.firstlinks.com.au
Which Mr Austrader brings to mind a character from the now defunct forum who bought in a ship load of WAF for about 1c and then sold out at over a $1. He had over 1 million That was certainly his Golden Nugget.Very interesting finding @Dona Ferentes , I guess we are all searching for those rare outperforming stocks, trying to find that gem or golden nugget in the crap heap...
i have searched and searched , and sometimes found a few , sadly nearly all of them were NOT selected to become multi-baggersVery interesting finding @Dona Ferentes , I guess we are all searching for those rare outperforming stocks, trying to find that gem or golden nugget in the crap heap...
Good morningWhich Mr Austrader brings to mind a character from the now defunct forum who bought in a ship load of WAF for about 1c and then sold out at over a $1. He had over 1 million That was certainly his Golden Nugget.
I have found a few “Multi-baggers”, and had the conviction to be quite heavily weighted in them. But I still believe in index investing too, My super and an investment bond I hold are both 100% indexed into VAS, VGS and a property index.i have searched and searched , and sometimes found a few , sadly nearly all of them were NOT selected to become multi-baggers
my only buy selected to be a multi-bagger was MQG ( av. SP $26.76 including a bonus SYD share ) the rest decided to rise without any successful prediction from me , including star of the portfolio , PME ( bought @ 16.5 cents , currently up more than 39,000% ) silly me thought it was good for a 1 cent or maybe 1.5 cent div a year
maybe somebody else has a better formula than me ( one success in more than 400 stocks over the last 11 years isn't a good strike rate )
good luck selecting your multi-baggers
the average market participant.
broad cross section of the global economy
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?