Your thoughts on this strategy...

[ROE]

How do you gauge the fundamental soundness of a stock in this environment with certainty? Stocks in the ASX 20 can move by 50% in a day. Fundamentals mean little when fear and greed take over.
So are you saying now is a good time spend all your money in value stocks and invest for the long term?

Investment is subjective it's your cash, what do you want to do with it
are you in for a quick bucks or wanting to save for retirement 30 years from

now or just want to take a bit of risk to get a bit better gain than what the banks deposit offer? ...

and how long is your long term? 1 years? 5 years? 10 years? 30 years?

I have a few stocks on my list right now that I want someone short the hell out of it or create fear and greed and knock it down I then buy

TAH is one of them

 

[Trembling Hand]

Nioka I love your absolutes that you never back-up.

I don't give a toss what anyone uses, TA, FA, Stars or Dart board, BUT when someone makes a statement like....

If ever there is a time when F/A is superior to T/A it is now.

They, in my humble opinion, need the :bs: flagged waved at them. And asked to justify it. Which you cannot.

 

[2BAD4U]

It is in volatile markets like this that FA gets thown out the window because there is no logical (FA) explaination for what some companies share price is doing. Some people who rely solely on FA will actually turn to TA in these times to try and make some sense of what's going on. It is also argued that TA provides better forecasts in these times.

And to support this statement read McGrath's Financial institutions, instruments and markets (2007) by Christopher Viney. Pg 298.

 

[chops_a_must]

I don't give a toss what anyone uses, TA, FA, Stars or Dart board, BUT when someone makes a statement like....

At the 'right' prices in this market, I'm sure the majority of us TAers will become FAers in something, at some time.

Really there are no fundamentals at the moment. No-one can tell you what a company's costs will be like in 6 months, 12 months time, so how on earth is anyone truly a FAer now? It's beyond me...

Just strategic punting is all I can call it...

 

[It's Snake Pliskin]

Thought you would say that. I'm waiting for the great expert , chops, for a reply too. I think he is busy on another thread.

I'll respond to your ridiculous statement a few posts back.

Rubbish.

You don't have to prove anything, but the disinformation is pathetic.

 

[nioka]

It is in volatile markets like this that FA gets thown out the window because there is no logical (FA) explaination for what some companies share price is doing. .

Of course there is no logical explanation, f/a or t/a, for what a companies SHARE PRICE is doing. So forget the share price to some extent, except for the fact that they are low. Concentrate on the fundamentals, chose companies with sound fundamentals ( cash on hand, good management etc,etc.) and accept that it is a good time to build a decent share portfolio. T/A basically tries to imitate the past by projecting it into the future. The past is history, times have changed dramatically. There has never been times like these. The future will be different. T/A is for traders. F/A is for investors . Maybe the opinions of a moron in some eyes but nothing posted yet has changed my mind.

 

[wayneL]

This post actually deserves a response as it actually shows some rational though

Of course there is no logical explanation, f/a or t/a, for what a companies SHARE PRICE is doing. So forget the share price to some extent, except for the fact that they are low. Concentrate on the fundamentals, chose companies with sound fundamentals ( cash on hand, good management etc,etc.) and accept that it is a good time to build a decent share portfolio.

Maybe. But I would reclassify FA from Fundamental Analysis to Forensic Analysis. The published fundamentals cannot be current in the present environment. So if one is good at looking deeper and projecting future numbers on upcoming conditions, one could perhaps find some good buys.

T/A basically tries to imitate the past by projecting it into the future.

This may be true for some, but not all. Just as there are different types of FA, not everybody buys when the green line crosses the red, or even try to predict at all. For many, it is about creating boundaries (to borrow Nick's phrase) of correct and incorrect.

The past is history, times have changed dramatically. There has never been times like these. The future will be different.

These statements are true for any point in time. Not just now. But it is an important point that conditions change on us regularly. Adapt or die - true for any type of analyst.

T/A is for traders. F/A is for investors .

In general terms yes, but with large overlap

Maybe the opinions of a moron in some eyes...

Be careful here about making sensible statements, you have a reputation to uphold.

...but nothing posted yet has changed my mind.

Ahh! The coup de grace... at least we know it's you and not some imposter.

 

[skyQuake]

The past is history, times have changed dramatically. There has never been times like these. The future will be different.

History doesn't repeat, but it sure as hell looks damn similiar

 

[Shrewd Crude]

whizz21

Assume there is a basket of stocks with many having gone down significantly in value since the time they were purchased, say in 2006-2007.

Assume some of the portfolio is in small stocks and another part is in index type funds.

Now, I'm thinking about selling these two types of investment in the not to distant future, at a loss and re-invest into large caps, possibly financial stocks. My reasoning is that as financial stocks have gone down the most (and may go down further) and are likely to re-bounce the fastest and the strongest. (and quicker than small caps as well as funds)

Any thoughts on this strategy?

hey wizz,
Theres no problem about investing in financials, but theres a good way to go about it to limit yourself in a downtrending sector... If you buy when it is downtrending, you will most likely continue to watch the stock fall... its quite rare to pick an absolute bottom...
So, in theory you should wait for the sector to start a new trend, and then get in just above the bottom as it rises up... This way you save yourself time (the opportunity cost lost while you held onto it on the way down and then back up).... the potential added losses of the sector countinuing to get sold off... and further more, the potential that if it kept falling for you to get stopped out or sell out lower, for it to only rebound...
and by waiting -> the added bonus of buying into an uptrending stock/sector...
as an investor, accept tht you will rarely pick the bottom... be smart... perhaps sometimes you will get it at the same price but three months later, and a whole lot less heartache...

As for small stocks vs large stocks... The bigger they are the harder they fall... Large stocks have been getting pummled just like mini stocks...
The Spec end of the market looks so sold off, that its hard to see it falling further... big stocks will fall alongside little ones... your real questions should be... How can I limit downside risks?
you dont evade the problem by just switching from small stock to a large stock, as market risk is the same if you hold big or small, in theory this relationship between small vs large and market risk might not quite be true... but its clear to see the big popas coming down...
Im at the spec end of the market...
and I feel save with the market sold off and reduced risk of major market falls, which is what we want to avoid... If no crash... we survive... and then we perform...

.^sc

 

[kam75]

Hi there,

Assume there is a basket of stocks with many having gone down significantly in value since the time they were purchased, say in 2006-2007.

Assume some of the portfolio is in small stocks and another part is in index type funds.

Now, I'm thinking about selling these two types of investment in the not to distant future, at a loss and re-invest into large caps, possibly financial stocks. My reasoning is that as financial stocks have gone down the most (and may go down further) and are likely to re-bounce the fastest and the strongest. (and quicker than small caps as well as funds)

Any thoughts on this strategy?

Financials bouncing the quickest? In this current market its hard to tell if and when anything will bounce. Depends on your strategy. Perhaps if you're a long term investor, whatever that means, buying financial stocks AFTER THEY BOUNCED may be the thing for you. Dont go out catching falling knives.

 

[BBand]

If you are looking for some current trading ideas - have a look at www.forexfactory.com/showthread.php?t=2331.

Quite interesting, I have read up to page 5 so far - lots more pages to go

 

[shulink]

I think there is no guarantee that stocks dropping the most will rise the most when the economic condition recovers.

 

[The Edge]

Saturday 1 November 2008

Interesting discussion/defense of opinions.

To add to the mix:

nioka says:

> Of course there is no logical explanation, f/a or t/a,
> for what a companies SHARE PRICE is doing.

Aren't share prices supposed to reflect the fundamental
value of a company? If not, of what good is any
fundamental information?

> Concentrate on the fundamentals...

Because they have been such a good guide?

> T/A basically tries to imitate the past by projecting
> it into the future.

From where do you draw this conclusion? It sounds
like a silly statement to make, but I would be interested
to know how you arrived at it, basically.

Shoot as many arrows at T/A as you will, but at least
put a point on them.

> The past is history...

True.

> There has never been times like these.

So much for past history!

> Maybe the opinions of a moron in some eyes but
> nothing posted yet has changed my mind.

Based on your train of thought, no opposing post
ever will. Yet, you still advance your own unfounded
beliefs about technical analysis, as though valid.

I have not been able to glean from your comments,
do you know what technical analysis is?


whizz21 says:

> Now, I'm thinking about selling these two types of ...

[No need to repeat the original premise]


Shrew Crude provided a very viable answer, and if
followed, actually dismisses the case for fundamental
analysis. Not intentionally, but it makes a case.

> Any thoughts on this strategy?

It is an excellent Q, and it shows you are seeking a
solution.

It is all about the trend. When the trend is down,
as it is pretty much across the world spectrum, it
makes little sense to be long anything, and that
includes exchanging one sinking ship for another
that is not sinking as quickly.

It would be imprudent of me to suggest a remedy
in view of the damage already done. The situation
is unwieldy right now. As an aside, we have not yet
seen the lows, and this downtrend has legs. Not
immediately from here, but caveat emptor.

---

I will submit, not to be argumentative, that a simple
reading of any chart, even with the most rudimentary
understanding of technical analysis, gave sufficient
warning not to be long, [visably showing a change in
trend to the downside.]

These warnings went unheeded because most hold
the belief that fundamentals will prevail, expecting it
to be business as usual, and no one could foresee the
severity of the current situation as it dramatically
unfolded. [Its major flaw has been exposed.]

Further, even dismissing technical analysis from any
consideration, and allowing for fundamental information
to prevail, where was there any responsible use of
money management to limit one's risk exposure, the
most fundamental principle of all: preservation of
capital?!

Trillions lost for want of a simple rule.

---

kam75 says:

> Dont go out catching falling knives.

Well said. No fundamental or technical arguement,
no bias, just common sense.


shulink says:

> I think there is no guarantee that stocks dropping
> the most will rise the most when the economic
> condition recovers.

Very true. If I could tailgate on your thought to add,
those stocks which drop the most do so because they
are the weakest, and the weakest will take the most
time to recover, and some may never, so watch for
those stocks which have dropped the least.

Always, always buy strength. Buy that which is
outperforming the overall market. A simple, but very
effective rule.

I have no quarrel with fundamental analysis, or even
with those who rely upon it. There is a place for it,
yet those who do rely upon it fail to see its major flaw.
It is lousy for timing.

I have an immense quarrel with technical analysis, and
for the record, it is the only thing I have ever used.

My quarrel is with those who misuse it, who do not fully
understand it, or use it blindly under all market conditions.
[Confession: guilty, at one time.] For as long as TA is
misused, and then touted by the misusers are superior
over fundamental analysis, the fundamentalists have open
season on TA, deservedly so.

TA is a skill to be acquired, and once acquired, an art to
employ.


Let me add, open season does not apply to me.

Cheers!

 

[Pairs Trader]

I remember reading somewhere that if you had missed the 60 best up days of the market over the last 40 years you gain would had gone from 12% avg p.a. to 3.4% avg p.a. that means you either hold in there or you better have bloody good timing. I prefer not to worry about FA or TA and trade arbitrage methods, the true trading profession and providing value/liquidity to the market.