cancel
Showing results for 
Search instead for 
Did you mean: 
     
Highlighted
Contributor ○○

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks


@racqueteer wrote:

Here, as in most discussions, there is a disconnect between (basically) three types of investor:  There are the efficient market folks who buy the market (index) and let it ride.  Then there is the group who, like @chang , look for the best investment in any given area over a long time frame (but not infinite like the first group).  Imo, like @chang's, rolling returns are best for identifying THOSE.  Finally, there is the group who looks for outperformers over a shorter time frame (time frame to vary depending on the individual).  @FD1001  would be an example of this group.  These three groups are not going to agree on THEIR choices; as they invest fundamentally differently.

My own opinion, for what that's worth, is that the efficacy of an investment is best identified by it outperforming its peers (an identification problem in itself) year in, year out; over a long time (that definition varying with the individual) - rolling returns.  The momentum play is effective, I believe, but I also think the momentum often comes as the result of fortunate circumstance and not 'skill' - right place, right time.  I've seen a LOT of charts, convering multiple years, where an obvious difference between two investments boiled down to something that happened over a few weeks or a couple of months.  That wouldn't identify a 'better' investment in an absolute sense (imo), but it MIGHT help identify a better MOMENTUM trade at the time. 

FWIW, I think it's FAR harder to successfully identify a MOMENTUM trade than it is to identify a long-term better investment; if for no other reason than a TRADE has to happen decisively.  A momentum trade is also going to require deep analysis of some kind.  Easiest of course, is to buy the index and hold on; which is probably what most should do.

The type of stuff @FD1001  does is not easily duplicated by anyone else.  In that respect, he is a lot like @capecod was. The cef guys in general are often traders; so deep analysis applies there as well: @aubergine, @Beliavsky, @keppelbay, @acamus, come to mind.  @dtconroe also does a lot of analysis, but his time frame is longer, and he wouldn't consider himself a 'trader' (though efficient market folks would).  In the equity area, @Holiday is currently THE guy.  Like most folks, I think, the analysis stuff is interesting to me and helps me to identify investments I'd like to look at in terms of my own criteria.  So I'll extend my appreciation to everyone mentioned (and probably a few I missed) for all the analysis they provide us.


I do trade CEFs, as mentioned above, but our family does own index funds in 401(k) and 529 accounts, and even in our taxable account, we have some stock index fund positions with large unrealized capital gains that my wife and I hope to pass on to our children some day. We are in our late 40s, so hopefully the step-up in basis will not occur for a few decades.

Active traders can and probably should have some buy-and-hold positions, even if they don't say much about them.

Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks


@51hh wrote:

Very conservative allocation,100% indexing, (+- 5%) tweaking (or nicely coined re-balancing); no need for any modeling, analysis, curves, or guidance for us (from here or anywhere else).


Then why are you here?

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Explorer ○○

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks


@PaulR888 wrote:

@51hh wrote:

Very conservative allocation,100% indexing, (+- 5%) tweaking (or nicely coined re-balancing); no need for any modeling, analysis, curves, or guidance for us (from here or anywhere else).


Then why are you here?


He could be here for many reasons.  I say good for him.  Someone that is an independent thinker and has developed his own methodology that fits his needs and personality.  

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks

Racq,

Thinking about my favorite posters, Capecod wins hands down. He taught me about investing in fixed income CEFs and that information made me a some good money.

Chang has also helped me make money with his disciplined "buy low" habit and clear-headed analysis of various funds.

CEFs trading is not exactly easy, but buying strong CEFs when their discount widens has been a profitable strategy. It doesn't require much T/A, as relative performance is easily measured and the premium/discount data is published daily.

I'm more skeptical than you about a couple of short-term traders, who have claimed success without actually demonstrating it. Will leave it there.

Cheers,

N.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks


@norbertc wrote:

Racq,

I'm more skeptical than you about a couple of short-term traders, who have claimed success without actually demonstrating it. Will leave it there.

My concerns are data, logic, and conclusions drawn on the basis of same.  I don't CARE how someone is doing, nor about personally appearing admirable.  It just doesn't matter to me (and I'm not sure why it seems to matter to others?).  I tend to assume that people are telling me the truth, I DO have some background with many online from which to draw, but the KEY thing is that their success (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with me. 

Legitimate data and sound conclusions?  THEY matter because they can mislead or inform.  The poster's personal circumstances and POV?  ALSO matter in order to put their commentary in perspective.  How they're doing personally?  Doesn't matter. 

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Participant ○

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks


@racqueteer wrote:

@norbertc wrote:

Racq,

I'm more skeptical than you about a couple of short-term traders, who have claimed success without actually demonstrating it. Will leave it there.

My concerns are data, logic, and conclusions drawn on the basis of same.  I don't CARE how someone is doing, nor about personally appearing admirable.  It just doesn't matter to me (and I'm not sure why it seems to matter to others?).  I tend to assume that people are telling me the truth, I DO have some background with many online from which to draw, but the KEY thing is that their success (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with me. 

Legitimate data and sound conclusions?  THEY matter because they can mislead or inform.  The poster's personal circumstances and POV?  ALSO matter in order to put their commentary in perspective.  How they're doing personally?  Doesn't matter. 


norbertc is being nice, extremely nice even. He's also no idiot!

Coming from a science-oriented background, if someone makes outlandish claims that fly in the face of common sense, logic, convention, or statistics - AND boast of it without pause, isn't there some obligation to support it factually as opposed to accepting "after-the-fact" bookkeeping? Otherwise, it's just some TALKING head on the forums claiming to have put Humpty-Dumpty back together again, OVER and OVER.

If I tell the gambling community I correctly picked every football game, each week, as proved by posting my Monday-morning results, you think anyone is going to believe it? In a real-world, it's put-up or shut-up.

Regardless Racq, not everyone on the forums has the investment/financial acumen to see thru the BS. Those peeps are vulnerable. Unfortunately, while your OP was obviously well-intended, it did little to illuminate the grossest of offenders - that's sad.

Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks


@VA-Tech wrote:

@racqueteer wrote:

@norbertc wrote:

Racq,

I'm more skeptical than you about a couple of short-term traders, who have claimed success without actually demonstrating it. Will leave it there.

My concerns are data, logic, and conclusions drawn on the basis of same.  I don't CARE how someone is doing, nor about personally appearing admirable.  It just doesn't matter to me (and I'm not sure why it seems to matter to others?).  I tend to assume that people are telling me the truth, I DO have some background with many online from which to draw, but the KEY thing is that their success (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with me. 

Legitimate data and sound conclusions?  THEY matter because they can mislead or inform.  The poster's personal circumstances and POV?  ALSO matter in order to put their commentary in perspective.  How they're doing personally?  Doesn't matter. 


norbertc is being nice, extremely nice even. He's also no idiot!

Coming from a science-oriented background, if someone makes outlandish claims that fly in the face of common sense, logic, convention, or statistics - AND boast of it without pause, isn't there some obligation to support it factually as opposed to accepting "after-the-fact" bookkeeping? Otherwise, it's just some TALKING head on the forums claiming to have put Humpty-Dumpty back together again, OVER and OVER.

If I tell the gambling community I correctly picked every football game, each week, as proved by posting my Monday-morning results, you think anyone is going to believe it? In a real-world, it's put-up or shut-up.

Regardless Racq, not everyone on the forums has the investment/financial acumen to see thru the BS. Those peeps are vulnerable. Unfortunately, while your OP was obviously well-intended, it did little to illuminate the grossest of offenders - that's sad.


Paul:  I am a horse racing fan and watch on TV.  Commentators receive e-mails and tweets and often have to remind about redboarding.  

Boasting about a winning wager after the contest has been completed, but never speaking about the wager before the race was run. Withholding of good information before a horse race then boasting about the winner after the race is over and the bet is safely cashed.
If you didn't give us the winner before the race do not redboard after the race is over.
 
The challenge is in real life you can physically distance yourself from such types.  Here they seem to crash every discussion.  Until there is the ignore button again, this will continue to plague Morningstar forum.  Nobody bats 1.000.  If you are batting  .300 in horse racing or even baseball for that matter, you are having a very good day or year.  
 
Edit:  Reminds me of a horse racing friend I have who never handicaps a race in advance for me or tell me how he is betting.  But after the race, he always seems to have the winning trifecta and superfecta ticket.  What I don't know is his ROI.  I am sure many times he bet more covering many horses in the bet than what he got back in a winning ticket.  But probably true, he did have the winning ticket.  
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks


@racqueteer wrote:

@norbertc wrote:

Racq,

I'm more skeptical than you about a couple of short-term traders, who have claimed success without actually demonstrating it. Will leave it there.

My concerns are data, logic, and conclusions drawn on the basis of same.  I don't CARE how someone is doing, nor about personally appearing admirable.  It just doesn't matter to me (and I'm not sure why it seems to matter to others?).  I tend to assume that people are telling me the truth, I DO have some background with many online from which to draw, but the KEY thing is that their success (or lack thereof) has nothing to do with me. 

Legitimate data and sound conclusions?  THEY matter because they can mislead or inform.  The poster's personal circumstances and POV?  ALSO matter in order to put their commentary in perspective.  How they're doing personally?  Doesn't matter. 


Racq,

It's very simple. Anyone who thinks they are a decent trader and can regularly beat the market, would not avoid demonstrating their skill by posting their trades in real time. The annual "Challenge" is one fun way to do it. There are others.

Great poker players participate in top tournaments, where everyone can watch. They put their money on the table. But, they don't brag on Internet forums in order to establish their reputation. They walk the talk.

Certain individuals at M* brag about their returns, post selected trades after the fact, and like to patronize other posters. The one they won't do is offer real transparency ... or ever admit to a mistake.

It's heartwarming that you want to offer thanks to certain posters and I appreciate the effort, but ... !

N.

Highlighted
Contributor ○○○

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks


@norbertc wrote:

Racq,

Thinking about my favorite posters, Capecod wins hands down. He taught me about investing in fixed income CEFs and that information made me a some good money.

Chang has also helped me make money with his disciplined "buy low" habit and clear-headed analysis of various funds. [...]

I'm more skeptical than you about a couple of short-term traders, who have claimed success without actually demonstrating it. Will leave it there.

Cheers,

N.


 

Norbert, I absolutely agree with your assessment of Capecod. By the way, he hasn't posted on the Fidelity Forum since April. Hope he is well.

However, I don't recall seeing much of Chang's "clear-headed analysis of various funds" on this forum. He certainly has strong opinions, but I must have overlooked Chang's talent in the fund analysis department. Are there any readily available examples you can point to?

On the other hand, I can easily point to a "short term trader" like FD who, in my opinion, is one of the best bond fund analysts on the M* discussion forum and has also made me some good money.

As a regular participant in the annual Challenge contest, I pay no attention to the various pissing contests and the resulting nasty insinuations that are being bandied about by various posters. Bloody boring, to say the least.

Fred

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks

Guys, I understand your points of view; I do, but you're speaking to an entirely different issue/concern than I am.  How someone is doing with their investing and whether or not I believe, like, or appreciate their actions has little to do with my op.

I indicated that there are a handful of recognizable groups of investors.  That their pov was going to impact their analyses and conclusions.  I volunteered my own pov on what constitutes a "good investment".  Finally, I thanked a handful of people whose names came to mind as having provided data and their analyses of same.  None of that has anything to do with the concerns you're now bringing up. 

I don't CARE about those things in THIS context.  If you have a beef with something specifically stated by someone, by all means call them on it with FACTS.  I've certainly haven't been shy about pointing out failures of logic, misinterpretation of data, or flawed conclusions from LOTS of people.  I'm kind of a nitpicker; I realize that about myself, but can't seem to stop doing it!  8^b

 

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks

Racq,

Sorry, but I just don't like BS. I can't get past that. I know it when I see it; and I'm amazed that you're encouraging it.

tenor.gif

 

Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks

It takes all kinds on any forum, even here with more information focused persons, there's going to be some displaced motives, as it seems an inexcapable aspect of website discuss forums.

I do enjoy reading most of the threads posted here, even the goofy ones.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks


@norbertc wrote:


Racq,

It's very simple. Anyone who thinks they are a decent trader and can regularly beat the market, would not avoid demonstrating their skill by posting their trades in real time. The annual "Challenge" is one fun way to do it. There are others.

Great poker players participate in top tournaments, where everyone can watch. They put their money on the table. But, they don't brag on Internet forums in order to establish their reputation. They walk the talk.

Certain individuals at M* brag about their returns, post selected trades after the fact, and like to patronize other posters. The one they won't do is offer real transparency ... or ever admit to a mistake.

It's heartwarming that you want to offer thanks to certain posters and I appreciate the effort, but ... !

N.


OK Norbi, you are throwing stones again without proofs.

I participate a few times in the annual challenge that you managed and I remember I did pretty well.

I have posted many times my trades in real times and many by 1-2 days off.  I posted several real-time trades at one of the best times to be out of the market at the end of 02/2020.  This thread Sold most of my portfolio to cash  has them.  I have posted regularly most of my trades at 2020 - bond funds analysis  but you must pay attention if you cared, several posters who did, own most of my funds, and did well. 

In the past, after I was challenged for months/years I put together a list of all the trades I have done for many months based on my thread.  It showed the funds I own every month and most cases when the switches were reported within 1-2 days).  In most cases, it was one change on average every 1-2 months.  These were bond funds, slow movers and you could easily come up with my performance.  So, what happened?  it was quiet for several months and then the claims came back.  Same old BS.

Over the years there were several posters I communicate privately where I was more open, we could share ideas and trades a lot closer.  I'm not going to name names

"ever admit to a mistake" ....any time I switch funds it means I like the new fund better than the old one.  Of course, sometimes the switch is not the best and...I switch back or to another fund.  In my world it's not a "mistake" it's part of my system to make sure all my funds are performing well.  If you want to call it a "mistake" then it's your choice.  If you can show a mistake please do it. I asked to do it a while back and you came with nothing.  So, please put on your big pants and prove it.  

So, if my "friends" call me a lier maybe I should stop posting my trades, that's a thought  :-)

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Participant ○

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks

Without sheep, there would be no fleece.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks


@norbertc wrote:

Racq,

Sorry, but I just don't like BS. I can't get past that. I know it when I see it; and I'm amazed that you're encouraging it.

tenor.gif

 


Ok, so here's where I DO have a problem with something which has been written - and AGAIN, it has nothing whatever to do with my op:  You are absolutely entitled to have an opinion about what someone writes.  You are absolutely entitled to believe or disbelieve whatever you want.  What you do NOT have the right to do is to make a statement which is demonstrably false or which implies something demonstrably false without expecting to be called on it. Just as you say you are doing.

Above you state that I am "encouraging...BS".  Where EXACTLY have I said or done any such thing?  Can you even point to something which even CONDONES such a thing?  Do you mean that absent ANY actual evidence, other than my personal opinion, I have failed to engage in an attack on someone?  Or might even, perhaps, disagree with your conclusions because of evidence I DO have that you, perhaps, do not?  I keep telling you that liking or disliking someone; their actions or their words is irrelevant to data or analysis.  Good data is agnostic.  Evaluations of that data and conclusions drawn are either legitimate or not.  Personality, likes and dislikes, belief or disbelief in this or that utterance are IRRELEVANT. 

I'm not interested in being anyone else's father (or grandfather); I've done the former and am working on the latter.  I don't have the time or energy to be bothering about someone's behavior on here.  As long as their facts are straight and their logic (based on their pov) is sound, I have no beef with them; even if I happen to disagree personally.  Let me ask you this: Do you REALLY think that your actions/words are actually DIScouraging anything?  If they ARE, I'm not seeing any evidence to indicate it...

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks


@VA-Tech wrote:

Without sheep, there would be no fleece.


What about llama and alpaca?  ;-)

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks

Racq,

Let's imagine that someone posts regularly about using astrology to time the market. He claims to have excellent risk-adjusted returns. He posts analysis almost every day. It's all very detailed and complex. But, one thing the guy doesn't do is offer transparency regarding his actual trades and positions.

The astrological trader points out that most people shouldn't attempt to do what he's doing, as it requires special abilities and know-how. Most people should just index. He, by inference, belongs to a group of elite investors.

Our astrologist is very prolific and has a group of fans who take his astrological charts seriously. 

Would you single him out and thank him for his work?  Say that his approach is more "challenging" than other investment strategies?  Refrain from mentioning that the astrological trader only posts about successful trades after the fact?  Not express skepticism because you can't prove that he's a phony?

Would demonstrating respect for the trader astrologer encourage or discourage him? Does it matter?

Or?

Screenshot_20200627-073538.png

 

N.

Highlighted
Participant ○

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks

Brilliant analogy norbertc. Unfortunately, Racq is perhaps blind or tone-deaf to the root-issue. By specifically calling out the "astrologer" in the OP, he unintentionally perpetuates the myth of success, while at the same time denigrating the artistry of capecod thru comparison (which if you recall how transparent capecod was, is amusing beyond comprehension).

Meanwhile, when and if football "kicks off" this year, I will enlighten the forums with my betting prowess by revealing my picks on Monday morning for all the previous weekend's games! I promise my success won't be easily duplicated by others. Most people probably shouldn't even try. When it becomes obvious how bad "your" picks were relative to mine, my commentary on your bad bets might come off a bit snarky or rude but it's only because english isn't my first language. I used to be more open about my wagers, but not any longer. There were too many posters questioning my unique skills. Over the years there were several posters I communicated with privately when I was more open, so we could share ideas and discuss bets in private.  I'm not going to name names. They know who they are. No doubt, I've made them a lot of money.

If the previous paragraph doesn't amuse it you either don't have a sense of humor or you are the "astrologer".

Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks


@norbertc wrote:

Racq,

Let's imagine that someone posts regularly about using astrology to time the market. He claims to have excellent risk-adjusted returns. He posts analysis almost every day. It's all very detailed and complex. But, one thing the guy doesn't do is offer transparency regarding his actual trades and positions.

The astrological trader points out that most people shouldn't attempt to do what he's doing, as it requires special abilities and know-how. Most people should just index. He, by inference, belongs to a group of elite investors.

Our astrologist is very prolific and has a group of fans who take his astrological charts seriously. 

Would you single him out and thank him for his work?  Say that his approach is more "challenging" than other investment strategies?  Refrain from mentioning that the astrological trader only posts about successful trades after the fact?  Not express skepticism because you can't prove that he's a phony?

Would demonstrating respect for the trader astrologer encourage or discourage him? Does it matter?

Or?


In response, and speaking only for myself, I would look at his data first.  Is it useful data; is it open to interpretation; does it ignore OTHER equally good data?  Then, does the data support his argument; is his argument sound?  Are there alternative interpretations for the data?  Entirely separate would be whatever 'feelings' I might have about the person; his or her claims or my beliefs in the matter - ESPECIALLY if I have no evidence that clearly supports the position I want to take.    My personality and training leads me to be (largely) dispassionate and data-driven - That's just me.  If there's nothing wrong with their data, their reasoning, or conclusions, on what basis do I disagree?  Since I HAVE nothing to analyze in your hypothetical, I have no basis for forming an opinion.  Would I be skeptical?  Sure, I'm ALWAYS skeptical until I look at the data.

YOU'RE saying data isn't, and shouldn't be the issue.  That it can be ignored in favor of feelings, supposition, desires, etc.  You're flattering yourself that anything you say is going to somehow affect this person.  That they will become discouraged and dissuaded by your failure to believe them.  You're further admitting that your disagreement will not be addressing data but be based solely on what you THINK/BELIEVE to be true.  If you were me, thinking as you know I do, what would expect ME to be thinking about your statements?  Have you provided evidence supporting your position?  Enough to convince me that your cause is noble/just/logical?

Your hypothetical above is an appeal to the prejudices you expect me to blindly embrace; so I can ignore what DOES matter.  It ignores that I try not to ALLOW my prejudices to affect my thinking.  Now I don't think that astronomical movements have anything to do with people's actions, and that's based on the data I have seen in the past.  Will I then choose to ignore future data?  Why would I?  If the person points to data which supports their conclusion, can I find data which equally well disproves it?  THAT'S what matters... To ME.

0 Kudos
Highlighted
Frequent Contributor

Re: Analysis - My thoughts and thanks

VA-Tech, my response is the same given to Norbert:  I would ask to be shown the data on which you based your conclusion(s).  I would ask you to indicate your reasoning.  Until I have those, claims are of no import.  Can't provide either?  Then I simply ignore what you wrote.  If there's an alternative interpretation, I'd probably mention it.  Flawed logic?  You can COUNT on me commenting on THAT. 

It sounds as if you have a technical background?  I not sure why you would expect my approach to evaluating arguments to be different than it is?  It is the way I tended to be anyway, and the way I was subsequently trained to be.  You should certainly see that Norbert's "brilliant analogy" is an appeal to predisposition and not to data, evidence, OR reasoning.  As such, the analogy is a bit flawed.  It's very simple; if you want me to agree with something, you need to produce actual data/evidence, and provide the reasoning/logic you employed to draw your conclusions.  I don't care what your 'feelings' are.  I don't care about your 'beliefs'.  I may or may not find something written to be objectionable, or be skeptical about claims, but that has nothing to do with evaluating data and logic.

0 Kudos
Announcements