It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
User avatar
Topic Author
Rick Ferri
Posts: 9707
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:40 am
Location: Georgetown, TX. Twitter: @Rick_Ferri
Contact:

It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by Rick Ferri »

I recall speaking with a woman at a bar after work in 1999. She had recently quite her job and was day-trading technology stocks from her living room. I asked what looked good to her and she told me the name of some internet company. I asked who the CEO was...she didn't know. I asked who the main competitors were...she didn't know. I asked what state the company was headquartered in...she didn't know. Then I asked what she did know about the stock. "It's going up. That's what I know."

Overconfidence is the biggest cognitive error that active investors make. "It's different for me" is an extremely expensive phrase. That's what this article is about:

Explaining The ‘It’s Different For Me’ Investor Mentality

Rick Ferri


.
Last edited by Rick Ferri on Thu Nov 07, 2013 1:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The Education of an Index Investor: born in darkness, finds indexing enlightenment, overcomplicates everything, embraces simplicity.
lisaac
Posts: 36
Joined: Thu Oct 24, 2013 8:55 am

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by lisaac »

Wonder how that worked out for her, when the market is flying up everyone "makes" money and thinks they are geniuses.

I was lucky to get burned by that pretty early so I did it with a very small sum and didn't lose to much, but definitely learned my lesson..
technovelist
Posts: 3611
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 8:02 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by technovelist »

I have another sort of similar story from the same timeframe. A friend who got a ton of free stock in a .com told me that they didn't want to make a profit any time soon, because then they would have a P/E ratio.

No, I'm not making that up... unfortunately for my friend.
In theory, theory and practice are identical. In practice, they often differ.
User avatar
nisiprius
Advisory Board
Posts: 52211
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:33 am
Location: The terrestrial, globular, planetary hunk of matter, flattened at the poles, is my abode.--O. Henry

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by nisiprius »

"It's Different for Me"--brilliant.

There are some specific forms of "It's Different For Me."

"It's Different For Me Because I Am One Of The Initiated." As in, "Alternative investments may play an important risk-management role in a strategically diversified pension plan portfolio; however, this sophisticated investment arena can prove risky for the uninitiated," but not for me.

"It's Different For Me Because I Am Tough." As in, "100% stocks is be too high for most people, but it's different for me because I never panic, so I do not need to factor in the possibility that that I might sell during a crash."

"It's Different For Me Because I Can See the Future." As in "I think bonds are riskier than stocks right now, because even though bonds fluctuate less I know which way their fluctuations are about to go. Bonds are going to fluctuate down and stocks are going to fluctuate up, and because I know they are going up, they are not risky for me."
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness; Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.
User avatar
Toons
Posts: 14467
Joined: Fri Nov 21, 2008 9:20 am
Location: Hills of Tennessee

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by Toons »

One Of My Favorite Quotes:

"Everyone is a genius In A Bull Market" :happy

http://thefirstmillionisthehardest.net/ ... ll-market/
"One does not accumulate but eliminate. It is not daily increase but daily decrease. The height of cultivation always runs to simplicity" –Bruce Lee
User avatar
baw703916
Posts: 6681
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:10 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by baw703916 »

It's different for me because I've never once talked to anyone in a bar about investing.

One the bright side, this story does break down the stereotype that only men can invest in an overconfident manner.

Brad
Most of my posts assume no behavioral errors.
Fallible
Posts: 8798
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:44 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by Fallible »

Rick Ferri wrote:I recall speaking with a woman at a bar after work in 1999. She had recently quite her job and was day-trading technology stocks from her living room. I asked what looked good to her and she told me the name of some internet company. I asked who the CEO was...she didn't know. I asked who the main competitors were...she didn't know. I asked what state the company was headquartered in...she didn't know. Then I asked what she did know about the stock. "It's going up. That's what I know."
...
The day-trader's replies are nearly identical to those I've heard at various social and work gatherings over the years: someone invariably recommends a stock and then at least one person asks for more details and the answers are like your day trader's. But the best response I've ever heard was from a guy who was asked the name of the stock he was pushing: "I'm not sure, but I know its ticker name because I watch it all the time." I've also seen videos from the '90s interviewing investors jumping into the hot stock and tech markets and their responses are similar, such as one who said his stock was now down a little, but "I don't worry because it'll just go back up."

How times and people have not changed. :(

Edit to add the definition of Overconfidence from the wiki:

"Being overconfident in your investing abilities can lead to big investing losses. A main reason is that, in the short run, the ups and downs of the stock market are random happenings. Such unpredictable variations mean that intelligence, skill, and knowledge give you no edge, and thinking they do can be “hazardous to your wealth.” [5] “The only way to achieve everything you’re capable of is to accept what you are not capable of,” says Jason Zweig."
Last edited by Fallible on Thu Nov 07, 2013 2:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Yes, investing is simple. But it is not easy, for it requires discipline, patience, steadfastness, and that most uncommon of all gifts, common sense." ~Jack Bogle
Levett
Posts: 4177
Joined: Fri Feb 23, 2007 1:10 pm
Location: upper Midwest

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by Levett »

"Overconfidence is the biggest cognitive error that active investors make"

Surely, you don't mean to imply that passive investors are immune from overconfidence, or do you?

Lev
User avatar
Topic Author
Rick Ferri
Posts: 9707
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:40 am
Location: Georgetown, TX. Twitter: @Rick_Ferri
Contact:

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by Rick Ferri »

I've never been accused of being overconfident myself :wink:, but if I were to become overconfident, one thing passive indexing does is it stops me from doing anything about it.

Rick Ferri
The Education of an Index Investor: born in darkness, finds indexing enlightenment, overcomplicates everything, embraces simplicity.
User avatar
prudent
Moderator
Posts: 9085
Joined: Fri May 20, 2011 2:50 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by prudent »

Yes, in the dot-com boom everyone who was new to investing (and many who were experienced) were convinced they knew everything. And after that I remember assisting at a company open house for recruiting... there was one gentleman who came to apply for an accounting job. His previous position was EVP of Finance for a pretty large company in town but it had ended two years earlier. Since my function at the open house was to steer applicants to the right manager for a quick assessment, I asked the man what sparked his interest in our accounting job (curious, since it would be a huge step down from an EVP).

He was straightforward - told me he quit his EVP job to day trade tech stocks, but after the bust it just wasn't working out, so he was getting back into the workforce.

Never forgot that.
Fallible
Posts: 8798
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:44 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by Fallible »

Rick Ferri wrote:I've never been accused of being overconfident myself :wink:, but if I were to become overconfident, one thing passive indexing does is it stops me from doing anything about it.

Rick Ferri
Right! In fact, the entire Bogleheads' philosophy can help us control overconfidence and other behavioral pitfalls.
"Yes, investing is simple. But it is not easy, for it requires discipline, patience, steadfastness, and that most uncommon of all gifts, common sense." ~Jack Bogle
User avatar
JoMoney
Posts: 16260
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 5:31 am

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by JoMoney »

nisiprius wrote:"It's Different for Me"--brilliant.

There are some specific forms of "It's Different For Me."

"It's Different For Me Because I Am One Of The Initiated." As in, "Alternative investments may play an important risk-management role in a strategically diversified pension plan portfolio; however, this sophisticated investment arena can prove risky for the uninitiated," but not for me.

"It's Different For Me Because I Am Tough." As in, "100% stocks is be too high for most people, but it's different for me because I never panic, so I do not need to factor in the possibility that that I might sell during a crash."

"It's Different For Me Because I Can See the Future." As in "I think bonds are riskier than stocks right now, because even though bonds fluctuate less I know which way their fluctuations are about to go. Bonds are going to fluctuate down and stocks are going to fluctuate up, and because I know they are going up, they are not risky for me."
I partly disagree with that... Someone who holds a lower (but non 0) percentage of stocks also has potential to panic and sell during a market crash. I would think the more risk-averse people who hold a lower percentage might even be more susceptible to that kind of reaction compared to someone who's had a large long-standing commitment to stocks and has some familiarity with the risks.
Someone who is willing to accept the risks just has a different preference, and that IS different for different people... it's not that it's not risky, they've just weighed the risks and picked the percentage that suits there preference.
"To achieve satisfactory investment results is easier than most people realize; to achieve superior results is harder than it looks." - Benjamin Graham
pkcrafter
Posts: 15461
Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 11:19 am
Location: CA
Contact:

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by pkcrafter »

I recall speaking with a woman at a bar after work in 1999. I asked what looked good to her
Man, what a lousy line. You should have asked what her sign was. :sharebeer

Paul
When times are good, investors tend to forget about risk and focus on opportunity. When times are bad, investors tend to forget about opportunity and focus on risk.
staythecourse
Posts: 6993
Joined: Mon Jan 03, 2011 8:40 am

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by staythecourse »

pkcrafter wrote:
I recall speaking with a woman at a bar after work in 1999. I asked what looked good to her
Man, what a lousy line. You should have asked what her sign was. :sharebeer

Paul
Good one!!

I was getting excited to read the rest ofthe post by Mr. Ferri after reading that scintillating starter!!

Good luck.
"The stock market [fluctuation], therefore, is noise. A giant distraction from the business of investing.” | -Jack Bogle
User avatar
grap0013
Posts: 1892
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:24 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by grap0013 »

nisiprius wrote:
There are some specific forms of "It's Different For Me."

"It's Different For Me Because I Am Tough." As in, "100% stocks is be too high for most people, but it's different for me because I never panic, so I do not need to factor in the possibility that that I might sell during a crash."
Is it possible some investors actually realize their weakness at being able to hold on to anything less than 100% stocks?

I respectfully disagree with you on this one. The investor who has been at a high equity percentage for a long time is a much different animal than someone who has recently changed to a 100% equity allocation.

My name is grap and I don't like bonds. There, I said it.

Cue Staythecourse to say, "the best allocation is the one that allows the investor to stay the course."
There are no guarantees, only probabilities.
User avatar
nisiprius
Advisory Board
Posts: 52211
Joined: Thu Jul 26, 2007 9:33 am
Location: The terrestrial, globular, planetary hunk of matter, flattened at the poles, is my abode.--O. Henry

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by nisiprius »

JoMoney wrote:
nisiprius wrote:..."It's Different For Me Because I Am Tough." As in, "100% stocks is be too high for most people, but it's different for me because I never panic, so I do not need to factor in the possibility that that I might sell during a crash."
I partly disagree with that... Someone who holds a lower (but non 0) percentage of stocks also has potential to panic and sell during a market crash. I would think the more risk-averse people who hold a lower percentage might even be more susceptible to that kind of reaction compared to someone who's had a large long-standing commitment to stocks and has some familiarity with the risks.
Someone who is willing to accept the risks just has a different preference, and that IS different for different people... it's not that it's not risky, they've just weighed the risks and picked the percentage that suits there preference.
You're right, of course. However, the forthright admission by Dan Solin that "In the midst of the Great Recession of 2008, stocks were dropping like a stone. I did the opposite of what I advise my clients to do: I panicked and reduced my asset allocation to stocks," shows that it is easy for people to gauge their risk tolerance inaccurately. Charles Jaffe made an unsourced throwaway statement that "studies show that average investors bail out when losses move beyond 20%." I'd really like to know the source for that. My working assumption is always that I'm an average investor.
Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure nineteen nineteen and six, result happiness; Annual income twenty pounds, annual expenditure twenty pounds ought and six, result misery.
technovelist
Posts: 3611
Joined: Wed Dec 30, 2009 8:02 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by technovelist »

grap0013 wrote:
nisiprius wrote:
There are some specific forms of "It's Different For Me."

"It's Different For Me Because I Am Tough." As in, "100% stocks is be too high for most people, but it's different for me because I never panic, so I do not need to factor in the possibility that that I might sell during a crash."
Is it possible some investors actually realize their weakness at being able to hold on to anything less than 100% stocks?

I respectfully disagree with you on this one. The investor who has been at a high equity percentage for a long time is a much different animal than someone who has recently changed to a 100% equity allocation.

My name is grap and I don't like bonds. There, I said it.

Cue Staythecourse to say, "the best allocation is the one that allows the investor to stay the course."
Agreed. My AA is very unusual but I don't have any trouble staying with it.
In theory, theory and practice are identical. In practice, they often differ.
hq38sq43
Posts: 425
Joined: Tue Sep 06, 2011 5:25 pm
Location: Bradenton FL

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by hq38sq43 »

lisaac wrote:Wonder how that worked out for her, when the market is flying up everyone "makes" money and thinks they are geniuses.

I was lucky to get burned by that pretty early so I did it with a very small sum and didn't lose to much, but definitely learned my lesson..
"Financial genius is a short memory and a rising market."

--John Kenneth Galbraith
Harry at Bradenton
nash031
Posts: 172
Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2013 10:38 am
Location: Coronado, CA

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by nash031 »

Rick Ferri wrote:I recall speaking with a woman at a bar after work in 1999. She had recently quite her job and was day-trading technology stocks from her living room. I asked what looked good to her and she told me the name of some internet company. I asked who the CEO was...she didn't know. I asked who the main competitors were...she didn't know. I asked what state the company was headquartered in...she didn't know. Then I asked what she did know about the stock. "It's going up. That's what I know."

Overconfidence is the biggest cognitive error that active investors make. "It's different for me" is an extremely expensive phrase. That's what this article is about:

Explaining The ‘It’s Different For Me’ Investor Mentality

Rick Ferri
.
Like many things in life, everyone is special and unique... just like everyone else.
Nowizard
Posts: 4839
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 5:33 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by Nowizard »

I once worked with a woman who was smart, had a Ph.D., and who had a "system" for day trading. She came in to my office regularly mentioning how much money she was making, which was a lot. She was aware she was being risky but had a very significant health issue that she said made her willing to take risk since she was "investing for the short term." Over a period of a month or so she gradually quit mentioning her "winnings." You know the rest, though she was smart enough to move on to other short term things that had a feeling of excitement attached. It was not different for her.

Tim
Fallible
Posts: 8798
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 3:44 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by Fallible »

Nowizard wrote:I once worked with a woman who was smart, had a Ph.D., and who had a "system" for day trading. She came in to my office regularly mentioning how much money she was making, which was a lot. She was aware she was being risky but had a very significant health issue that she said made her willing to take risk since she was "investing for the short term." Over a period of a month or so she gradually quit mentioning her "winnings." You know the rest, though she was smart enough to move on to other short term things that had a feeling of excitement attached. It was not different for her.

Tim
Ph.D notwithstanding, day trading seems most about emotions. Here's a NYT article I remember reading on the subject and also a comment on being "in charge" that I'm not quite sure I agree with: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/03/28/busin ... wanted=all

From the article:

"So why do people persist in this line of work?

“The technical term is thrill-seeking,” says Hersh Shefrin, a professor of behavioral finance at Santa Clara University in California and author of “Beyond Greed and Fear,” an exploration of investors’ mindscapes. “There’s an adrenaline rush. And the thing about day trading is that it gives you pretty quick feedback. If you buy and hold, a lot of things need to happen before you see a result, and much of what happens relates to external factors that are beyond your control. With day trading, you’re in charge.”

Also, he says, “people enjoy trading.”
"Yes, investing is simple. But it is not easy, for it requires discipline, patience, steadfastness, and that most uncommon of all gifts, common sense." ~Jack Bogle
berntson
Posts: 1366
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2012 12:10 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by berntson »

grap0013 wrote: Is it possible some investors actually realize their weakness at being able to hold on to anything less than 100% stocks?
You know, I hadn't thought about this. Suppose we are primarily concerned about helping an investor find an asset allocation that will allow her to stay the course. We usually end up focusing on protecting the investor from irrational fear. Bear markets are ugly, and we want to make sure that the investor doesn't suffer losses that will cause her to panic and sell when stocks are cheap.

But markets are characterized not only by irrational fear, but by irrational greed. Suppose we are we are nearing the end of a mature bull-market. An investor with an overly conservative portfolio may feel she has missed out, not making as much as her neighbors and friends who have had a more aggressive portfolio from the get-go. In a fit of irrational greed, she decides to "make up for lost time" by doubling-down on super-duper sector X. We all know how this sort of story ends.

What makes irrational greed less dangerous than irrational fear? One possibility is that where greed usually sneaks up on you, fear hits you in the face. It's sudden, paralyzing, unavoidable. Greed creeps in over months or years. On the other hand, emotions that build slowly over time can be dangerous in their own way. When I'm afraid, I usually know that I'm afraid. It's much easier to be greedy and not realize that you are.
Buddtholomew
Posts: 1059
Joined: Thu Mar 01, 2007 2:29 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by Buddtholomew »

I considered increasing equity to 75% from 65% in response to the current economic climate and forecast for higher yields. I rebalanced in 2008/9 and otherwise have made few changes to my allocation over the previous 6-7 years. The challenge is sticking to the plan in the face of new evidence, perceived or otherwise.
"The first principle is that you must not fool yourself and you are the easiest person to fool" --Feynman.
User avatar
Taylor Larimore
Posts: 32842
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 7:09 pm
Location: Miami FL

A timely quote.

Post by Taylor Larimore »

lisaac wrote: "Financial genius is a short memory and a rising market."--John Kenneth Galbraith
lisaac:

Thank you for this timely quote from a great economist.

Best wishes
Taylor
"Simplicity is the master key to financial success." -- Jack Bogle
JW-Retired
Posts: 7189
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 11:25 am

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by JW-Retired »

Who was the Boglehead who "backed up the truck" and went to 100% equities in late 2008? I sort of recall it was Adrian Nemu but could easily be wrong and he is gone from here. The searches don't go back beyond 2011 threads now. I wonder if he is still at 100%.
JW
Retired at Last
Calm Man
Posts: 2917
Joined: Wed Sep 19, 2012 9:35 am

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by Calm Man »

I will take a contrary viewpoint. So the lady clearly did not know any fundamentals. Well,, whoever was on the other side of the trade knows more fundamentals that any of us. She was trading on momentum. Probably just as good for short term speculation.
linuxizer
Posts: 1783
Joined: Wed Jan 02, 2008 6:55 am

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by linuxizer »

nisiprius wrote:My working assumption is always that I'm an average investor.
This, of course, makes you an above-average investor.
User avatar
baw703916
Posts: 6681
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:10 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by baw703916 »

If I had been in Rick's situation, I would have had the urge to sell everything immediately. It's the same as the old story that it's time to sell when you are getting stock tips from the shoe shiner or the cab driver.

But, I've only been to a bar less than ten times in my life, I've never struck up a conversation with anyone I didn't already know while in a bar, and if I were to, I don't imagine I would pick investing as a conversation topic. :)

Brad
Most of my posts assume no behavioral errors.
User avatar
grap0013
Posts: 1892
Joined: Thu Mar 18, 2010 1:24 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by grap0013 »

berntson wrote:
You know, I hadn't thought about this. Suppose we are primarily concerned about helping an investor find an asset allocation that will allow her to stay the course. We usually end up focusing on protecting the investor from irrational fear. Bear markets are ugly, and we want to make sure that the investor doesn't suffer losses that will cause her to panic and sell when stocks are cheap.

But markets are characterized not only by irrational fear, but by irrational greed. Suppose we are we are nearing the end of a mature bull-market. An investor with an overly conservative portfolio may feel she has missed out, not making as much as her neighbors and friends who have had a more aggressive portfolio from the get-go. In a fit of irrational greed, she decides to "make up for lost time" by doubling-down on super-duper sector X. We all know how this sort of story ends.

What makes irrational greed less dangerous than irrational fear? One possibility is that where greed usually sneaks up on you, fear hits you in the face. It's sudden, paralyzing, unavoidable. Greed creeps in over months or years. On the other hand, emotions that build slowly over time can be dangerous in their own way. When I'm afraid, I usually know that I'm afraid. It's much easier to be greedy and not realize that you are.
I was almost convinced to buy some bonds when I first joined this forum despite being 100% equities since 2007. I'm glad I didn't. I think it's the maximizer in me that likes 100% rather than greed. Plus it's just money, you can't take it with you. Optimizers like 80/20 because it has a much higher Sharpe Ratio. Then you have you're agnostic girl who's 50:50. Finally, conservative Joe who is 25:75. Different strokes for different folks.
There are no guarantees, only probabilities.
User avatar
noyopacific
Posts: 359
Joined: Wed Jan 28, 2009 5:06 pm
Location: Mendocino

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by noyopacific »

My favorite comment in Rick's excellent article was: . . . "These confident people say they have a more sophisticated, savvier approach than the common Joe, thus they have a better chance of beating the markets with active management."
After a lackluster experience with professional management, my wife and I stared managing our own investments 20 years ago. I had first become interested in index funds because I had heard of too many top performing managers losing their "touch" and didn't know of any way to identify managers that were likely to "beat the market" going forward. I wasn't willing to risk the disappointment of picking a big stinker. After the experience we'd had with professional management, we decided that we would be content to get average performance. As I read and learned more, I was pleased to discover that while passive investing can be quite simple, the justifications behind it are hardly unsophisticated.
Rick Ferri wrote:I recall speaking with a woman at a bar after work in 1999. She had recently quite her job and was day-trading technology stocks from her living room. I asked what looked good to her ? . . .
Rick Ferri.
BTW: Under the circumstances, I thought that Rick's line to the woman in a bar was excellent! It showed that he was listening and being attentive to her interests. I guess that as a gentleman, he isn't going to disclose how the encounter turned out. :wink:
The information contained herein, while not guaranteed by us, has been obtained from from sources which have not in the past proved particularly reliable.
YDNAL
Posts: 13774
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 4:04 pm
Location: Biscayne Bay

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by YDNAL »

Rick Ferri wrote:I recall speaking with a woman at a bar after work in 1999.
Weren't you married in 1999. LOL
Landy | Be yourself, everyone else is already taken -- Oscar Wilde
User avatar
Bustoff
Posts: 2033
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2012 5:45 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by Bustoff »

Rick Ferri wrote: Overconfidence is the biggest cognitive error that active investors make.
Rick Ferri
I would say the above assertion applies more to passive investors. Investing in broad based market index funds is no less a speculative venture simply because we close our eyes and take our hands off the wheel. "Stay the course" includes an element of blind faith that can seduce one into believing that markets will always produce positive results in the long run. Removing ourselves from the mix helps, but it's still a highly speculative venture.
User avatar
nedsaid
Posts: 19275
Joined: Fri Nov 23, 2012 11:33 am

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by nedsaid »

Everytime I congratulate myself on my brilliance as an investor, the markets have a way of humbling me. Markets are like that you know.
A fool and his money are good for business.
User avatar
Topic Author
Rick Ferri
Posts: 9707
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 10:40 am
Location: Georgetown, TX. Twitter: @Rick_Ferri
Contact:

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by Rick Ferri »

Bustoff wrote:
Rick Ferri wrote: Overconfidence is the biggest cognitive error that active investors make.
Rick Ferri
I would say the above assertion applies more to passive investors. Investing in broad based market index funds is no less a speculative venture simply because we close our eyes and take our hands off the wheel. "Stay the course" includes an element of blind faith that can seduce one into believing that markets will always produce positive results in the long run. Removing ourselves from the mix helps, but it's still a highly speculative venture.
No passive investor ever closes their eyes and takes their hands off the wheel. There is always work to be done - rebalancing, investment of new capital, withdrawals.

"Stay the course" is by default a belief that the markets will always produce positive results in the long run, but that's what every investor believes. If we don't expect positive returns, why invest? And in a capital economy, if the markets don't produce positive returns in the long run, the country will have a lot more to worry about than whether we earn a return on our investment.

Rick Ferri
The Education of an Index Investor: born in darkness, finds indexing enlightenment, overcomplicates everything, embraces simplicity.
azanon
Posts: 3142
Joined: Mon Nov 07, 2011 9:34 am

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by azanon »

pkcrafter wrote:
I recall speaking with a woman at a bar after work in 1999. I asked what looked good to her
Man, what a lousy line. You should have asked what her sign was. :sharebeer

Paul

Oh come now. If he wanted to go that direction, all he'd need say what "Hi, I'm Rick, I'm a Marine Fighter Pilot". Then shows over..... Who hasn't seen Top Gun?
User avatar
BackInTheBlack
Posts: 311
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 4:37 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by BackInTheBlack »

The OP is giving me a serious case of deja vu.
"Do not put your faith in what statistics say until you have carefully considered what they do not say." | | -William W. Watt
manwithnoname
Posts: 1584
Joined: Mon Jul 22, 2013 7:52 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by manwithnoname »

azanon wrote:
pkcrafter wrote:
I recall speaking with a woman at a bar after work in 1999. I asked what looked good to her
Man, what a lousy line. You should have asked what her sign was. :sharebeer

Paul

Oh come now. If he wanted to go that direction, all he'd need say what "Hi, I'm Rick, I'm a Marine Fighter Pilot". Then shows over..... Who hasn't seen Top Gun?
Obviously you, because you missed the rest of the scene:


Charlie: Sit down! I love that song! How long have you two been doing this act?

Maverick: Oh, since uh...

Charlie: Puberty?

Maverick: Right, puberty.


Charlie: what's your name?

Maverick: "Maverick"

Charlie: "didn't your mother like you?"


Charlie: Listen, can I ask you a personal question?

Maverick: That depends.

Charlie: Are you a good pilot?

Maverick: I can hold my own.

Charlie: Great, then I won't have to worry about you making your living as a singer.

Maverick: I'm going to need a beer to put these flames out. Yo! Great Mav, real slick.

You must have slept through the movie more than once.
Last edited by manwithnoname on Fri Nov 08, 2013 5:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
dodonnell
Posts: 421
Joined: Wed Oct 29, 2008 6:48 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by dodonnell »

JW Nearly Retired wrote:Who was the Boglehead who "backed up the truck" and went to 100% equities in late 2008? I sort of recall it was Adrian Nemu but could easily be wrong and he is gone from here. The searches don't go back beyond 2011 threads now. I wonder if he is still at 100%.
JW
Adrian Nenu, bogleheads.org, Dec 2008: Anyone thinking of 100% equity in the next 6-12 months?
User avatar
JoMoney
Posts: 16260
Joined: Tue Jul 23, 2013 5:31 am

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by JoMoney »

dodonnell wrote: Adrian Nenu, bogleheads.org, Dec 2008: Anyone thinking of 100% equity in the next 6-12 months?
That was an interesting thread, I enjoyed look at the outcome of some of the proposed strategies
e.g.
This would have gotten out in August 2009, hasn't gone back to those lows, and missed quite a bit of gains since then:
fundtalk wrote:...
How about this for an idea. If you're 60/40 now, how about increasing you equity allocation at certain levels of the S&P 500.
S&P 500 at 800 go to 70%, 700 to 80%, 600 to 90% and 500 to 100%. Of course, you would need a sell range as well. When the S&P hits 1000 go back to your normal allocation? ...
This would have been squeezed pretty tightly, maybe even closed out the following March:
Tramper Al wrote:...I have decided I can tolerate total loss, so I'm thinking about going to 200% equity.
"To achieve satisfactory investment results is easier than most people realize; to achieve superior results is harder than it looks." - Benjamin Graham
User avatar
abuss368
Posts: 27850
Joined: Mon Aug 03, 2009 2:33 pm
Location: Where the water is warm, the drinks are cold, and I don't know the names of the players!
Contact:

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by abuss368 »

I read this last night and really enjoyed the post.

Thanks Rick!
John C. Bogle: “Simplicity is the master key to financial success."
User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 20122
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by VictoriaF »

baw703916 wrote:It's different for me because I've never once talked to anyone in a bar about investing.

One the bright side, this story does break down the stereotype that only men can invest in an overconfident manner.

Brad
Hi Brad,

The bar at the Boglehead conference hotel is filled with investing discussions. Check it out next time,

Victoria
Inventor of the Bogleheads Secret Handshake | Winner of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)
JW-Retired
Posts: 7189
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 11:25 am

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by JW-Retired »

dodonnell wrote:
JW Nearly Retired wrote:Who was the Boglehead who "backed up the truck" and went to 100% equities in late 2008? I sort of recall it was Adrian Nemu but could easily be wrong and he is gone from here. The searches don't go back beyond 2011 threads now. I wonder if he is still at 100%.
JW
Adrian Nenu, bogleheads.org, Dec 2008: Anyone thinking of 100% equity in the next 6-12 months?
Thanks for finding this. I thought it was an informative thread at the time and still do. Later in the thread Adrian said he was going to DCA into 80-100% stocks over 6-12 months but I can't tell if he ever got there. Maybe the "back up the truck" guy was someone else.

I see that the search date limitation mentioned on the advanced search page no longer applies. Just had to spell Adrian's name right for it to work back to 2007.
JW
Retired at Last
User avatar
baw703916
Posts: 6681
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:10 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by baw703916 »

VictoriaF wrote:
baw703916 wrote:It's different for me because I've never once talked to anyone in a bar about investing.

One the bright side, this story does break down the stereotype that only men can invest in an overconfident manner.

Brad
Hi Brad,

The bar at the Boglehead conference hotel is filled with investing discussions. Check it out next time,

Victoria
Hi Victoria,

Very good point. I imagine, though, that conversations at the Bogleheads conference bar wouldn't have given Rick much material for his blog! ;)

Brad
Most of my posts assume no behavioral errors.
User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 20122
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by VictoriaF »

baw703916 wrote:
VictoriaF wrote:
baw703916 wrote:It's different for me because I've never once talked to anyone in a bar about investing.

One the bright side, this story does break down the stereotype that only men can invest in an overconfident manner.

Brad
Hi Brad,

The bar at the Boglehead conference hotel is filled with investing discussions. Check it out next time,

Victoria
Hi Victoria,

Very good point. I imagine, though, that conversations at the Bogleheads conference bar wouldn't have given Rick much material for his blog! ;)

Brad
Right ... unless
two Blogheads walk into the bar.

Victoria
Last edited by VictoriaF on Sun Nov 10, 2013 8:01 am, edited 1 time in total.
Inventor of the Bogleheads Secret Handshake | Winner of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)
User avatar
BackInTheBlack
Posts: 311
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 4:37 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by BackInTheBlack »

Oh thanks for the shout-out in your blog by the way Rick, lol. If what I said were false, then Vanguard's active fund results, on the whole, over the last 30 years wouldn't be possible. It's one thing to say active funds are losers on average, so the average winning fund is chosen by luck. But what about when an entire fund family, one of the biggest in existence, is an aggregate winner? There is something more to this story, no matter how badly one might want to simplify things to fit a popular narrative.
"Do not put your faith in what statistics say until you have carefully considered what they do not say." | | -William W. Watt
friar1610
Posts: 2331
Joined: Sat Nov 29, 2008 8:52 pm
Location: MA South Shore

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by friar1610 »

One of my Navy buddies with whom I used to discuss investing always quoted his father: "Bears can make money; bulls can make money but pigs never make money."
Friar1610 | 50-ish/50-ish - a satisficer, not a maximizer
User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 20122
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by VictoriaF »

friar1610 wrote:One of my Navy buddies with whom I used to discuss investing always quoted his father: "Bears can make money; bulls can make money but pigs never make money."
Neither do chicken.

Victoria
Inventor of the Bogleheads Secret Handshake | Winner of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)
User avatar
baw703916
Posts: 6681
Joined: Sun Apr 01, 2007 1:10 pm
Location: Seattle

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by baw703916 »

VictoriaF wrote:
friar1610 wrote:One of my Navy buddies with whom I used to discuss investing always quoted his father: "Bears can make money; bulls can make money but pigs never make money."
Neither do chicken.

Victoria
How about sloths? (don't just do something, stand there!--or hang onto your tree branch)
Most of my posts assume no behavioral errors.
User avatar
VictoriaF
Posts: 20122
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 6:27 am
Location: Black Swan Lake

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by VictoriaF »

baw703916 wrote:
VictoriaF wrote:
friar1610 wrote:One of my Navy buddies with whom I used to discuss investing always quoted his father: "Bears can make money; bulls can make money but pigs never make money."
Neither do chicken.

Victoria
How about sloths? (don't just do something, stand there!--or hang onto your tree branch)
For as long as they balance while hanging.

Victoria
Inventor of the Bogleheads Secret Handshake | Winner of the 2015 Boglehead Contest. | Every joke has a bit of a joke. ... The rest is the truth. (Marat F)
User avatar
BackInTheBlack
Posts: 311
Joined: Tue Apr 27, 2010 4:37 pm

Re: It's not different for me. Is it for you?

Post by BackInTheBlack »

friar1610 wrote:One of my Navy buddies with whom I used to discuss investing always quoted his father: "Bears can make money; bulls can make money but pigs never make money."
True, although some pigs live high on the hog for a while, like Babe after winning best in show, with all of the attendant ego-boosts along the way. I'm sure most Amazon, Netflix, LinkedIn, Tesla, Netsuite, and Salesforce investors will be pretty shocked when they begin smelling the slaughterhouse just around the corner.
"Do not put your faith in what statistics say until you have carefully considered what they do not say." | | -William W. Watt
Post Reply