It's Not Different This Time

Discuss all general (i.e. non-personal) investing questions and issues, investing news, and theory.
Dottie57
Posts: 8146
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 5:43 pm
Location: Earth Northern Hemisphere

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by Dottie57 » Mon Mar 23, 2020 9:48 pm

Unladen_Swallow wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 9:46 pm
Dottie57 wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 9:23 pm
watchnerd wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 8:34 pm
Dottie57 wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 8:33 pm
Maybe it’s not different. But a pandemic is a different cause. I think the virus will be treatable ora vaccine created but it is not a sure thing. If no vaccine or treatment this will be a different world.
Maybe. Or maybe it mutates into something less lethal like the Spanish Flu did.
Or worse.

No-one knows.
Actually, infectious disease specialists DO know. All RNA viruses mutate. But they are more likely to mutate to become weaker.

Anyone can read up literature on the SARS Covis viruses and decide what they take away from it.
The key to what you state is “less likely” meaning not certain.

Unladen_Swallow
Posts: 744
Joined: Tue Dec 10, 2019 6:12 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by Unladen_Swallow » Mon Mar 23, 2020 10:03 pm

Dottie57 wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 9:48 pm
Unladen_Swallow wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 9:46 pm
Dottie57 wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 9:23 pm
watchnerd wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 8:34 pm
Dottie57 wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 8:33 pm
Maybe it’s not different. But a pandemic is a different cause. I think the virus will be treatable ora vaccine created but it is not a sure thing. If no vaccine or treatment this will be a different world.
Maybe. Or maybe it mutates into something less lethal like the Spanish Flu did.
Or worse.

No-one knows.
Actually, infectious disease specialists DO know. All RNA viruses mutate. But they are more likely to mutate to become weaker.

Anyone can read up literature on the SARS Covis viruses and decide what they take away from it.
The key to what you state is “less likely” meaning not certain.
I also say that the stock market is unlikely to go to zero. We all still invest in stocks, and we are not in 100% cash because we have not used words like "impossible" or other such absolutes.

But you do you.
"I think it's much more interesting to live not knowing than to have answers which might be wrong." - Richard Feynman

Dottie57
Posts: 8146
Joined: Thu May 19, 2016 5:43 pm
Location: Earth Northern Hemisphere

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by Dottie57 » Mon Mar 23, 2020 10:17 pm

Unladen_Swallow wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 10:03 pm
Dottie57 wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 9:48 pm
Unladen_Swallow wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 9:46 pm
Dottie57 wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 9:23 pm
watchnerd wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 8:34 pm


Maybe. Or maybe it mutates into something less lethal like the Spanish Flu did.
Or worse.

No-one knows.
Actually, infectious disease specialists DO know. All RNA viruses mutate. But they are more likely to mutate to become weaker.

Anyone can read up literature on the SARS Covis viruses and decide what they take away from it.
The key to what you state is “less likely” meaning not certain.
I also say that the stock market is unlikely to go to zero. We all still invest in stocks, and we are not in 100% cash because we have not used words like "impossible" or other such absolutes.

But you do you.
Same for you.

jaqenhghar
Posts: 17
Joined: Sat Feb 22, 2020 3:24 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by jaqenhghar » Mon Mar 23, 2020 11:18 pm

bligh wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 8:26 pm
8foot7 wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 7:07 pm
LawProf wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 4:09 pm


(1) No one knows nothing

That’s not true. My wife says I know nothing.
Jon Snow? Is that you?
:D

mmcmonster
Posts: 420
Joined: Sun Jan 12, 2014 1:18 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by mmcmonster » Tue Mar 24, 2020 5:17 am

eye.surgeon wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:29 am
White Coat Investor wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:53 am
A lot of newer forum participants have been surprised to see so many supposed Bogleheads panicking, selling low, market timing, picking individual stocks etc. They are surprised because they thought Bogleheads didn't do this stuff. Indeed, their mentor, Jack Bogle, said
I've said "Stay the course" a thousand times, and I meant it every time.
Thanks for the reassurance. There's a awful lot of this time it's different posts going on here.
This time it actually is different. We KNOW we'll get through this (as a society). There is an end in site. What is that end? In six months, either the vast majority of the population will be infected, go through the illness, and be either immune on the other side or dead. Or (the other option) is that a viable treatment to curb the disease and/or vaccination will be available.

A year from now, society will be rebuilding. And you KNOW you'll want to be holding Total Stock Market at that time, because we won't know who the winners will be. Just that they will win big.

SandysDad
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:27 am

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by SandysDad » Tue Mar 24, 2020 6:35 am

mmcmonster wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 5:17 am

This time it actually is different. We KNOW we'll get through this (as a society). There is an end in site. What is that end? In six months, either the vast majority of the population will be infected, go through the illness, and be either immune on the other side or dead. Or (the other option) is that a viable treatment to curb the disease and/or vaccination will be available.

A year from now, society will be rebuilding. And you KNOW you'll want to be holding Total Stock Market at that time, because we won't know who the winners will be. Just that they will win big.
Yes, I absolutely do want to be holding TSM at that time. I just don't want to be holding it now, or back in the 1st half of March, or back in Late February.

I fully agree we will recover. This is (was) about avoiding a car wreck that was (IMHO) visible by early February.

User avatar
birdog
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by birdog » Tue Mar 24, 2020 6:43 am

Everybody’s an accurate market timer in retrospect.

investingdad
Posts: 1700
Joined: Fri Mar 15, 2013 10:41 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by investingdad » Tue Mar 24, 2020 6:52 am

SandysDad wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 6:35 am
mmcmonster wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 5:17 am

This time it actually is different. We KNOW we'll get through this (as a society). There is an end in site. What is that end? In six months, either the vast majority of the population will be infected, go through the illness, and be either immune on the other side or dead. Or (the other option) is that a viable treatment to curb the disease and/or vaccination will be available.

A year from now, society will be rebuilding. And you KNOW you'll want to be holding Total Stock Market at that time, because we won't know who the winners will be. Just that they will win big.
Yes, I absolutely do want to be holding TSM at that time. I just don't want to be holding it now, or back in the 1st half of March, or back in Late February.

I fully agree we will recover. This is (was) about avoiding a car wreck that was (IMHO) visible by early February.
I saw enough writing on the wall that we stocked up on supplies weeks ago.

But portfolio changes? As I said before, not knowing what to do...i did nothing. I feel stupid for not doing anything when I saw enough to know to have a few months of essentials on hand.

This was partly because of my 2001 and 2008 experience, do nothing, suffer, come out better on the other side.

Jags4186
Posts: 4358
Joined: Wed Jun 18, 2014 7:12 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by Jags4186 » Tue Mar 24, 2020 7:14 am

It’s always different and always the same. A shock hits the system, stocks tank, people lose their jobs and take on debt, businesses take a hit, and, eventually, things recover.

What is different this time is that the immediately affected people are mostly those at the bottom of the economic ladder. In the 1987 crash bars and restaurants didn’t close. During the dot com bust malls stayed open. And during the 2008 crash planes still flew.

What will most likely come out of this is a series of legislative actions that will provide benefits to workers that other countries take for granted. That, I believe, is a good thing.

john0608
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 9:22 am

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by john0608 » Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:09 am

age 63 - as a small to mid to large investor have seen 87, 2000, 2008 meltdowns, panics, market timers, etc.

always will be doom and gloomers - my opinion is as follows - this is not the first pandemic or something from outer space, this is why there is a medical speciality called epidemiology, science will defeat this one, we will have meds soon and will have vaccines in 9 to 12 months.

if you have planned correctly you have cash/cd's sitting safe with 3 to 5 years living expense parked there (I am 60/40 equity/fixed)...i actually have more than 5 years set aside just for cases like this.

stay safe, have faith in the markets to rebound, have faith in science to defeat this....keep it in perspective because if you get the virus you won't care about money one bit so relax if you can. does it matter if you are over 60 and you have $2million instead of $6million? not really......

User avatar
DrPayItBack
Posts: 50
Joined: Sun Dec 22, 2019 6:27 pm
Contact:

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by DrPayItBack » Tue Mar 24, 2020 10:04 am

Amen. I'm more worried that I'll lose my job doing 'elective' procedures than I am worried the market will fail to recover. So using this opportunity to build the emergency fund I probably should have had all along, and otherwise just keep shoveling in money and living beneath my means.

User avatar
eye.surgeon
Posts: 499
Joined: Wed Apr 05, 2017 1:19 pm
Location: California

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by eye.surgeon » Tue Mar 24, 2020 10:20 am

SandysDad wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 6:35 am
mmcmonster wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 5:17 am

This time it actually is different. We KNOW we'll get through this (as a society). There is an end in site. What is that end? In six months, either the vast majority of the population will be infected, go through the illness, and be either immune on the other side or dead. Or (the other option) is that a viable treatment to curb the disease and/or vaccination will be available.

A year from now, society will be rebuilding. And you KNOW you'll want to be holding Total Stock Market at that time, because we won't know who the winners will be. Just that they will win big.
Yes, I absolutely do want to be holding TSM at that time. I just don't want to be holding it now, or back in the 1st half of March, or back in Late February.

I fully agree we will recover. This is (was) about avoiding a car wreck that was (IMHO) visible by early February.
Every bear seems obvious and predictable in the rear view mirror. If a 30% market drop was visible to you in February, please let us know when the bottom is visible to you and we can buy in.
"I would rather be certain of a good return than hopeful of a great one" | Warren Buffett

User avatar
birdog
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by birdog » Tue Mar 24, 2020 10:58 am

eye.surgeon wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 10:20 am
SandysDad wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 6:35 am
mmcmonster wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 5:17 am

This time it actually is different. We KNOW we'll get through this (as a society). There is an end in site. What is that end? In six months, either the vast majority of the population will be infected, go through the illness, and be either immune on the other side or dead. Or (the other option) is that a viable treatment to curb the disease and/or vaccination will be available.

A year from now, society will be rebuilding. And you KNOW you'll want to be holding Total Stock Market at that time, because we won't know who the winners will be. Just that they will win big.
Yes, I absolutely do want to be holding TSM at that time. I just don't want to be holding it now, or back in the 1st half of March, or back in Late February.

I fully agree we will recover. This is (was) about avoiding a car wreck that was (IMHO) visible by early February.
Every bear seems obvious and predictable in the rear view mirror. If a 30% market drop was visible to you in February, please let us know when the bottom is visible to you and we can buy in.
Yes, what is visible to you now?

User avatar
nps
Posts: 894
Joined: Thu Dec 04, 2014 10:18 am

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by nps » Tue Mar 24, 2020 7:32 pm

investingdad wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 6:52 am
I saw enough writing on the wall that we stocked up on supplies weeks ago.

But portfolio changes? As I said before, not knowing what to do...i did nothing. I feel stupid for not doing anything when I saw enough to know to have a few months of essentials on hand.
I don't see why. The range of consequences of stocking up on some extra supplies is not the same as the range of consequences in making portfolio changes.

bitdocmd
Posts: 103
Joined: Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:24 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by bitdocmd » Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:39 pm

White Coat Investor wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:53 am
A lot of newer forum participants have been surprised to see so many supposed Bogleheads panicking, selling low, market timing, picking individual stocks etc. They are surprised because they thought Bogleheads didn't do this stuff. Indeed, their mentor, Jack Bogle, said
I've said "Stay the course" a thousand times, and I meant it every time.
He meant it this time too, even if he isn't around to say it. Some of them are wondering if this mass Boglehead panic happened in 2008 too. While I'm nowhere near the oldest or most experienced Boglehead, I just wanted to reassure these newer members that yes, this happened in 2008 as well. There were lots of people who professed to be Bogleheads but didn't stay the course in 2008. Here are some examples. Feel free to add your own to the list.

viewtopic.php?t=33253

viewtopic.php?t=32624

viewtopic.php?t=32623

viewtopic.php?t=5934

viewtopic.php?t=25126

viewtopic.php?t=33849

Stay the course. We don't know how deep this bear will go. We don't know when it will end. But we do know two things:

# 1 It will end.
# 2 Those who continue to follow their reasonable written plan will be glad they did so on the other side of it while those who panicked and sold low will regret their actions.

Good luck investing. Stay healthy.

Edit: Maybe I'll start compiling threads here from this bear market too. Here's one:

viewtopic.php?p=5123733#p5123733
Jim,

Can you comment on Taylor's Maximum Tolerable Loss:

"Maximum Tolerable Loss X 2 = Maximum Stock Allocation"

Trust me I'm feeling the pain of the decline too.

IMHO this time IS different though. It's not just a flu. Doctor's are struggling trying to keep the doors open. WCI should focus on this from here on forward.

bitdocmd

User avatar
Topic Author
White Coat Investor
Posts: 14490
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Greatest Snow On Earth

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by White Coat Investor » Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:35 pm

bitdocmd wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:39 pm
White Coat Investor wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:53 am
A lot of newer forum participants have been surprised to see so many supposed Bogleheads panicking, selling low, market timing, picking individual stocks etc. They are surprised because they thought Bogleheads didn't do this stuff. Indeed, their mentor, Jack Bogle, said
I've said "Stay the course" a thousand times, and I meant it every time.
He meant it this time too, even if he isn't around to say it. Some of them are wondering if this mass Boglehead panic happened in 2008 too. While I'm nowhere near the oldest or most experienced Boglehead, I just wanted to reassure these newer members that yes, this happened in 2008 as well. There were lots of people who professed to be Bogleheads but didn't stay the course in 2008. Here are some examples. Feel free to add your own to the list.

viewtopic.php?t=33253

viewtopic.php?t=32624

viewtopic.php?t=32623

viewtopic.php?t=5934

viewtopic.php?t=25126

viewtopic.php?t=33849

Stay the course. We don't know how deep this bear will go. We don't know when it will end. But we do know two things:

# 1 It will end.
# 2 Those who continue to follow their reasonable written plan will be glad they did so on the other side of it while those who panicked and sold low will regret their actions.

Good luck investing. Stay healthy.

Edit: Maybe I'll start compiling threads here from this bear market too. Here's one:

viewtopic.php?p=5123733#p5123733
Jim,

Can you comment on Taylor's Maximum Tolerable Loss:

"Maximum Tolerable Loss X 2 = Maximum Stock Allocation"

Trust me I'm feeling the pain of the decline too.

IMHO this time IS different though. It's not just a flu. Doctor's are struggling trying to keep the doors open. WCI should focus on this from here on forward.

bitdocmd
I don't think that's Taylor's rule, I think Adrian Nenu coined it. It's a decent rule of thumb and worked pretty well in 2008, but obviously didn't hold in The Great Depression.

This time is unique, but not different. i.e. every bear market is caused by something else. So it's unique. But it is the same in that it goes down, gets really volatile for a while, and then starts back up, usually pretty sharply, and eventually recovers and goes on to new highs.

I agree that one unique aspect is that docs, who usually have pretty recession resistant jobs, are also out of work or have less work. So they aren't as able to take advantage of the downturn in asset prices as usual. Great depression like in that respect, but hopefully brief.
1) Invest you must 2) Time is your friend 3) Impulse is your enemy | 4) Basic arithmetic works 5) Stick to simplicity 6) Stay the course

Dennisl
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2019 1:46 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by Dennisl » Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:53 pm

Yes, it’s very painful as a surgical subspecialist. I can’t do procedures. Clinic is closed to elective visits, so I’m not seeing new patients. I can do telehealth, but most of my patients are so old they have trouble with email and only have land lines. I have resorted to phone call visits, which pay 0.25 rvu. Corporate is gonna send people home and remove their positions very soon. Glad I have my EF and bonds, but I splashed some early in the dip thinking my job was rock solid. This has been a great educational experience for me.

User avatar
watchnerd
Posts: 5272
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:18 am
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by watchnerd » Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:57 pm

Dennisl wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:53 pm
Yes, it’s very painful as a surgical subspecialist. I can’t do procedures. Clinic is closed to elective visits, so I’m not seeing new patients. I can do telehealth, but most of my patients are so old they have trouble with email and only have land lines. I have resorted to phone call visits, which pay 0.25 rvu. Corporate is gonna send people home and remove their positions very soon. Glad I have my EF and bonds, but I splashed some early in the dip thinking my job was rock solid. This has been a great educational experience for me.
What is rvu?
70% Global Market Weight Equities | 15% Long Treasuries 15% short TIPS & cash || RSU + ESPP

Dennisl
Posts: 28
Joined: Sun Jun 09, 2019 1:46 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by Dennisl » Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:02 am

watchnerd wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:57 pm
Dennisl wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 11:53 pm
Yes, it’s very painful as a surgical subspecialist. I can’t do procedures. Clinic is closed to elective visits, so I’m not seeing new patients. I can do telehealth, but most of my patients are so old they have trouble with email and only have land lines. I have resorted to phone call visits, which pay 0.25 rvu. Corporate is gonna send people home and remove their positions very soon. Glad I have my EF and bonds, but I splashed some early in the dip thinking my job was rock solid. This has been a great educational experience for me.
What is rvu?
A rvu (relative value unit) is a unit of work that a lot of docs are paid in. A visit or a procedure is worth so many rvu’s depending on how much work is considered done. Each rvu is paid a certain amount. 1 rvu in my specialty runs about $50. Given 50% goes to overhead and 50% of the remaining goes to taxes...well you’ve gotta make a whole lotta phone calls.

User avatar
watchnerd
Posts: 5272
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:18 am
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by watchnerd » Wed Mar 25, 2020 1:09 am

Dennisl wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 12:02 am


A rvu (relative value unit) is a unit of work that a lot of docs are paid in. A visit or a procedure is worth so many rvu’s depending on how much work is considered done. Each rvu is paid a certain amount. 1 rvu in my specialty runs about $50. Given 50% goes to overhead and 50% of the remaining goes to taxes...well you’ve gotta make a whole lotta phone calls.
Oh, you have quota!

Interesting.
70% Global Market Weight Equities | 15% Long Treasuries 15% short TIPS & cash || RSU + ESPP

manatee2005
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:17 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by manatee2005 » Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:36 am

rasta wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 4:21 pm
Crushtheturtle wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 4:05 pm

Long term, stocks go up.
there will be individual stocks which will go up, but for broad markets, could be a long, long time, i.e. japan.
We’re not japan

manatee2005
Posts: 555
Joined: Wed Dec 18, 2019 9:17 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by manatee2005 » Wed Mar 25, 2020 5:41 am

SandysDad wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 6:35 am
mmcmonster wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 5:17 am

This time it actually is different. We KNOW we'll get through this (as a society). There is an end in site. What is that end? In six months, either the vast majority of the population will be infected, go through the illness, and be either immune on the other side or dead. Or (the other option) is that a viable treatment to curb the disease and/or vaccination will be available.

A year from now, society will be rebuilding. And you KNOW you'll want to be holding Total Stock Market at that time, because we won't know who the winners will be. Just that they will win big.
Yes, I absolutely do want to be holding TSM at that time. I just don't want to be holding it now, or back in the 1st half of March, or back in Late February.

I fully agree we will recover. This is (was) about avoiding a car wreck that was (IMHO) visible by early February.
Did you sell in early February?

SandysDad
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:27 am

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by SandysDad » Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:23 am

Yes. I started my selling then. But I continued it after feb 24th as well.

User avatar
birdog
Posts: 420
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 1:35 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by birdog » Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:07 am

SandysDad wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:23 am
Yes. I started my selling then. But I continued it after feb 24th as well.
What is your plan for re-entering the equities market?

SandysDad
Posts: 189
Joined: Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:27 am

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by SandysDad » Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:15 am

birdog wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:07 am
SandysDad wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:23 am
Yes. I started my selling then. But I continued it after feb 24th as well.
What is your plan for re-entering the equities market?
I don’t have a hard set number. But I plan to ignore 2020 earnings on the market as a whole. They will be temporary.
But when I see lots of value on 2019 earnings which would be S&P500 at 2000 or lower (that’s 15x former earnings ). I will probably start. Won’t be all at once. DCA Approach

While the most value in modern times was under PE 10 for the market that was against a very high interest rate backdrop. So not realistic.

There will be a lot of false rally’s along the way. See pic
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_r_4bas-lh0U/ ... tchart.PNG

Keenobserver
Posts: 178
Joined: Thu Aug 13, 2015 1:05 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by Keenobserver » Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:20 am

So you see now as a false rally and sp500 hitting 2000 when?

Thesaints
Posts: 3454
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:25 am

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by Thesaints » Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:25 pm

bitdocmd wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:39 pm
Can you comment on Taylor's Maximum Tolerable Loss:

"Maximum Tolerable Loss X 2 = Maximum Stock Allocation"
What does it even mean ?

7eight9
Posts: 805
Joined: Fri May 17, 2019 7:11 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by 7eight9 » Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:33 pm

Thesaints wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:25 pm
bitdocmd wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:39 pm
Can you comment on Taylor's Maximum Tolerable Loss:

"Maximum Tolerable Loss X 2 = Maximum Stock Allocation"
What does it even mean ?
Taylor Larimore's "Maximum Tolerable Loss" -- Not just a fear factor explains it here ...
viewtopic.php?t=30085
I guess it all could be much worse. | They could be warming up my hearse.

surfstar
Posts: 2063
Joined: Fri Sep 13, 2013 12:17 pm
Location: Santa Barbara, CA

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by surfstar » Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:35 pm

SandysDad wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:15 am
birdog wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 8:07 am
SandysDad wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 6:23 am
Yes. I started my selling then. But I continued it after feb 24th as well.
What is your plan for re-entering the equities market?
I don’t have a hard set number. But I plan to ignore 2020 earnings on the market as a whole. They will be temporary.
But when I see lots of value on 2019 earnings which would be S&P500 at 2000 or lower (that’s 15x former earnings ). I will probably start. Won’t be all at once. DCA Approach

While the most value in modern times was under PE 10 for the market that was against a very high interest rate backdrop. So not realistic.

There will be a lot of false rally’s along the way. See pic
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_r_4bas-lh0U/ ... tchart.PNG
and if we never see S&P500 below 2001, you will never buy back in?

User avatar
firebirdparts
Posts: 1110
Joined: Thu Jun 13, 2019 4:21 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by firebirdparts » Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:36 pm

What does it even mean ?
Well, it just assumes that stocks are going to drop 50% and you can choose today how much you'd like to lose from your portfolio. Not complicated. If you think a 30% loss of your net worth would suddenly trigger a bad decision, we would guess you can avoid that by holding less than 60% stocks.

This is useless info, but I think the emotional reaction to the panic scenario has some other angles beyond how much you'd like to lose. But it's still a useful mental exercise.
A fool and your money are soon partners

Thesaints
Posts: 3454
Joined: Tue Jun 20, 2017 12:25 am

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by Thesaints » Wed Mar 25, 2020 3:25 pm

7eight9 wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:33 pm
Thesaints wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:25 pm
bitdocmd wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:39 pm
Can you comment on Taylor's Maximum Tolerable Loss:

"Maximum Tolerable Loss X 2 = Maximum Stock Allocation"
What does it even mean ?
Taylor Larimore's "Maximum Tolerable Loss" -- Not just a fear factor explains it here ...
viewtopic.php?t=30085
Let's assume we have a $800,000 retirement portfolio providing $32,000 annual return (4%). We decide we need a minimum $24,000 annual return. This means we cannot allow our portfolio to be less than $600,000 ($600,000 X 4% = $24,000).
Even more unsure.
Which portfolio "provides 4% return" ? The year that 800k portfolio drops to 600k, ithas not provided a 24k, nor a 32k, return. The return has been -200k.
Seems to me it is some confused mental accounting thing.

james22
Posts: 1654
Joined: Tue Aug 21, 2007 2:22 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by james22 » Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:11 am

For the love of God, please ignore the particulars of the (bad) example.

Taylor's point was simply that buy-and-hold is not absolute. Changing the course might be necessary at some point to protect what you cannot risk.

That should go without saying, but some Bogleheads really seemed to believe buy-and-hold was risk-free.

User avatar
jeffyscott
Posts: 8564
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:12 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by jeffyscott » Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:26 am

Thesaints wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 3:25 pm
Let's assume we have a $800,000 retirement portfolio providing $32,000 annual return (4%). We decide we need a minimum $24,000 annual return. This means we cannot allow our portfolio to be less than $600,000 ($600,000 X 4% = $24,000).
Even more unsure.
Which portfolio "provides 4% return" ? The year that 800k portfolio drops to 600k, ithas not provided a 24k, nor a 32k, return. The return has been -200k.
Seems to me it is some confused mental accounting thing.
There are 12 pages to that discussion from 2008 that you can read to get a better idea of what the debate was about, but I think that he meant a 4% safe withdrawal rate there.
Time is your friend; impulse is your enemy. - John C. Bogle

ScubaHogg
Posts: 280
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 3:02 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by ScubaHogg » Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:03 am

john0608 wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:09 am

if you have planned correctly you have cash/cd's sitting safe with 3 to 5 years living expense parked there (I am 60/40 equity/fixed)...i actually have more than 5 years set aside just for cases like this.
I always get a touched confused what people mean when they say they keep “x number of years of living expenses in [cd, bond, etc.]” and then give an overall asset allocation.

Do you rebalance between that 3-5 years worth of cash/cd back into stocks after an equity fall, so that it could presumably fall under 3 years worth of expenses? If not, do you continuously replenish the cash/cd account as you use it by selling stocks? If not, how low do you let the cash/cd account get before you replenish it?
“There is no problem so bad you can’t make it worse.” - Chris Hatfield, Astronaut mantra

User avatar
watchnerd
Posts: 5272
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:18 am
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by watchnerd » Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:10 am

james22 wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 9:11 am
For the love of God, please ignore the particulars of the (bad) example.

Taylor's point was simply that buy-and-hold is not absolute. Changing the course might be necessary at some point to protect what you cannot risk.

That should go without saying, but some Bogleheads really seemed to believe buy-and-hold was risk-free.
The Children of the Bull are still being re-educated.
70% Global Market Weight Equities | 15% Long Treasuries 15% short TIPS & cash || RSU + ESPP

getthatmarshmallow
Posts: 498
Joined: Mon Dec 04, 2017 9:43 am

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by getthatmarshmallow » Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:15 am

I think it *is* different, but not in a way that meaningfully helps with one's investment strategy. Ordinarily, when the economy goes sideways, one uses economic tools to manage the business cycle. Here, the business cycle was fine, and we need not to get people back to work, but to keep them paying the bills while their workplaces close due to the coronavirus so we can get a handle on the pandemic.

If this were a normal economic crunch people who are still secure like me could be enticed out by sales and bargains, but even getting takeout from somewhere local and tipping generously isn't going to make up for the fact that we've postponed some major home renovations indefinitely, and even as relatively frugal homebodies our spending is down, especially as the kids' activities shut down, too.

Beardog
Posts: 88
Joined: Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:38 pm
Location: Arkansas

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by Beardog » Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:36 am

The underlying cause for each market panic is different in some way every time. And, as usual, this one occurred due to a reason that 99% of us would never have predicted.

I looked at my portfolio for the first time since the crash started a minute ago, after logging on to BH (for the first time in many months) and scanning this thread. My usual approximate allocation has changed from 60/40 to 55/45.

I stopped rebalancing years ago. Not going to do so now, but if I was fully retired, I would (and will) rebalance.

At 57, I continue to work part-time, and buy into the market every 2 weeks. The retirement account has lost high in the 6-figures. No panic on my part. Emergency fund is good. This, too, will all pass. If it doesn't, then as others have said, money will be the least of our concerns. Stay the course. Practice what you preach. Start investing as early in life as possible, and save the maximum that you can. You will be glad that you did so 30-40 some-odd years later.
Beardog

john0608
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 9:22 am

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by john0608 » Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:00 pm

ScubaHogg wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:03 am
john0608 wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:09 am

if you have planned correctly you have cash/cd's sitting safe with 3 to 5 years living expense parked there (I am 60/40 equity/fixed)...i actually have more than 5 years set aside just for cases like this.
I always get a touched confused what people mean when they say they keep “x number of years of living expenses in [cd, bond, etc.]” and then give an overall asset allocation.

Do you rebalance between that 3-5 years worth of cash/cd back into stocks after an equity fall, so that it could presumably fall under 3 years worth of expenses? If not, do you continuously replenish the cash/cd account as you use it by selling stocks? If not, how low do you let the cash/cd account get before you replenish it?
throughout my investing life - (40 years, i am 63 now ) i have always held an emergency fund - started with 3 months expenses - then 6 mths, then 1 year, then 3, 5, 7 years of living expenses. Of course all financial advisors said i was crazy and wasting returns from bond funds etc....including vanguard....my response is 'who cares', this is how i sleep easy at night.

So for AA you need to pay attention, due to last 3 years bull market my equities skyrocketed and my fixed went down and i was 75/25, so i was paying attention in Jan and rebalanced to 60/40. So having $1.5m in cash and CDs seems weird but its comforting now, at age 63 i doubt if i want less than $1M in CDs/Cash ever again.

my other 60% is in stock funds (growth and total - all domestic) and can ride the wild pony up and down.....i sleep easy and don't even think about the measly 2% my CDs and online bank accounts are making....its important not to be greedy as you get old.

User avatar
watchnerd
Posts: 5272
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:18 am
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by watchnerd » Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:17 pm

john0608 wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:00 pm
throughout my investing life - (40 years, i am 63 now ) i have always held an emergency fund - started with 3 months expenses - then 6 mths, then 1 year, then 3, 5, 7 years of living expenses. Of course all financial advisors said i was crazy and wasting returns from bond funds etc....including vanguard....my response is 'who cares', this is how i sleep easy at night.

So for AA you need to pay attention, due to last 3 years bull market my equities skyrocketed and my fixed went down and i was 75/25, so i was paying attention in Jan and rebalanced to 60/40. So having $1.5m in cash and CDs seems weird but its comforting now, at age 63 i doubt if i want less than $1M in CDs/Cash ever again.

my other 60% is in stock funds (growth and total - all domestic) and can ride the wild pony up and down.....i sleep easy and don't even think about the measly 2% my CDs and online bank accounts are making....its important not to be greedy as you get old.
I'm sympathetic to this. At age 49, we keep 5-6 years living expenses in short TIPS / MM / CD. That might grow to 10 years by the time I'm 60. This allows us to ride out bad, long stock markets without much concern.

Anti-fragility in our personal finances is the foundation upon which we take our investment risks.
70% Global Market Weight Equities | 15% Long Treasuries 15% short TIPS & cash || RSU + ESPP

ScubaHogg
Posts: 280
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2011 3:02 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by ScubaHogg » Thu Mar 26, 2020 2:02 pm

john0608 wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:00 pm
ScubaHogg wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:03 am
john0608 wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:09 am

if you have planned correctly you have cash/cd's sitting safe with 3 to 5 years living expense parked there (I am 60/40 equity/fixed)...i actually have more than 5 years set aside just for cases like this.
I always get a touched confused what people mean when they say they keep “x number of years of living expenses in [cd, bond, etc.]” and then give an overall asset allocation.

Do you rebalance between that 3-5 years worth of cash/cd back into stocks after an equity fall, so that it could presumably fall under 3 years worth of expenses? If not, do you continuously replenish the cash/cd account as you use it by selling stocks? If not, how low do you let the cash/cd account get before you replenish it?
throughout my investing life - (40 years, i am 63 now ) i have always held an emergency fund - started with 3 months expenses - then 6 mths, then 1 year, then 3, 5, 7 years of living expenses. Of course all financial advisors said i was crazy and wasting returns from bond funds etc....including vanguard....my response is 'who cares', this is how i sleep easy at night.

So for AA you need to pay attention, due to last 3 years bull market my equities skyrocketed and my fixed went down and i was 75/25, so i was paying attention in Jan and rebalanced to 60/40. So having $1.5m in cash and CDs seems weird but its comforting now, at age 63 i doubt if i want less than $1M in CDs/Cash ever again.

my other 60% is in stock funds (growth and total - all domestic) and can ride the wild pony up and down.....i sleep easy and don't even think about the measly 2% my CDs and online bank accounts are making....its important not to be greedy as you get old.
I guess I didn’t make my question clear. Do you always keep 3-5 years worth of living expenses in cash/cd or do you always rebalance to 60/40? Or do you keep 3-5 years in cash/cd and then stay 60/40 with everything else? Effectively you have to choose one of these options, correct?

I’m not saying any of these are wrong or too conservative, I’m just trying to determine what folks typically mean when they lay it out the way I read your original description.
“There is no problem so bad you can’t make it worse.” - Chris Hatfield, Astronaut mantra

User avatar
JAZZISCOOL
Posts: 717
Joined: Sat May 18, 2019 11:49 am
Location: Colorado - 5,700 ft.

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by JAZZISCOOL » Thu Mar 26, 2020 3:18 pm

Per the Wall St Journal 3/26/20, the bear market is over and we have now entered a bull market since stocks rallied again today:

"Dow Escapes Bear Market With a 6% Rally
The blue-chip index is now up 20% from its low, qualifying as a new bull market"

"U.S. stocks soared higher Thursday, even after data showed the ranks of unemployed Americans surged in the past week, signaling that investors remain hopeful that a $2 trillion stimulus package can help save the country’s weakening economy.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed 6.2%, putting the blue-chip index more than 20% above its recent low, a move that starts a new bull market and marks the shortest bear market in the index’s history. The S&P 500 gained 6.1%, and tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite added 5.6%."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/global-sto ... _lead_pos1

Does this mean we won't have more volatility in the coming months? No. :|

User avatar
watchnerd
Posts: 5272
Joined: Sat Mar 03, 2007 11:18 am
Location: Seattle, WA, USA

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by watchnerd » Thu Mar 26, 2020 3:31 pm

JAZZISCOOL wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 3:18 pm
Per the Wall St Journal 3/26/20, the bear market is over and we have now entered a bull market since stocks rallied again today:

"Dow Escapes Bear Market With a 6% Rally
The blue-chip index is now up 20% from its low, qualifying as a new bull market"

"U.S. stocks soared higher Thursday, even after data showed the ranks of unemployed Americans surged in the past week, signaling that investors remain hopeful that a $2 trillion stimulus package can help save the country’s weakening economy.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed 6.2%, putting the blue-chip index more than 20% above its recent low, a move that starts a new bull market and marks the shortest bear market in the index’s history. The S&P 500 gained 6.1%, and tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite added 5.6%."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/global-sto ... _lead_pos1

Does this mean we won't have more volatility in the coming months? No. :|
And if it goes down again by 10% in the next 2 weeks, will that make it the shortest bull in history?

Or does it have to go down another 20% again?

Some of these designations are pretty arbitrary and silly.
70% Global Market Weight Equities | 15% Long Treasuries 15% short TIPS & cash || RSU + ESPP

User avatar
jeffyscott
Posts: 8564
Joined: Tue Feb 27, 2007 9:12 am
Location: Wisconsin

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by jeffyscott » Thu Mar 26, 2020 3:51 pm

watchnerd wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 3:31 pm
JAZZISCOOL wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 3:18 pm
Per the Wall St Journal 3/26/20, the bear market is over and we have now entered a bull market since stocks rallied again today:

"Dow Escapes Bear Market With a 6% Rally
The blue-chip index is now up 20% from its low, qualifying as a new bull market"

"U.S. stocks soared higher Thursday, even after data showed the ranks of unemployed Americans surged in the past week, signaling that investors remain hopeful that a $2 trillion stimulus package can help save the country’s weakening economy.

The Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed 6.2%, putting the blue-chip index more than 20% above its recent low, a move that starts a new bull market and marks the shortest bear market in the index’s history. The S&P 500 gained 6.1%, and tech-heavy Nasdaq Composite added 5.6%."

https://www.wsj.com/articles/global-sto ... _lead_pos1

Does this mean we won't have more volatility in the coming months? No. :|
And if it goes down again by 10% in the next 2 weeks, will that make it the shortest bull in history?

Or does it have to go down another 20% again?

Some of these designations are pretty arbitrary and silly.
Completely arbitrary and very silly. And I thought by now these things were based on the S&P, not the Dow?

I think 10% is just a correction and does not end a bull.
Time is your friend; impulse is your enemy. - John C. Bogle

john0608
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 9:22 am

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by john0608 » Thu Mar 26, 2020 4:53 pm

ScubaHogg wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 2:02 pm
john0608 wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:00 pm
ScubaHogg wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:03 am
john0608 wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:09 am

if you have planned correctly you have cash/cd's sitting safe with 3 to 5 years living expense parked there (I am 60/40 equity/fixed)...i actually have more than 5 years set aside just for cases like this.
I always get a touched confused what people mean when they say they keep “x number of years of living expenses in [cd, bond, etc.]” and then give an overall asset allocation.

Do you rebalance between that 3-5 years worth of cash/cd back into stocks after an equity fall, so that it could presumably fall under 3 years worth of expenses? If not, do you continuously replenish the cash/cd account as you use it by selling stocks? If not, how low do you let the cash/cd account get before you replenish it?
throughout my investing life - (40 years, i am 63 now ) i have always held an emergency fund - started with 3 months expenses - then 6 mths, then 1 year, then 3, 5, 7 years of living expenses. Of course all financial advisors said i was crazy and wasting returns from bond funds etc....including vanguard....my response is 'who cares', this is how i sleep easy at night.

So for AA you need to pay attention, due to last 3 years bull market my equities skyrocketed and my fixed went down and i was 75/25, so i was paying attention in Jan and rebalanced to 60/40. So having $1.5m in cash and CDs seems weird but its comforting now, at age 63 i doubt if i want less than $1M in CDs/Cash ever again.

my other 60% is in stock funds (growth and total - all domestic) and can ride the wild pony up and down.....i sleep easy and don't even think about the measly 2% my CDs and online bank accounts are making....its important not to be greedy as you get old.
I guess I didn’t make my question clear. Do you always keep 3-5 years worth of living expenses in cash/cd or do you always rebalance to 60/40? Or do you keep 3-5 years in cash/cd and then stay 60/40 with everything else? Effectively you have to choose one of these options, correct?

I’m not saying any of these are wrong or too conservative, I’m just trying to determine what folks typically mean when they lay it out the way I read your original description.
hard to say 'what do i always do' , i never practiced active AA until past 5 years, never had more than a few hundred K in the market till the past 7 years. During bull markets its easy to rebalance using IRA money since there is no tax implication, you pull gains out of equity funds and transfer to your cash/cd/mm funds.

however in a bear market it is a more difficult story, when your stocks decline, do you have the guts to take money out of the safe, fixed funds and buy 'cheaper' equities?

to be honest at age 63 no i wouldn't, i will keep my fixed at my current $ levels, if stocks drop 70% they will come back one day, no need for me to play warren buffet and reallocate so i get rich when they do.....and even if they never come back i have enough in fixed to survive and thrive.

so given my age i would not allocate the other way.

john0608
Posts: 33
Joined: Sat Dec 09, 2017 9:22 am

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by john0608 » Thu Mar 26, 2020 4:55 pm

john0608 wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 4:53 pm
ScubaHogg wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 2:02 pm
john0608 wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 1:00 pm
ScubaHogg wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 10:03 am
john0608 wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 9:09 am

if you have planned correctly you have cash/cd's sitting safe with 3 to 5 years living expense parked there (I am 60/40 equity/fixed)...i actually have more than 5 years set aside just for cases like this.
I always get a touched confused what people mean when they say they keep “x number of years of living expenses in [cd, bond, etc.]” and then give an overall asset allocation.

Do you rebalance between that 3-5 years worth of cash/cd back into stocks after an equity fall, so that it could presumably fall under 3 years worth of expenses? If not, do you continuously replenish the cash/cd account as you use it by selling stocks? If not, how low do you let the cash/cd account get before you replenish it?
throughout my investing life - (40 years, i am 63 now ) i have always held an emergency fund - started with 3 months expenses - then 6 mths, then 1 year, then 3, 5, 7 years of living expenses. Of course all financial advisors said i was crazy and wasting returns from bond funds etc....including vanguard....my response is 'who cares', this is how i sleep easy at night.

So for AA you need to pay attention, due to last 3 years bull market my equities skyrocketed and my fixed went down and i was 75/25, so i was paying attention in Jan and rebalanced to 60/40. So having $1.5m in cash and CDs seems weird but its comforting now, at age 63 i doubt if i want less than $1M in CDs/Cash ever again.

my other 60% is in stock funds (growth and total - all domestic) and can ride the wild pony up and down.....i sleep easy and don't even think about the measly 2% my CDs and online bank accounts are making....its important not to be greedy as you get old.
I guess I didn’t make my question clear. Do you always keep 3-5 years worth of living expenses in cash/cd or do you always rebalance to 60/40? Or do you keep 3-5 years in cash/cd and then stay 60/40 with everything else? Effectively you have to choose one of these options, correct?

I’m not saying any of these are wrong or too conservative, I’m just trying to determine what folks typically mean when they lay it out the way I read your original description.
hard to say 'what do i always do' , i never practiced active AA until past 5 years, never had more than a few hundred K in the market till the past 7 years. During bull markets its easy to rebalance using IRA money since there is no tax implication, you pull gains out of equity funds and transfer to your cash/cd/mm funds.

however in a bear market it is a more difficult story, when your stocks decline, do you have the guts to take money out of the safe, fixed funds and buy 'cheaper' equities?

to be honest at age 63 no i wouldn't, i will keep my fixed at my current $ levels, if stocks drop 70% they will come back one day, no need for me to play warren buffet and reallocate so i get rich when they do.....and even if they never come back i have enough in fixed to survive and thrive.

so given my age i would not allocate the other way.
missed your last point.....my 7 to 10 years living expenses is part of the 40 in the 60/40 equation........if you have $5m -$3m in stock funds, $2 in cds, cash, some bond funds........

User avatar
Topic Author
White Coat Investor
Posts: 14490
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:11 pm
Location: Greatest Snow On Earth

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by White Coat Investor » Thu Mar 26, 2020 5:25 pm

SandysDad wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 6:35 am
mmcmonster wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 5:17 am

This time it actually is different. We KNOW we'll get through this (as a society). There is an end in site. What is that end? In six months, either the vast majority of the population will be infected, go through the illness, and be either immune on the other side or dead. Or (the other option) is that a viable treatment to curb the disease and/or vaccination will be available.

A year from now, society will be rebuilding. And you KNOW you'll want to be holding Total Stock Market at that time, because we won't know who the winners will be. Just that they will win big.
Yes, I absolutely do want to be holding TSM at that time. I just don't want to be holding it now, or back in the 1st half of March, or back in Late February.

I fully agree we will recover. This is (was) about avoiding a car wreck that was (IMHO) visible by early February.
So you bought puts on the market with all the money you could borrow? No? Then sounds like you weren't certain either.
1) Invest you must 2) Time is your friend 3) Impulse is your enemy | 4) Basic arithmetic works 5) Stick to simplicity 6) Stay the course

JonnyB
Posts: 271
Joined: Sun Jan 19, 2020 5:28 pm

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by JonnyB » Thu Mar 26, 2020 5:42 pm

White Coat Investor wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 5:25 pm
SandysDad wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 6:35 am
mmcmonster wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 5:17 am

This time it actually is different. We KNOW we'll get through this (as a society). There is an end in site. What is that end? In six months, either the vast majority of the population will be infected, go through the illness, and be either immune on the other side or dead. Or (the other option) is that a viable treatment to curb the disease and/or vaccination will be available.

A year from now, society will be rebuilding. And you KNOW you'll want to be holding Total Stock Market at that time, because we won't know who the winners will be. Just that they will win big.
Yes, I absolutely do want to be holding TSM at that time. I just don't want to be holding it now, or back in the 1st half of March, or back in Late February.

I fully agree we will recover. This is (was) about avoiding a car wreck that was (IMHO) visible by early February.
So you bought puts on the market with all the money you could borrow? No? Then sounds like you weren't certain either.
Are you sure stocks will go up in the long run? Why aren't you leveraged beyond 100% in stocks. It sounds like you don't believe in stocks.

It's a silly argument.

Starfox
Posts: 72
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2020 7:28 pm
Location: Florida

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by Starfox » Thu Mar 26, 2020 6:08 pm

nedsaid wrote:
Sun Mar 22, 2020 10:56 am
I have done nothing. The news and the markets have been so crazy that I wouldn't draw any conclusions about the longer term behavior of asset classes based upon the last month. Not sure lessons can be drawn from the last month regarding market behavior because each bear market has its unique causes, no two are exactly the same. It is like the markets have just lost their minds and we are in a period of temporary insanity. We just have to wait until rationality returns. If you had a well constructed portfolio before all of this hit, just wait it out. Selling your stocks at or near the bottom could doom your future retirement. The thing is, we are seeing crazy things happen not only in the stock market but also in the bond market. The market can panic in ways that you never dreamed.

Also amazed at all the doom and gloom here. I visited Poland in 2016 and if you are a student of history, you realize that the Polish people had the misfortune of being located between the Germans and the Russians. They were also not too far away from the Hapsburg empire. Another thing you have to realize is that a huge stretch of Northern Europe is pretty flat, all the way from Moscow, Russia to Northern France. Really no geographic barriers save for rivers to stop armies from rolling back and forth. Poland even had a period during which it didn't even exist as a country.

Learning more about World War II and post war history from my trip, I learned that Poland lost 20% of its population during the war. Their capital, Warsaw was 86% destroyed during the war and just abandoning the site was considered but the Poles decided to rebuild. Auschwitz is in Poland. Poland had a large Jewish population pre-war and this influence was a huge part of their culture. The Jewish population there was almost entirely destroyed. Then after the Nazis were driven out, the Soviets occupied Poland for another 45 years or so after that. So the Poles faced about 50 years of oppression from outside powers.

Now on to American Economic history. Particularly in the pre-Federal Reserve Bank days, our economic history is full of economic and market panics. From boom to depression and back to boom again. To become our own nation, we fought a Revolutionary War and then sort of had to do much of it all over again in the War of 1812. But the economy bounced back from various crisis and sometimes pretty quickly. We have pretty much convinced ourselves that a Coronavirus quarantine for maybe a few months will damage our economy beyond repair and produce and endless recession. When I look at the broad sweep of history and then look at US economic history, we sort of sound like a bunch of babies today. We are not occupied by foreign armies, no one is bombing our cities from the air, and we are not subject to artillery bombardment. Our problems seem pretty small in comparison.

I am not making light of the current situation with the Coronavirus. We do have a big problem, we are trying to save a good part of our elderly population and many of those with chronic health problems. We should heed what Medical professionals are telling us. The point is, we will get through this. This will end at some point. When the markets see clarity regarding this issue, the markets will recover.
Have your tiger in the tank purchases from many years ago helped or hurt any different from the rest of your portfolio from the pandemic?
I’m so thankful I didn’t bet on energy stocks a couple weeks ago like I contemplated with a few % of my portfolio.. I would have bought right before the Saudi/Russia fight and it would have been miserable.

columbia
Posts: 2548
Joined: Tue Aug 27, 2013 5:30 am

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by columbia » Thu Mar 26, 2020 6:12 pm

White Coat Investor wrote:
Thu Mar 26, 2020 5:25 pm
SandysDad wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 6:35 am
mmcmonster wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 5:17 am

This time it actually is different. We KNOW we'll get through this (as a society). There is an end in site. What is that end? In six months, either the vast majority of the population will be infected, go through the illness, and be either immune on the other side or dead. Or (the other option) is that a viable treatment to curb the disease and/or vaccination will be available.

A year from now, society will be rebuilding. And you KNOW you'll want to be holding Total Stock Market at that time, because we won't know who the winners will be. Just that they will win big.
That trope again. Oy vey.
Yes, I absolutely do want to be holding TSM at that time. I just don't want to be holding it now, or back in the 1st half of March, or back in Late February.

I fully agree we will recover. This is (was) about avoiding a car wreck that was (IMHO) visible by early February.
So you bought puts on the market with all the money you could borrow? No? Then sounds like you weren't certain either.
That tripe again? Oy vey.
If you leave your head in the sand for too long, you might get run over by a Jeep.

Call_Me_Op
Posts: 7670
Joined: Mon Sep 07, 2009 2:57 pm
Location: Milky Way

Re: It's Not Different This Time

Post by Call_Me_Op » Thu Mar 26, 2020 6:18 pm

7eight9 wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:33 pm
Thesaints wrote:
Wed Mar 25, 2020 2:25 pm
bitdocmd wrote:
Tue Mar 24, 2020 8:39 pm
Can you comment on Taylor's Maximum Tolerable Loss:

"Maximum Tolerable Loss X 2 = Maximum Stock Allocation"
What does it even mean ?
Taylor Larimore's "Maximum Tolerable Loss" -- Not just a fear factor explains it here ...
viewtopic.php?t=30085
As stated above, this is not Taylor's. Nonetheless, it is very simple and says you can lose up to half what you have in stocks. In point of fact, it's too simple, and not correct. You can lose more than half.
Best regards, -Op | | "In the middle of difficulty lies opportunity." Einstein

Post Reply