Posts: 669
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation:
12
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-14-2017, 10:34 PM
SamuelBroberts you will have to explain why you think I am delusional? Hurling insults is not useful, what is useful is you explaining your reasoning why you think I am wrong. Peter Lynch one of the greatest fund managers of all time wrote a few books encouraging average Americans to pick individual stocks and said they can succeed and its a realistic goal.
As I noted in my opening post a lot of institutional investors might be "smarter", more well connected, more knowledgeable and more educated than individual investors but they have less flexibility and also strong performance is not always their number one priority.
I once remember reading a blog comment somewhere from a former fund manager that when he was a fund manager his fund outperformed the market by only 1% per annum net over a 14 year period (I think it was 14, I do not remember exactly) and it was damn hard to achieve. He claimed over the same time period that he was a fund manager his personal portfolio (where he had full flexibility and a small sum to invest) outperformed the market by 14% per annum net and it was less stressful.
Competing with institutional investors by picking individual stocks is like going up against a Olympic professional sprinter in a race after he has had his right leg amputated at the knee (with no prosthetic replacement)
Posts: 4,842
Threads: 0
Joined: Oct 2014
Reputation:
93
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-14-2017, 10:43 PM
Let's try this another way, then.
Walk us through your last purchase. How long it took you to find it, what methods you used, how much you invested, and how much you've made off it so far.
Posts: 669
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation:
12
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-14-2017, 10:48 PM
SamuelBRoberts I do not want to derail this thread as its not a thread about specific stocks, there are other threads discussing specific stocks. Also to answer your question I would reveal more personal information than I am comfortable on a public forum. I will send you a p.m. a little later to answer your question.
Posts: 669
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation:
12
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-14-2017, 10:56 PM
De-beguiled, Harry Brownes advice is great (and I am aware of his 4 asset rebalancing "permanent portfolio") for someone who wants to preserve substantial wealth they already built, but not as great for younger guys who are still in the early stages of their wealth building journey. There is a reason he formulated the advice after he got rich speculating on gold and not before. Because he wanted to know how to preserve and safely grow his existing wealth.
Sure, Harry Brownes advice if you are early on your wealth building journey could make you modestly rich after 30 or 40 years of grinding and saving and investing but that is assuming that you are healthy enough to work for that long (who knows what unexpected health problems can occur) not to mention that the overall job market could deteriorate greatly (due to automation, increased foreign competition, etc) so you might not be able to get a decent paying job in 20 years time. Plus who the fuck wants to work for 40 years anyway!
Posts: 669
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation:
12
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-14-2017, 11:03 PM
Polar I will address some of your points.
Firstly I started investing in Australian stocks in 2007 right the market peak when the GFC was about to hit. So I know first hand what a bear market is like. Secondly how can you possibly say I got lucky by riding a huge bull market? I invested close to the market peak (I was a newbie at the time and just recently had some cash to invest). Also the Australian stock market has not enjoyed anything like the Bull run of U.S. stocks and the All ordinaries index is still well below its 2007 high. It peaked at around 6800 in 2007 and is currently around 5800. Hardly what I would call a strong tailwind.
In regards to me holding 3 stocks you clearly glossed over that post where I mentioned that stocks only make up a portion of my investment portfolio. I also own real estate and commodities.
Warren Buffett back in the day once invested 40% of his partnerships money into American Express. Long before that a young Buffett invested 75% of his personal net worth into GEICO.
Now obviously I am not as smart or knowledgeable as Warren Buffett, but to say that concentration is bad is not always accurate. Warren Buffett famously stated that "diversification is protection against ignorance. It makes little sense if you know what you are doing." He routinely advises most people to buy a low cost index fund because most people are ignorant. I would like to think I am not that ignorant so I concentrate. So far, so good but only time will tell if I am right on this assumption.
Posts: 1,514
Threads: 0
Joined: Apr 2014
Reputation:
26
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-14-2017, 11:12 PM
We're confusing investing with trading and vice versa multiple times in this thread.
They are NOT the same. The average person thinks they are "investing" by buying penny stocks. Far from it. They would be far better off dollar cost averaging into an index or vanguard fund that tracks the S&P or Dow. When shit hits the fan, buy more at a discount, and over the course of your life, you will do not too poorly.
The average person doesn't understand hedging strategies, how to properly utilize options, or frankly what derivatives even are. They are much better off investing in index funds. I would say 90% of people should do this. If you want to play Steven Cohen, put 80% of your money in an index and 20% you can buy naked options and trade futures and jerk off when you win big, but it doesn't hurt so bad when you lose.
Then there is 10% of people that can properly value invest. These people probably have some business background, understand financial statements, and can properly see where there is future value in a company via discounted cash flows. They can see clearly what is good value and what is dog shit. This takes time and effort. You need to read books, go into the SEC history of companies and view their quarterly/annual reports and make intelligent decisions. <b>It is however, doable.</b>. These people will also likely understand derivatives and will hedge their portfolios over significant geo-political and unseeable events. Think Brexit, Trump's election etc.
Finally, we come to the .0X% of people that can run long-short hedge funds, utilize algorithmic methods, and seek alpha in all sorts of circumstances no matter what the overall market volatility is. These are the people that can successfully <b>trade</b> with defined risk-reward outcomes, proper portfolio allocation, and understand that they are simply gambling, albeit intelligently.
To conclude, I fully agree the average and vast majority of people should index. Should YOU index? If you're willing to put in the time to properly evaluate a company, you might be able to pick stocks over the long term and beat the market. It's definitely doable.
"Money over bitches, nigga stick to the script." - Jay-Z
They gonna love me for my ambition.
Posts: 669
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation:
12
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-14-2017, 11:29 PM
TheFinalEpic, yes most people are idiots and should probably buy an index fund, but Roosvforum members are not most people, hence the reason for creating this thread.
And yes there are no shortcuts to value investing I have 50+ investment books that I have read on my bookshelf including the classic 1951 edition of Security Analysis by Ben Graham and David Dodd. Its around 770 pages long, and full of financial terminology and concepts. Most investment professionals never even bothered to read Security Analysis and yet I read it when I was 18 or 19! I am not saying I am an investment whiz or anything but I like to think I at least have the basics down pat. I remember a long time ago when I was in my final year of high school and should have been studying for my exams I was instead lying in bed re-reading Peter Lynch books.
TheFinalEpic when you said "We're confusing investing with trading and vice versa multiple times in this thread." Where you referring to me or other posters in this thread? I do not see anywhere that I mentioned anything that could be interpreted as trading.
Posts: 1,363
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2013
Reputation:
17
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-14-2017, 11:42 PM
Concentration is perfectly fine if you're actively managing your portfolio and you keep an eye on it all the time to make sure nothing funny is happening.Unlike the big guys, being the microscopic fish we are we can get in and out, and in and out of our positions in a few clicks, there's no need to be in the market if the world is collapsing around you.
Posts: 49
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2017
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-14-2017, 11:44 PM
@Australia Sucks, bro you are only hearing what you want to hear. Good job turning 5 figures into 6. Really, congrats.
Here's the thing, not everyone cares. You said an extra 100K over a decade is great and everyone should aspire to it. Yes and no.
That's only 10K per year. If you are getting hardons over an extra 10K per year, I argue you need to think bigger. Sky's the limit if you are good in capital markets.
If you have seen what other people in other industries are making with the minuscule effort they put in as I have, you wouldn't think so greatly about the diminishing returns pouring over 10K and DCF models.
I did the same thing as you, I worked in industry. I put the same numbers up as you. I wouldn't do it over again. My time is worth more.
You also don't realize that a lot of fund managers aren't swinging 20K accounts where they don't impact the market. Try moving a book of 200M and see if you get the prices you want.
Posts: 669
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation:
12
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-15-2017, 12:15 AM
Firstly the $100,000 was just a hypothetical example. That is for people with piddling amounts to invest, you have to start somewhere. You build up the skills gradually then when you have bigger sums you are already well honed. If you just say "nah I don't have enough money to invest for it to be worth my while being active" when you eventually do have bigger sums to invest, you won't have the skill set to invest it.
For the guy who already has some decent capital lets say $300,000 or $400,000 to invest the difference for outperforming over a decade can be huge. The difference between earning 7% per annum and 12% per annum on $350,000 over a decade is nearly an extra $400,000. Is that still too small time for you? With the current trajectory I am on I expect to break 7 figures net worth within the next ten years.
While having $1 million or even $1.5 million dollars does not make you a baller or rich by any stretch of the imagination (not even close) its enough for a comfortable retirement in a cheap country, i.e. enough to quit the rat race which is all I ever really wanted.
Digimata when you say:
"You also don't realize that a lot of fund managers aren't swinging 20K accounts where they don't impact the market. Try moving a book of 200M and see if you get the prices you want. "
You are actually agreeing with what I said previously! I mentioned that being a small investor is an advantage because you can get in or out of a stock quickly without affecting the price whereas for the big guys its not always the case. Glad we agree on that.
Posts: 231
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2013
Reputation:
31
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-15-2017, 12:57 AM
AS how are you determining a stocks fundamental value?
Do you use the FCF method and forecast revenues, do regressions etc?
Posts: 49
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2017
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-15-2017, 01:33 AM
Quote: (07-15-2017 12:15 AM)Australia Sucks Wrote:
Is that still too small time for you? With the current trajectory I am on I expect to break 7 figures net worth within the next ten years.
While having $1 million or even $1.5 million dollars does not make you a baller or rich by any stretch of the imagination (not even close) its enough for a comfortable retirement in a cheap country, i.e. enough to quit the rat race which is all I ever really wanted.
Bro I've done the linear net worth projection too. Everytime I did it it marked a top in my personal net worth. Have you considered your compound rates?
Take your CAGR and project that out and realistically think about it. I peg your account at 100K-150K AUS. You need about a 22% CAGR over the next 10 years to make it. If you can't make that 22% average you're not hitting 1M. This is hard math reality check.
Quote: (07-15-2017 12:15 AM)Australia Sucks Wrote:
Digimata when you say:
"You also don't realize that a lot of fund managers aren't swinging 20K accounts where they don't impact the market. Try moving a book of 200M and see if you get the prices you want. "
You are actually agreeing with what I said previously! I mentioned that being a small investor is an advantage because you can get in or out of a stock quickly without affecting the price whereas for the big guys its not always the case. Glad we agree on that.
I absolutely agree being a small time investor you can get higher rates of returns. That however does not validate why you think large funds underperform because fund managers are shit(most are). They have a liquidity constraint, you and I do not.
You aren't making an apples/apples comparison.
Posts: 49
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2017
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-15-2017, 01:36 AM
Quote: (07-15-2017 12:19 AM)Teutatis Wrote:
Quote: (07-14-2017 11:44 PM)Digimata Wrote:
That's only 10K per year.
Only? That's a lot of money for a lot of people. Let's not start going all "pointy elbows" with sums of money now.
Brother, then you need to elevate your position. Not a judgement on you. But if you haven't seen this level of cash being thrown around, take a trip to NYC/Chicago/London/HK and try to spend a day inside a prop firm or bulge bracket. Or ask institutional mutual fund sales guys at a large company what their commission checks are like. Hell, my company's annual Christmas party bill is 20K alone.
Posts: 128
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2015
Reputation:
4
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-15-2017, 01:37 AM
What most retail and professional investors fail to release that in order the beat the market you need to make more painful decisions that the crowd, and embrace uncertainty.
My most successful investments have been when I felt sick in my stomach when I clicked on the buy button.
Posts: 669
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation:
12
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-15-2017, 01:42 AM
Kangaroo it depends on the situation, you need different tools in the toolkit. Sometimes I go old school and use asset based valuation methods and look at book value, net tangible assets, liquidation value or replacement value depending on the situation.
Sometimes I look at takeover value by looking at a previous takeover that got rejected or looking at other similar companies that got taken over. This is more for the optimistic case rather than as a base case scenario.
Sometimes I use rough earnings based valuations such as projecting various e.p.s. figures 5 or 10 years into the future and then apply what I think is a reasonable p.e. multiple to it ten years in the future.
For example company A is a quality company which currently earns $1 per share currently and pays a $0.20 per share dividend. After carefully studying the business I think it can at least quadruple its earnings per share over the next ten years (i.e. around 15% per annum) while paying a dividend every year. Today you can purchase the shares for a bargain price of $10 (p.e. of 10). Now in ten years time you will have made at least 15% per annum from earnings growth (plus a few percent per annum from dividends with any potential p.e. expansion being icing on the cake)
Another type of earnings valuation use sometimes is the "payback period". Its conservative because it focuses on getting your money back as quick as possible so to speak. It measures how many years it will take for the company to "pay back its purchase price". Its different to a p.e. because it takes into account changes in earnings over the time period. For example company B's shares trade for $5, and if you expect company B to earn per share $1 then $1.10, then $1.15, then $1.25, $1.30 you calculate it will take between 4 and 5 years to earn back the purchase price. The assumption of this model like any earnings based valuation is that its a good company and retained earnings are value creating for shareholders.
I do tend to cross check earnings against the cash flow statement and occasionally make adjustments if I think earnings are overstated or understated). I do not do regressions as such but I do come up with a range of back of the envelope type earnings valuations. I believe DCF models need to much precision to be useful in most cases and hence its a case of garbage in garbage out. Also while I do look at broker/analysts forecasts I make my own forecasts (or rather range of forecasts) for a company.
Sometimes I use a sum of the parts valuation. In Australian shares a good example of using sum of the parts valuation would be the property funds management company APN property group (ASX code: APD). They are a property fund manager and they also own some properties. So you separately calculate an asset based valuation (NTA based on the properties, etc) and earnings based valuation (the funds management business) and sum them together.
The reality though is that usually I spend very little time on valuation, and I rarely use spreadsheets for valuations because if something is an obvious buy it will slap you over the face so to speak. I think too many people get bogged down on this aspect. An obvious bargain is easy to spot. If you find yourself needing to pull out a spreadsheet and do elaborate calculations then its probably not cheap enough.
An actual example of a stock I loaded up on less than 2 years ago. A small cap company that had compounded e.p.s. at twenty something percent since listing around the turn of the millennium. Industry leader with the highest market share. It paid roughly half its earnings as a dividend had a high return on equity and strong balance sheet, good management, etc. It looked set to keep growing e.p.s. at 15-20% for years to come. It looked likely to beat its guidance for the year and was trading on a dividend yield north of 5% and a forward p.e. of less than 10. I bought it, and within a few months the company issued a profit upgrade and the share price doubled in under 12 months. Do you think when I bought it I used a spreadsheet. Hell no. It was such an obvious bargain it just hit me over the head.
An example of a company I advised a friend to buy (I could not buy because I did not have cash) a year ago was a foreign property developer listed on the ASX. Management and directors owned 90%+ of the company, it was generating solid returns on equity and the balance sheet had no "debt" so to speak. The company had been around a long time and had a history of buying back shares below NTA and the shares were trading at a 30% discount to NTA (property valuations were conservative too) and a p.e. of 6 or 7. Also the stock paid a decent dividend.
Fund managers did not like buying the stock mostly because of the lack of liquidity (management and directors had ninety something percent of the stock tied up and it was only small/mid cap stock), but also the somewhat complicated holding structure, the dividends were un-franked (did not have imputation credits attached) and the lumpy earnings profile (property developers often have lumpy/cyclical earnings).
Fast forward a year later and the stock is up over 35%.
The hard part is not the quantitative side its the qualitative research learning about and evaluating the business model, the competition/industry, the management etc. That is where you need to spend most of your time.
Posts: 669
Threads: 0
Joined: Aug 2016
Reputation:
12
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-15-2017, 01:50 AM
Digi you are way off with my account size. My gross account size is way higher than that and I am substantially leveraged (using property as collateral, no margin loans). I do not use anything like a 22% CAGR projection (at least not if we are talking gross assets). Also when I say I will have a 7 figure sum I mean including the results of my whole investment portfolio; shares, property, commodities. Sorry if I was not 100% clear on that before.
Besides my current and future net worth is off topic and irrelevant to the thread. The thread is about "active" vs passive investing not about my investment performance or future net worth.
Posts: 49
Threads: 0
Joined: May 2017
Index fund investing - is it defeatism?
07-15-2017, 02:22 AM
Quote: (07-15-2017 01:50 AM)Australia Sucks Wrote:
Besides my current and future net worth is off topic and irrelevant to the thread. The thread is about "active" vs passive investing not about my investment performance or future net worth.
No it is very relevant. Firstly, because it's implicit in the claims you are making, and secondly because you straight up brought it up.
Unlike many others in this thread, I'm your biggest hype man. Because I did exactly what you did too(margin loans). I know it's doable.
If you are coming in here and making large claims you best have your shit locked down is all I'm saying. Best of luck.