Author Topic: 100% stocks still?  (Read 8849 times)

MishMash

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 712
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #100 on: March 12, 2020, 02:02:12 PM »
This is going to be a great learning opportunity for people who jump out near the bottom and did not diversify and ignored the CAPE. It took me two rounds of dotcom and gfc to give in and go more conservative like golden butterfly.

Actually, you don't need to be "conservative" at all. If you, for example, jumped in *right before* the 2007 crash with a $10k starting amount (100% US equities), and then contributed a relatively small $2000 a month (even fairly low income folks here on the forum easily manage that), every month, until now, you'd have over $620k now.

If you started right before the .com crash in 1999, (same $10k to start, same $2k/month invested) you'd have $1.2 million today.

That's with no bonds and TERRIBLE timing.

-W

.. and your a robot with no emotion, internet, or TV watching CNBC. Most people are not like this. Panic, fear, blood in streets, etc. Not everyone likes there job but sucked it up and endured it for a future payoff and worked really hard to gain that money, seeing it get destroyed is a very scary thing even if it is only over 2 years.

We are pretty much 100% in stocks, we are down a half a million dollars since the spanking began, hell, I'm pretty sure we are down six figures today alone.  Are we panicking, not in the least, DH and I just shrugged at each other this morning and decided it was time to move the 200k cash we'd been sitting on for a year into Vanguard so we can begin buying.

You can't be 100% in stocks if you still have enough cash to buy a house sitting on the side.

And that is why I said pretty much.  That 200k is a small percentage of our overall assets.  Everything else is 100% in stock.

frugalnacho

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4035
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Madison Heights, Michigan
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #101 on: March 12, 2020, 02:08:43 PM »
This is going to be a great learning opportunity for people who jump out near the bottom and did not diversify and ignored the CAPE. It took me two rounds of dotcom and gfc to give in and go more conservative like golden butterfly.

Actually, you don't need to be "conservative" at all. If you, for example, jumped in *right before* the 2007 crash with a $10k starting amount (100% US equities), and then contributed a relatively small $2000 a month (even fairly low income folks here on the forum easily manage that), every month, until now, you'd have over $620k now.

If you started right before the .com crash in 1999, (same $10k to start, same $2k/month invested) you'd have $1.2 million today.

That's with no bonds and TERRIBLE timing.

-W

.. and your a robot with no emotion, internet, or TV watching CNBC. Most people are not like this. Panic, fear, blood in streets, etc. Not everyone likes there job but sucked it up and endured it for a future payoff and worked really hard to gain that money, seeing it get destroyed is a very scary thing even if it is only over 2 years.

We are pretty much 100% in stocks, we are down a half a million dollars since the spanking began, hell, I'm pretty sure we are down six figures today alone.  Are we panicking, not in the least, DH and I just shrugged at each other this morning and decided it was time to move the 200k cash we'd been sitting on for a year into Vanguard so we can begin buying.

You can't be 100% in stocks if you still have enough cash to buy a house sitting on the side.

That's chump change to mishmash.  He probably has that much just in his couch cushions. 

mies

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 542
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #102 on: March 12, 2020, 02:35:52 PM »
This is going to be a great learning opportunity for people who jump out near the bottom and did not diversify and ignored the CAPE. It took me two rounds of dotcom and gfc to give in and go more conservative like golden butterfly.

Actually, you don't need to be "conservative" at all. If you, for example, jumped in *right before* the 2007 crash with a $10k starting amount (100% US equities), and then contributed a relatively small $2000 a month (even fairly low income folks here on the forum easily manage that), every month, until now, you'd have over $620k now.

If you started right before the .com crash in 1999, (same $10k to start, same $2k/month invested) you'd have $1.2 million today.

That's with no bonds and TERRIBLE timing.

-W

.. and your a robot with no emotion, internet, or TV watching CNBC. Most people are not like this. Panic, fear, blood in streets, etc. Not everyone likes there job but sucked it up and endured it for a future payoff and worked really hard to gain that money, seeing it get destroyed is a very scary thing even if it is only over 2 years.

We are pretty much 100% in stocks, we are down a half a million dollars since the spanking began, hell, I'm pretty sure we are down six figures today alone.  Are we panicking, not in the least, DH and I just shrugged at each other this morning and decided it was time to move the 200k cash we'd been sitting on for a year into Vanguard so we can begin buying.

You can't be 100% in stocks if you still have enough cash to buy a house sitting on the side.

And that is why I said pretty much.  That 200k is a small percentage of our overall assets.  Everything else is 100% in stock.

Right. I think vand is splitting hairs. Does everyone that is 100% stocks have to have all money not going to bills go to equities to meet his standards of 100%?

Panly

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 123
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #103 on: March 12, 2020, 02:41:12 PM »
am over 100% stocks when it comes to liquid assets.


excellent time to go over 100%.

vand

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 968
  • Location: UK
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #104 on: March 12, 2020, 02:41:42 PM »
This is going to be a great learning opportunity for people who jump out near the bottom and did not diversify and ignored the CAPE. It took me two rounds of dotcom and gfc to give in and go more conservative like golden butterfly.

Actually, you don't need to be "conservative" at all. If you, for example, jumped in *right before* the 2007 crash with a $10k starting amount (100% US equities), and then contributed a relatively small $2000 a month (even fairly low income folks here on the forum easily manage that), every month, until now, you'd have over $620k now.

If you started right before the .com crash in 1999, (same $10k to start, same $2k/month invested) you'd have $1.2 million today.

That's with no bonds and TERRIBLE timing.

-W

.. and your a robot with no emotion, internet, or TV watching CNBC. Most people are not like this. Panic, fear, blood in streets, etc. Not everyone likes there job but sucked it up and endured it for a future payoff and worked really hard to gain that money, seeing it get destroyed is a very scary thing even if it is only over 2 years.

We are pretty much 100% in stocks, we are down a half a million dollars since the spanking began, hell, I'm pretty sure we are down six figures today alone.  Are we panicking, not in the least, DH and I just shrugged at each other this morning and decided it was time to move the 200k cash we'd been sitting on for a year into Vanguard so we can begin buying.

You can't be 100% in stocks if you still have enough cash to buy a house sitting on the side.

And that is why I said pretty much.  That 200k is a small percentage of our overall assets.  Everything else is 100% in stock.

Right. I think vand is splitting hairs. Does everyone that is 100% stocks have to have all money not going to bills go to equities to meet his standards of 100%?

Er.. yes?!!

If the 20% market fall has resulted in mishmash down by half a million, then that implies a portfolio that was $2.5m. 200k cash would be a 92.5% equities and 7.5% cash. 

waltworks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4047
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #105 on: March 12, 2020, 02:52:42 PM »
That's chump change to mishmash.  He probably has that much just in his couch cushions.

Crap, if I was worth (guesstimating here) $5million, I wouldn't be watching the market. I would be out skiing.

Oh, wait, I'm worth a fraction of that and I was out skiing and not watching the market like every day.

-W

MishMash

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 712
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #106 on: March 12, 2020, 02:53:15 PM »
This is going to be a great learning opportunity for people who jump out near the bottom and did not diversify and ignored the CAPE. It took me two rounds of dotcom and gfc to give in and go more conservative like golden butterfly.

Actually, you don't need to be "conservative" at all. If you, for example, jumped in *right before* the 2007 crash with a $10k starting amount (100% US equities), and then contributed a relatively small $2000 a month (even fairly low income folks here on the forum easily manage that), every month, until now, you'd have over $620k now.

If you started right before the .com crash in 1999, (same $10k to start, same $2k/month invested) you'd have $1.2 million today.

That's with no bonds and TERRIBLE timing.

-W

.. and your a robot with no emotion, internet, or TV watching CNBC. Most people are not like this. Panic, fear, blood in streets, etc. Not everyone likes there job but sucked it up and endured it for a future payoff and worked really hard to gain that money, seeing it get destroyed is a very scary thing even if it is only over 2 years.

We are pretty much 100% in stocks, we are down a half a million dollars since the spanking began, hell, I'm pretty sure we are down six figures today alone.  Are we panicking, not in the least, DH and I just shrugged at each other this morning and decided it was time to move the 200k cash we'd been sitting on for a year into Vanguard so we can begin buying.

You can't be 100% in stocks if you still have enough cash to buy a house sitting on the side.

And that is why I said pretty much.  That 200k is a small percentage of our overall assets.  Everything else is 100% in stock.

Right. I think vand is splitting hairs. Does everyone that is 100% stocks have to have all money not going to bills go to equities to meet his standards of 100%?

Er.. yes?!!

If the 20% market fall has resulted in mishmash down by half a million, then that implies a portfolio that was $2.5m. 200k cash would be a 92.5% equities and 7.5% cash.

And again, you are splitting hairs, you could go the same route and say if a person owns a house, they aren't 100% stock.   For the intent of this thread, I have a feeling that people are discussing their allocation of ones invested assets.  Cash is not an invested asset, it's an insurance policy.

MishMash

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 712
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #107 on: March 12, 2020, 02:58:31 PM »
That's chump change to mishmash.  He probably has that much just in his couch cushions.

Crap, if I was worth (guesstimating here) $5million, I wouldn't be watching the market. I would be out skiing.

Oh, wait, I'm worth a fraction of that and I was out skiing and not watching the market like every day.

-W

It's she, and no not chump change I assure you lol.  Proceeds from selling a rental property, we were looking for another one which is why the cash is on hand but I think at this stage I'd rather dump it in the market.

diapasoun

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3798
  • Location: California
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #108 on: March 12, 2020, 06:01:43 PM »
To those telling me I'm stupid:

I can sell now, and lock in major losses, giving myself a guaranteed fuck-over.

I can also wait more than 30 years and sell then. Unless this is much worse than the Great Depression, that's the better route -- and if this is much worse than the Great Depression, my worries about the stock market are chump fucking change.

nsmall

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 117
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #109 on: March 12, 2020, 06:37:34 PM »
Yeah, forgive us for being skeptical but this forum has been littered with naysayers and doomsday predictions since before I joined in 2014.   They have all been wrong every single time and I'm so much better off financially speaking for having ignored them that I could weather just about anything the stock market does, even if this time actually is different and we are up against an unprecedented recession.  I'm going to listen to the rich and retired that have advised me to stay the course.

I'm sorry, but this isn't 'hey guys I think stocks are over valued, top is in tuck yuck'.

It's 'hey look guys, the factories in China have been at a standstill for over two months, millions of people are being quarantined, businesses are seeing steep declines. Infections are spreading uncontrolled and even actively unmonitored in the U.S. due to incompetent leadership. Oh and the markets were already softening before all that'.

Two completely different things.

Sorry but it's exactly the same thing, only a slightly different flavor this time.  You're not blindly saying stocks are too expensive, but you are saying this time it's different for reasons.  The reasons always sound plausible as you are living through them.  We've had recessions, depressions, diseases, terrorism, multiple wars, etc and everything keeps on chugging.   



There are dozens of charts just like that one.  If the forum had been around I guarantee we'd have threads on every single one of those reasons (and many more) all explaining how this time it's different.  It's never different! Everything keeps on chugging! We may get beat up short term.  I think the economic effects of this are going to be real, but I think it's absurd to claim that it's truly different and unprecedented and you should move your long term money out of stocks and try to time the market.  You can't time the market, and neither can I.  You might get lucky though.  If people are perpetually predicting a recession and a drop in stock prices someone is bound to be right eventually, so maybe it's you?

I can't time the market.  I don't know where it's going tomorrow, or next month, or next year.  But I feel very confident that in 10 years the coronavirus will be a distant memory and the prices of the indices will be higher than they are today.  I'm betting my entire retirement on it.

Well said.  I really enjoyed reading your post here.  Its much more logical vs the marker timer who thinks they are smarter than the rest of dummies.

vand

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 968
  • Location: UK
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #110 on: March 12, 2020, 07:00:35 PM »
This is going to be a great learning opportunity for people who jump out near the bottom and did not diversify and ignored the CAPE. It took me two rounds of dotcom and gfc to give in and go more conservative like golden butterfly.

Actually, you don't need to be "conservative" at all. If you, for example, jumped in *right before* the 2007 crash with a $10k starting amount (100% US equities), and then contributed a relatively small $2000 a month (even fairly low income folks here on the forum easily manage that), every month, until now, you'd have over $620k now.

If you started right before the .com crash in 1999, (same $10k to start, same $2k/month invested) you'd have $1.2 million today.

That's with no bonds and TERRIBLE timing.

-W

.. and your a robot with no emotion, internet, or TV watching CNBC. Most people are not like this. Panic, fear, blood in streets, etc. Not everyone likes there job but sucked it up and endured it for a future payoff and worked really hard to gain that money, seeing it get destroyed is a very scary thing even if it is only over 2 years.

We are pretty much 100% in stocks, we are down a half a million dollars since the spanking began, hell, I'm pretty sure we are down six figures today alone.  Are we panicking, not in the least, DH and I just shrugged at each other this morning and decided it was time to move the 200k cash we'd been sitting on for a year into Vanguard so we can begin buying.

You can't be 100% in stocks if you still have enough cash to buy a house sitting on the side.

And that is why I said pretty much.  That 200k is a small percentage of our overall assets.  Everything else is 100% in stock.

Right. I think vand is splitting hairs. Does everyone that is 100% stocks have to have all money not going to bills go to equities to meet his standards of 100%?

Er.. yes?!!

If the 20% market fall has resulted in mishmash down by half a million, then that implies a portfolio that was $2.5m. 200k cash would be a 92.5% equities and 7.5% cash.

And again, you are splitting hairs, you could go the same route and say if a person owns a house, they aren't 100% stock.   For the intent of this thread, I have a feeling that people are discussing their allocation of ones invested assets.  Cash is not an invested asset, it's an insurance policy.

Not splitting hairs at all. Cash certainly IS an invested asset - 100% cash is a perfectly legit portfolio position, and your home represents consumption - it is not a part of your investment portfolio. That is crystal clear in terms of FI principles.

If my employer suddenly made a mistake and I only got 92.5% of my expected paycheque next month or next year you can bet that I would not be ignoring it and dusting it off as splitting hairs.

Let's just say I'm right and call a spade a spade. You're not 100% stocks if you're 92.5% stocks. Easy.
« Last Edit: March 12, 2020, 07:02:28 PM by vand »

dividendman

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1260
  • Age: 38
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #111 on: March 12, 2020, 07:24:35 PM »
I'm 21% bonds right now (reverse equity glidepathing down to 5%, started at 25% on my FIRE date, 2% a year from bonds to stocks)

What do all of you BND holders think about the 5+% drop in that today? Bit of a bummer but I did re-balance before it dropped 5% to maintain my 21% allocation.

Buffaloski Boris

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1910
  • Politics is the disease, not the cure.
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #112 on: March 12, 2020, 08:18:19 PM »
To those telling me I'm stupid:

I can sell now, and lock in major losses, giving myself a guaranteed fuck-over.

I can also wait more than 30 years and sell then. Unless this is much worse than the Great Depression, that's the better route -- and if this is much worse than the Great Depression, my worries about the stock market are chump fucking change.

Who's calling you stupid?  None of us know with certainty that tomorrow the stock market won't perk right up.  I personally doubt it.  But we don't know that, and you are where you are. 

I'll tell you what stupid is.  Me.  I'm not in the market much so I missed most of the butt-pucker of the last few weeks.   A genius, right?  Not really.  You see I also missed a good part of the run up.  So if I had simply consistently kept a huge percentage of my wealth in the market since say 2009, I'd be singing the blues with everyone else, BUT with a vastly larger stash. I'm lucky in that I'm (likely) getting a great opportunity in coming weeks to buy at a steep discount. It doesn't mean that it was the right strategy, though. 

diapasoun

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3798
  • Location: California
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #113 on: March 12, 2020, 09:54:26 PM »
To those telling me I'm stupid:

I can sell now, and lock in major losses, giving myself a guaranteed fuck-over.

I can also wait more than 30 years and sell then. Unless this is much worse than the Great Depression, that's the better route -- and if this is much worse than the Great Depression, my worries about the stock market are chump fucking change.

Who's calling you stupid?  None of us know with certainty that tomorrow the stock market won't perk right up.  I personally doubt it.  But we don't know that, and you are where you are. 

I'll tell you what stupid is.  Me.  I'm not in the market much so I missed most of the butt-pucker of the last few weeks.   A genius, right?  Not really.  You see I also missed a good part of the run up.  So if I had simply consistently kept a huge percentage of my wealth in the market since say 2009, I'd be singing the blues with everyone else, BUT with a vastly larger stash. I'm lucky in that I'm (likely) getting a great opportunity in coming weeks to buy at a steep discount. It doesn't mean that it was the right strategy, though.

Not me personally -- but there's been some rhetoric in this thread which seems to be suggesting (at least to my first read) that folks with large stock positions should be changing their positions right now. I may have misread some posters, in which case I do apologize. I'm a bit touchy right now because I'm seeing folks in my personal life who look like they're gearing up to panic sell stocks and that really scares me for them!

I try not to think of any particular asset allocation as stupid. (I mean, in practice there are a few strategies that leave my mind spinning, but ain't that true for everything?) Fundamentally, we all have different risk tolerances, and we need different things from our investments based on our life circumstances -- different amounts of liquidity, stability, resilience to different problem scenarios. What I *do* think is stupid is selling in a panic when your investments are down. That's the only way to guarantee your losses. It sounds like you aren't doing that, Buffaloski Boris. You may be in the process of realizing there's a more optimal strategy for you as your risk tolerance and investment needs change -- but as long as you're not locking in losses (like you would be if you sold a bunch of stocks right now upon realizing that you actually need a much more conservative investment strategy to feel secure) then you're not causing yourself any harm. For those who are feeling really happy right now that they have a more conservative investment strategy, who feel secure despite the recent drops, FUCK YES. You have the right strategy for you. I'm feeling just fine with my 98% stocks strategy right now, so fuck yes for me too! because I have the right strategy for my risk tolerance and investment needs, too.

StashingAway

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 272
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #114 on: March 13, 2020, 09:59:18 AM »
Let's just say I'm right and call a spade a spade. You're not 100% stocks if you're 92.5% stocks. Easy.

That'll go over well on any internet forum. I'm right; you're wrong. Done and done!

BTW I disagree. By your metric, no one one earth is 100% stocks. Some people own clothes, cars, houses, food in their pantry. All are valuables that should be considered when counting invested assets. I have a good chunk of change invested in an extra kidney that should be in the market if I'm counting assets.

There is a line, somewhere, where assets should be removed from what is considered an investment.  And it's not a black and white "spade" as you are calling it.


NWOutlier

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 115
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Seattle Area
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #115 on: March 13, 2020, 10:03:09 AM »
I am going to be 52 in July, I'm 100% total stock market index in both Fidelity and Vangaurd...  and to be clear, I even just spend 20k more on these 3/12/2020... I will continue to buy all the way down...

I have no use for anything else....

NWOutlier (Steve)

PS - when it's down, buy more... if you want to move away from stocks, do it while it's UP.....
« Last Edit: March 13, 2020, 10:29:19 AM by NWOutlier »

waltworks

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4047
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #116 on: March 13, 2020, 10:17:51 AM »
I live naked in the street and eat from dumpsters, and when I have enough plasma to donate, I do that and immediately buy VTSAX. Already sold the kidney.

100% stocks all the way, baby!

-W

NWOutlier

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 115
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Seattle Area
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #117 on: March 13, 2020, 10:29:55 AM »
I live naked in the street and eat from dumpsters, and when I have enough plasma to donate, I do that and immediately buy VTSAX. Already sold the kidney.

100% stocks all the way, baby!

-W

where is the "LIKE" button for this quote!  :)

Jamese20

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 223
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #118 on: March 13, 2020, 11:23:51 AM »
slightly off topic but didnt want to start a thread on it.. but unless you have some serious cash or bonds... these buying opportunities have little affect for us millennials if you are just buying monthly... surely the only time to be excited in this scenario is if you have some serious cash on hand.. (like 100k+?)

frugalnacho

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4035
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Madison Heights, Michigan
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #119 on: March 13, 2020, 11:43:36 AM »
slightly off topic but didnt want to start a thread on it.. but unless you have some serious cash or bonds... these buying opportunities have little affect for us millennials if you are just buying monthly... surely the only time to be excited in this scenario is if you have some serious cash on hand.. (like 100k+?)

I may not have "dry powder" to throw into the market, but I still prefer all my regular contributions are at a discount.  If the downturn continues I am planning to tighten the financial belt in order to invest even more during the downturn as well.

maizefolk

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4668
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #120 on: March 13, 2020, 11:48:04 AM »
slightly off topic but didnt want to start a thread on it.. but unless you have some serious cash or bonds... these buying opportunities have little affect for us millennials if you are just buying monthly... surely the only time to be excited in this scenario is if you have some serious cash on hand.. (like 100k+?)

It depends on how long it lasts. If this ends up being like 2009 (very depressed prices from October of 2008 well into 2010), so long as you stay employed and keep making those monthly contributions you'll come out well ahead.

That's the situation I find myself in. Haven't bought anything since prices came down a lot because I don't have free cash/bonds sitting out of the market waiting for a buying opportunity. But on April 1st my monthly auto investments will post. And then May 1st, and so on.

StashingAway

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 272
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #121 on: March 13, 2020, 11:54:25 AM »
slightly off topic but didnt want to start a thread on it.. but unless you have some serious cash or bonds... these buying opportunities have little affect for us millennials if you are just buying monthly... surely the only time to be excited in this scenario is if you have some serious cash on hand.. (like 100k+?)

That's quite on topic. I'm the exact same way. All spare investment assets that I have are deposited per paycheck into accounts... I don't have extra liquidity to do anything with (other than small emergency fund, which are definitely not for putting into the markets). I can't comfortably change my lifestyle to invest more capital into the market "sale" (whatever that even really means), because I've already been optimizing for current lifestyle and savings for FI. There is nothing to do but watch everyone else try to predict things, move funds around, etc. It's quite comforting; the plan is already in place, just gotta sit back and watch the world turn.

NWOutlier

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 115
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Seattle Area
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #122 on: March 13, 2020, 11:54:54 AM »
slightly off topic but didnt want to start a thread on it.. but unless you have some serious cash or bonds... these buying opportunities have little affect for us millennials if you are just buying monthly... surely the only time to be excited in this scenario is if you have some serious cash on hand.. (like 100k+?)

I may not have "dry powder" to throw into the market, but I still prefer all my regular contributions are at a discount.  If the downturn continues I am planning to tighten the financial belt in order to invest even more during the downturn as well.

all my life I have been in the situation you've described... dollar cost avg'ing will bring you huge returns, don't worry.... I only recently 1x in 1/2 century have some free cash to invest.... don't fret, you will do amazing things.....

Enjoy the ride

NWOutlier (Steve)

Jamese20

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 223
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #123 on: March 14, 2020, 02:57:28 AM »
slightly off topic but didnt want to start a thread on it.. but unless you have some serious cash or bonds... these buying opportunities have little affect for us millennials if you are just buying monthly... surely the only time to be excited in this scenario is if you have some serious cash on hand.. (like 100k+?)

It depends on how long it lasts. If this ends up being like 2009 (very depressed prices from October of 2008 well into 2010), so long as you stay employed and keep making those monthly contributions you'll come out well ahead.

That's the situation I find myself in. Haven't bought anything since prices came down a lot because I don't have free cash/bonds sitting out of the market waiting for a buying opportunity. But on April 1st my monthly auto investments will post. And then May 1st, and so on.

i do not think that makes a huge difference though more like a bonus.. even then you are buying as prices slowly regain - this happend to me via pensions in 2008.. i literally started pumping money on them (through luck) right at the bottom and like i say.. although it is a nice healthy return unless you have serious money to dump into the market at half price.. i really dont see such life changing sums coming your way? at may take a year off your stash piling perhaps at best (which is nice) but i still dont see the huge excitement for many of us.. if you are following the plans written here and elsewhere you are likely pumping most your spare saved income into investment accounts with little powder to spare.


Mr. Frugal Pharmacist

  • 5 O'Clock Shadow
  • *
  • Posts: 15
    • Mr. Frugal Pharmacist
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #124 on: March 16, 2020, 07:25:16 PM »
Still keeping it 100.

Each new biweekly contribution goes 100% into US equities divvidied up into 40% S&P, 30% small cap, and 30% mid cap. The small and mid cap tilt has made my unrealized percentage losses slightly larger than the S&P's. No sleep lost.

I just pray for all the people who are likely going to be in a whole lot of hurt through job losses and potential health issues. Stay safe everyone.

Jimbo

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 151
  • Location: Montreal, Qc
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #125 on: July 16, 2020, 01:42:36 PM »
So @MilesTeg, still calling us idiots on this?

Psychstache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 999
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #126 on: July 16, 2020, 04:41:35 PM »
Mid-30s here. 100% VTSAX. no plans to change.

Looks like the March plan held up. I have made no changes.

hodedofome

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1349
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Texas
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #127 on: July 16, 2020, 09:58:27 PM »
100% tech stocks here. Itís why my net worth is up 40% this year. Iím staying this way for at least another 5 years.

helloyou

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 138
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #128 on: July 17, 2020, 02:27:30 AM »
100% tech stocks here. Itís why my net worth is up 40% this year. Iím staying this way for at least another 5 years.

Which stock / ETF did you buy?

hodedofome

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1349
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Texas
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #129 on: July 17, 2020, 05:57:11 AM »
100% tech stocks here. Itís why my net worth is up 40% this year. Iím staying this way for at least another 5 years.

Which stock / ETF did you buy?

I have AMZN, AAPL, NFLX, MSFT, SHOP, RNG, BILL, DOCU, ZM. No ETFs.

helloyou

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 138
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #130 on: July 17, 2020, 07:47:39 AM »
100% tech stocks here. Itís why my net worth is up 40% this year. Iím staying this way for at least another 5 years.

Which stock / ETF did you buy?

I have AMZN, AAPL, NFLX, MSFT, SHOP, RNG, BILL, DOCU, ZM. No ETFs.

That's smart and you got balls. As warren buffet said: "Diversification may preserve wealth, but concentration build wealth"

Don't you fear risk of some of these tech stock going down at some stage?

DadJokes

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1581
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #131 on: July 17, 2020, 08:09:46 AM »
I would like to add some technology stocks into my portfolio without being as risky as single stocks. Is anyone aware of a technology index fund I could get with a cheaper buy-in than VITAX?

PDXTabs

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1907
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Portland, OR, USA
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #132 on: July 17, 2020, 09:49:43 AM »
DadJokes, VGT is VITAX as an ETF. There's also QQQ.

PDXTabs

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1907
  • Age: 37
  • Location: Portland, OR, USA
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #133 on: July 17, 2020, 09:59:18 AM »
I have AMZN, AAPL, NFLX, MSFT, SHOP, RNG, BILL, DOCU, ZM. No ETFs.

My VT is 1.96% AMZN, 2.52% AAPL, 0.34% NFLX, 2.66% MSFT, 0.12% SHOP, 0.04% RNG, 0.04% DOCU. I'm fine with that.

hodedofome

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1349
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Texas
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #134 on: July 17, 2020, 04:38:25 PM »
100% tech stocks here. Itís why my net worth is up 40% this year. Iím staying this way for at least another 5 years.

Which stock / ETF did you buy?

I have AMZN, AAPL, NFLX, MSFT, SHOP, RNG, BILL, DOCU, ZM. No ETFs.

That's smart and you got balls. As warren buffet said: "Diversification may preserve wealth, but concentration build wealth"

Don't you fear risk of some of these tech stock going down at some stage?

I expect volatility but Iím also expecting another tech bubble in the next 5-10 years and Iíll sell into that bubble. Iím holding until things get really out of hand. Tech is the way the world is moving and I want to take advantage of that trend.

ChpBstrd

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2185
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #135 on: July 17, 2020, 07:50:56 PM »
100% tech stocks here. Itís why my net worth is up 40% this year. Iím staying this way for at least another 5 years.

Which stock / ETF did you buy?

I have AMZN, AAPL, NFLX, MSFT, SHOP, RNG, BILL, DOCU, ZM. No ETFs.

That's smart and you got balls. As warren buffet said: "Diversification may preserve wealth, but concentration build wealth"

Don't you fear risk of some of these tech stock going down at some stage?

I expect volatility but Iím also expecting another tech bubble in the next 5-10 years and Iíll sell into that bubble. Iím holding until things get really out of hand. Tech is the way the world is moving and I want to take advantage of that trend.

How do you know the tech bubble is here? Six-figure forward PE ratios like in 2000?

hodedofome

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1349
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Texas
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #136 on: July 18, 2020, 06:32:23 AM »
100% tech stocks here. Itís why my net worth is up 40% this year. Iím staying this way for at least another 5 years.

Which stock / ETF did you buy?

I have AMZN, AAPL, NFLX, MSFT, SHOP, RNG, BILL, DOCU, ZM. No ETFs.

That's smart and you got balls. As warren buffet said: "Diversification may preserve wealth, but concentration build wealth"

Don't you fear risk of some of these tech stock going down at some stage?

I expect volatility but Iím also expecting another tech bubble in the next 5-10 years and Iíll sell into that bubble. Iím holding until things get really out of hand. Tech is the way the world is moving and I want to take advantage of that trend.

How do you know the tech bubble is here? Six-figure forward PE ratios like in 2000?

These posts summarize my thoughts pretty well without having to type it all out from scratch. In short, I think things need to get a lot crazier for me to feel like we're in a legit bubble like the 60s or the 90s.

https://joefahmy.com/2013/11/13/bubble
https://joefahmy.com/2013/12/13/stories-1999

While the software stocks I'm in (SHOP, ZM, RNG, BILL, DOCU, AVLR etc) may not be profitable at the moment, it's because they are growing at 30-50%+ per year and are spending money to continue growing at that pace to eventually take over the world. With gross margins of 70-85%, whenever the growth slows and they decide to focus on profitability, they will be insanely profitable and the market knows that. They have legitimate revenues, not like a bunch of the stocks of the 90s which may have had no revenues at all. AMZN, NFLX, MSFT etc are huge and 'expensive' but they are also growing at like 30%/yr, something we've never seen before. Tech is truly doing things that are 'different' this time, but will eventually end in a mania bubble like the 90s. We're just not there yet IMO.

Stocks with no revenues like SPCE and NKLA, I agree with you their runs were not much more than wild speculation or pump and dumps. Those stocks are 'bubbles' but they are few and far between, and are not driving the market like the tech stocks we all know.

MustacheAndaHalf

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 2832
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #137 on: July 18, 2020, 08:04:03 AM »
To those telling me I'm stupid:
I checked the thread - nobody even replied to your earlier message (before this one), let alone insulted you.

It's obnoxious of you to accuse others of something that never happened.

lemonlyman

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #138 on: July 18, 2020, 08:46:52 AM »
A quick opinion on BILL: While I use bill.com personally in my company and think it's a great product, I see a lot of risk in their stock price right now. Looking forward, the company isn't reporting their Q4 (ending June 30) until Aug 27th. I would assume that company subscriber base shrunk compared to their Q3 (ending Mar 30). Small businesses are their primary subscriber base and those are struggling right now. They make a lot of good points about that risk because they talked about it in their May earnings call, but I'd probably take the 100% gain for 2020 off the table and wait to see what they report in August.

hodedofome

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1349
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Texas
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #139 on: July 18, 2020, 01:32:29 PM »
A quick opinion on BILL: While I use bill.com personally in my company and think it's a great product, I see a lot of risk in their stock price right now. Looking forward, the company isn't reporting their Q4 (ending June 30) until Aug 27th. I would assume that company subscriber base shrunk compared to their Q3 (ending Mar 30). Small businesses are their primary subscriber base and those are struggling right now. They make a lot of good points about that risk because they talked about it in their May earnings call, but I'd probably take the 100% gain for 2020 off the table and wait to see what they report in August.

Iíd cut staff before I cut BILL. It helps me do more work with less people.

lemonlyman

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 162
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #140 on: July 18, 2020, 02:16:50 PM »
A quick opinion on BILL: While I use bill.com personally in my company and think it's a great product, I see a lot of risk in their stock price right now. Looking forward, the company isn't reporting their Q4 (ending June 30) until Aug 27th. I would assume that company subscriber base shrunk compared to their Q3 (ending Mar 30). Small businesses are their primary subscriber base and those are struggling right now. They make a lot of good points about that risk because they talked about it in their May earnings call, but I'd probably take the 100% gain for 2020 off the table and wait to see what they report in August.

Iíd cut staff before I cut BILL. It helps me do more work with less people.

I meant small businesses as a market. Between 66,000 and 110,000 have permanently closed since the start of the crisis. Bill.com had 91,000 subscribers as of Mar 30th. Their particular subscriber growth story at this time is hard to picture until Aug when they report.

hodedofome

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1349
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Texas
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #141 on: July 18, 2020, 05:42:25 PM »
A quick opinion on BILL: While I use bill.com personally in my company and think it's a great product, I see a lot of risk in their stock price right now. Looking forward, the company isn't reporting their Q4 (ending June 30) until Aug 27th. I would assume that company subscriber base shrunk compared to their Q3 (ending Mar 30). Small businesses are their primary subscriber base and those are struggling right now. They make a lot of good points about that risk because they talked about it in their May earnings call, but I'd probably take the 100% gain for 2020 off the table and wait to see what they report in August.

Iíd cut staff before I cut BILL. It helps me do more work with less people.

I meant small businesses as a market. Between 66,000 and 110,000 have permanently closed since the start of the crisis. Bill.com had 91,000 subscribers as of Mar 30th. Their particular subscriber growth story at this time is hard to picture until Aug when they report.

I doubt a lot of the businesses that permanently closed were using bill.com. Just my opinion.

Chris Pascale

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 293
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #142 on: July 18, 2020, 07:30:48 PM »
Except my personal residence, I'm all stocks. 38-yo.

NWOutlier

  • Stubble
  • **
  • Posts: 115
  • Age: 52
  • Location: Seattle Area
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #143 on: July 19, 2020, 11:33:47 AM »
100% VTSAX and during this volatile time, i increased my frequency of purchases from 1x /mo to 1x /wk... no bonds and no plans for bonds...  I'm 51 today... 52 tomorrow.

diapasoun

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3798
  • Location: California
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #144 on: July 19, 2020, 01:24:28 PM »
To those telling me I'm stupid:
I checked the thread - nobody even replied to your earlier message (before this one), let alone insulted you.

It's obnoxious of you to accuse others of something that never happened.

I agree, I made an overly pugnacious post.

hodedofome

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1349
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Texas
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #145 on: July 19, 2020, 04:29:24 PM »
My 92 year old grandpa ďI havenít bought a bond in my life.Ē Lol

Alternatepriorities

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 727
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Alaska
  • Engineer, explorer, investor
    • Alternate Priorities
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #146 on: July 19, 2020, 05:53:38 PM »
My 92 year old grandpa ďI havenít bought a bond in my life.Ē Lol

If he's been investing for most of his adult life that must have been a wild profitable ride...

hodedofome

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1349
  • Age: 40
  • Location: Texas
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #147 on: July 20, 2020, 02:08:56 PM »
My 92 year old grandpa ďI havenít bought a bond in my life.Ē Lol

If he's been investing for most of his adult life that must have been a wild profitable ride...

Me: grandpa have you ever been on margin?
Grandpa: I've been on margin for 50 years

He doesn't tell me about all his losses (which I am sure are numerous), but I know he made $1 million on Amazon alone and his account is upwards of 8 figures. Stocks and mowing the lawn is about the last thing he has to keep his mind sharp and body moving, so the family just lets him do his thing.

Alternatepriorities

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 727
  • Age: 39
  • Location: Alaska
  • Engineer, explorer, investor
    • Alternate Priorities
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #148 on: July 20, 2020, 02:14:49 PM »
My 92 year old grandpa ďI havenít bought a bond in my life.Ē Lol

If he's been investing for most of his adult life that must have been a wild profitable ride...

Me: grandpa have you ever been on margin?
Grandpa: I've been on margin for 50 years

He doesn't tell me about all his losses (which I am sure are numerous), but I know he made $1 million on Amazon alone and his account is upwards of 8 figures. Stocks and mowing the lawn is about the last thing he has to keep his mind sharp and body moving, so the family just lets him do his thing.

Wow. I expect I could enjoy a good conversation with anyone who has 8 figures invested and still mows their own lawn.

dougules

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 2064
Re: 100% stocks still?
« Reply #149 on: July 20, 2020, 02:45:53 PM »
My 92 year old grandpa ďI havenít bought a bond in my life.Ē Lol

If he's been investing for most of his adult life that must have been a wild profitable ride...

Me: grandpa have you ever been on margin?
Grandpa: I've been on margin for 50 years

He doesn't tell me about all his losses (which I am sure are numerous), but I know he made $1 million on Amazon alone and his account is upwards of 8 figures. Stocks and mowing the lawn is about the last thing he has to keep his mind sharp and body moving, so the family just lets him do his thing.

Wow. I expect I could enjoy a good conversation with anyone who has 8 figures invested and still mows their own lawn.

Make sure to stay on his good side and in the will.