Boghies Account Talk

Sort by newest Sort by date
Re: Movin' a Bit Back Into The Market...

I think we got another taste of terminal panic velocity over the last 4 days - this activity is typical of bull market corrections. I'm holding to my silly opinion. A 20% decline in the SPX from its April high would take it to 1091 - not there yet for a bear market call.
 
Re: Movin' a Bit Back Into The Market...

Birchtree said:
I think we got another taste of terminal panic velocity over the last 4 days - this activity is typical of bull market corrections. I'm holding to my silly opinion. A 20% decline in the SPX from its April high would take it to 1091 - not there yet for a bear market call.
Click to expand...
And at 1091, things will get real interesting as HFT stops are met and the real selling happens. Then, Mom & Pop will join in the fun... At some point, we will run out of buyers for all those sellers and, well, we will bottom. Some people say 580, but I think that is a bit much (who knows with the dang computers in charge); I am thinking a drop below 1091 will take us to 930-950 minimum and leveling out around 900...

We'll see :nuts:
 
Re: Movin' a Bit Back Into The Market...

RealMoney,

We are sooooo faaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr from a 2008 style panic (especially in the US) that making investment adjustments to defend against such a market is very dangerous. As BT stated, we are still in 'market correction' territory - we are about 18% from the top of the market (in the S&P). A correction is a normal part of a trend. A panic would see an 18% move in a week. I know, I saw a number of them in 2008 and 2009 (3 of them, I think).

May through October are usually flat to negative correcting. I thought my last move gave me a bit less 'risk'. It really didn't, so here I am. Trying to sit in a conservative allocation - but not one that will preclude me from an early Santa Claus growth spurt.

Regardless, my normal pattern of watching a trend for three days and then making the 'wise' move is trashed this year. We are in a very, very choppy market. Best to get into an allocation that one can live through.

But, to get into a panic level allocation (say 75%+ G) will kill you if this is a correction to a bull market.

I'm not going to guess one way or another.
 
Re: Movin' a Bit Back Into The Market...

Boghie, I'm not panicked. If I was panicked, I would think that S&P would be 500 by the end of September. Right now, I am thinking we are going to complete this correction we started Jult 25th. If we don't, we will continue to chop around and not turn around and get bullish. That still might not happen until after the election, but I won't get into politics here.

The point being, not much is holding the markets up (heck, the bulls can't even get above 1140) so I am preparing for some downward action over the next week or so. I will then re-evaluate the situation and go from there. There is a ton (50 SMA, 200 SMA, rising trend line, major support from Nov 2010, etc) of resistance at 1175, which even if there is a rally, that is where it will stop. I will short there too and watch the money roll in as the market heads south farther than it has gone so far this year...

Just my 2 cents.

TSP: Hiding in G until a good entry point in October... all of this is talking about the market in general and how I trade ETFs...
 
Last edited:
Re: Movin' a Bit Back Into The Market...

RealMoney,

A drop to 930 on the S&P500 is a 32% decline from the recent high of 1370. That is beyond a correction. It is either a bull market crash (never heard of that) or a bear market. Regardless, we are talking semantics - I think...

Anyway, both of our ideas are similar. I probably will not reinvest from the 40% 'F Fund' holding till late October or early November. But, we are talking days not months in our approach. I think I will assume a February through April 2009 model. I think my 'trend' watching is too short in duration and I think there is too much political and outside influence in this summers moves. My personal marker was a -10% in my account. That is expected and survivable.

Why not run to 50% - 75% 'G Fund'? Because I do not really believe I can time the turnback on either a correction or a short bear market. I want to catch a biggish chunk when da'Boyz start buying low. I'm thinking I will use the 'G Fund' only in crashes - a capital preservation market. My 'G Fund' assets have not seemed to buffer squat. Assets there simply do not earn enough to buffer equity (or even bond) losses. I mean, how much can a 75% holding in 'G Fund' making 0.01 buffer even a 1% loss in the 'C Fund'. If you have $100K in assets you are talking about making $75 bucks and losing $250. That is why I'm going to hold 'F Fund' assets (even though I think it is in a bubble, yuk). If I gain 0.5% on 40% F I will earn $200 and lose $600 in the 'C Fund' while still giving me opportunity during the whipback on correction/bear completion. Might increase F, but probably not.

Anyway, swinging in the dark

Too many moving parts.
 
By the way...

Although I have been asked where I attain the Expected Return and Expected Risk numbers (Quicken), I have never been asked one important question...

Are those numbers 'inflation adjusted'?

Sleeping on a question is always a good thing. In fact sleeping is a nice thing - unless it is the 'dirt nap':p. I could not figure out how to test my hypothesis. It came to me in a dream.

Quicken explains that it uses models from the 'Newport Group'. Looking around demonstated that they have a table of expected returns, how they get them (sort of), and standard deviations. They very nicely document that their expected return for Large Cap is the market return on the S&P from 1957 to present (I actually think 'present' might be changed on each Quicken download). Their return for the S&P 500 is documented to be 7.5%. Yowser, that seems low when everybody yaks about 10%+ returns. Kinda seems inflation adjusted. But, seems is not close enough!!! We want numbers. Where to get those numbers.

That is where Robers Shiller's MoneyChimp site come in. His 'Compound Annual Growth Rate (Annualized Return) - CAGR' documents both the 'Average Return' and the Standard Deviation as well as the CAGR (which most call an Internal Rate of Return). The 'Average Return' fron 1957 through 2010 is 11.28% (CAGR of 9.78%). Inflation adjusted that 'Average Return' becomes 7.18% with a CAGR of 5.63%.

So, now we are talking the difference of 7.5% and 7.18%. My guess is that the difference is the result of computing dividend reinvestment for the Newport Group ratio. Or maybe we are talking about incorporating this years cr@ppy returns:p.
 
Hey Folks,

Guessed wrongish on the market on 2011/09/23.
Moved 40% into the 'F Fund' and got out of the horrible 'G Fund'.

But, it is a nice feeling to be only part wrong. Kept 60% in the C/S. Yummy.

Including the dump spotted in the remains of September I am about even (ie. about -0.39%).

My crystal ball is as cloudy as ever, but at least I didn't put my full faith in it. 100% in the 'G Fund' would have resulted in a gain of $5. Guaranteed:p

Should I be safe and make $5 a month - or take some risk?

Oh, heart be still. I can't handle it:cheesy:
 
Boghie said:
Hey Folks,

Guessed wrongish on the market on 2011/09/23.
Moved 40% into the 'F Fund' and got out of the horrible 'G Fund'.

But, it is a nice feeling to be only part wrong. Kept 60% in the C/S. Yummy.

Including the dump spotted in the remains of September I am about even (ie. about -0.39%).

My crystal ball is as cloudy as ever, but at least I didn't put my full faith in it. 100% in the 'G Fund' would have resulted in a gain of $5. Guaranteed:p

Should I be safe and make $5 a month - or take some risk?

Oh, heart be still. I can't handle it:cheesy:
Click to expand...
You should get in hold of the The Technician. He knew how the clear up his crystal balls and tell the future of the market. He used to be a regular and he revisited Nnutt a few months back.
 
For all those who follow folks in the AutoTracker 500:
  • 0% G - Dudes and Dudettes, you are making 0% per day
  • 30% F - This will probably crap out, but science tells me to own this
  • 40% C - The safest (I hope) of the equity funds
  • 30% S - The riskiest (I hope) of the equity funds
  • 0% I - No comment
I have no idea what the expected return and risk is as this moment. We are talking science here...
 
Re(1): 'Beware the Dinosaurs', Dopey Cowboy, Six Gun
HT: 'Traders Talk Back to OccupyChigaco', Instapundit, Glenn Reynolds

Wall Street's Creed:
Go ahead and try to take us down, cause you are only going to hurt yourselves. What is going to happen when we can’t find jobs on the street anymore? Guess what, we are going to take yours. We get up at 5am and go out after work till 1am. We are used to not getting up to **** when we have a position. We don’t take and hour lunch break. We don’t demand a union. We don’t retire at 50 with a pension. We eat what we kill, and when the only thing left to eat is on your dinner plates – we are going to devour that.
Click to expand...
These are GenXers. Watch out folks:D
 
Why I like Defined Contribution Plans like TSP/401(k)

It's too bad the valiant public employees of Detroit do not have a defined contribution retirement plan like TSP/401(k). Had they, no amount of political jiggering of the numbers would affect them. Politicians would not have control of their distributions. However, politicians - and, potentially bankruptcy courts - do control their retirement.

This will happen in Kalefornea, Illinois, and other Meccas of Liberalism.

Remember, it cannot happen to us:nuts:

Oh well. And goodby.:blink:
 
Re: Why I like Defined Contribution Plans like TSP/401(k)

Least we forget that Uncle has input into your annuity. My wife converted her defined benefits program to a defined contribution retirement program with the State of Florida - so she has the potential to watch her retirement really grow once all the euro-nonsense is completed. Now she is just DCAing the sideways action which is cool to gather more shares at better pricing.
 
ContrarianJeff has another Contrarian Indicator

ContrarianJeff has another Contrarian Indicator - Me!!! :p

Playing with Quicken has just documented my 2011 trading prowess. I have been selling low. Yuk. Patience Boghie, patience:cheesy:.

The August through October IFTs were especially egregious. Got to either speed up the IFTs (not likely) or slow them down (which I am trying to do). I don’t expect a market dump like some of the rest of you. In fact I kinda expect a market boomlet in the United States oriented funds. So, I’ve gotta learn how to use the new info from Quicken (just the chart of fund performance matched with my buy/sells) to manage my IFTs better.

Kinda watching for an obvious low in C/S. A nice entry point for my 'F Fund' assets (which I believe are quite bubbly:notrust:).
 
Buying into the Falling Knife

Just because I have been wrong all year.

Got to keep the trend.

No Friend.:p
  • G: 0%
  • F: 20%
  • C: 45%
  • S: 30%
  • I: 5%
Used some growth in the 'F Fund' to buy into the others a bit. Not too much, but a little. Might migrate the last 10% - 20% in if Santa is spotted.
 
Epic Fail - Kaleforea Style

Epic Fail - Kaleforea Style

Kalefornea will come through just fine. All we have to do is borrow more money and raid more lock boxes.

Here are two great sites for watching Economic Morons in action:
I just found the Kaleforea site today.

Here is a nice tidbit. Under Kalefornea's Austerity Program we are spending about $4 Billion more than last year (to date:p). Amazing.

We don't have a spending problem. I just need to pay more from my family's assets. Reducing my take home will fix everything. Also, another funny thing is the reduction in inheritance and gift tax receipts. Somehow dead people are paying 1/3rd of what they did last year. Then again, maybe the nearly dead rich 1%ers are moving across Lake Tahoe to spend their last breath in the land of freedom - Nevada. A nice boat ride. A very nice boat ride. Nah, folks don't adjust to gubmint edicts, regulations, and taxes.

We need your money.

Now!!!

:nuts:
 
Re: Epic Fail - Kaleforea Style

FWM, always good...

If I started working for the Feds in 1970 with:
Starting Salary: $10,000
TSP Contribution: 10% (Starting: $1,000)
TSP Match: 5% (Starting: $500)
Wage Increase: 5% (Final salary after 40 years of about $74,000)
Inflation: 3.1%
Increase contributions using Wage Increase 5%
DCA in the 'C Fund' with an Average Annual Return: 11.61%
Rate of return during retirement: 6%
And, I want distributions equal to my final salary ($74,000) inflation adjusted​


Right now I would be retiring with:
TSP Holdings: $1,888,000
Annual Salary: $74,000
Monthly Salary: $6,166
Bi-Weekly Salary: $2,846​


Those are some nice numbers, eh. And, our salaries (promotions, COLAs, etc.) probably have increased by more than 5% per year - remember your starting salary. Yummy, very yummy. The above chap would also leave his/her significant other with over $2 million for the 'wheels up' party when he/she croaks at 100 years old.

How does Social Security or the FERS pension match up? Especially after the benefits are taxed (Clinton) and jiggered (the next Administration).

By the way, I was way too dumb to start investing in TSP when I started working for the Feds. And, I started in the late 1980s. Uuuugggghhhhh. Putting in lots of money to catch up. Why can't HROs push this issue much more?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V
Valleymd blog (the international question)
Replies
2
Views
237
tsptalk
tsptalk
TommyIV
March Contest In Progress
Replies
5
Views
230
rangerray
rangerray
TommyIV
  • Article Article
TSP Talk AutoTracker Insights: An S-fund Preference
Replies
1
Views
454
tsptalk
tsptalk
TommyIV
  • Article Article
TSP Talk AutoTracker Insights: TSP Investors Lock in Gains
Replies
1
Views
539
tsptalk
tsptalk
TommyIV
  • Article Article
G-Fund Allocations on the Rise in TSP Talk AutoTracker
Replies
0
Views
474
TommyIV
TommyIV
Back
Top