Interfund Transfer 2/4 for 2/7/05

[Guest]

imported post

Oh yeah,

Remember your raise your hand for jury duty comment you made?? (I am sure you do ha ha).

I was walking through LAX about two weeks ago (from wonderful Hilton Head, SC) and this came over the loud speaker "Will the person that lost two hearing aides please pick up a white courtesy phone."

Hope that went well.

MT

 

[Guest]

imported post

MarketTimer wrote:

The benchmark of the S fund is the Wilshire 4500 or theExtended Market Growth Fund or another name for it is the NASDAQ...they are all the same animal....

The S fund is actually the least favorable fund to be in this year...the C fund MAY be in the black this year but I do not see it....the market does not go up every year and with the gains the previous two we need to get back to some sort of normal average...those who can step aside when the market is down and buy with both hands when the market go up can reallymake some dough...those who know when to short the market when it is going down can really supercharge their returns.

Come on, MT. Cut the nonsense. Another name for the Wilshire 4500 is the Nasdaq? Please stop fooling around... I understand that you're a "big picture" man, but you start blurring lines to peoplewhen your picture gets that big.

Everyone here now knows your view of the market, ad nauseum.That said, you will agree that youhave also been wrong in the past, no? Of course.Ronald Reagan once said of the Soviet Union thatthepolicy of the US is to "trust but verify." Similarly, while I trust that you believe what you say is true with respect to the future of the markets, I am attempting to verify it. Right now, the S fund is performing well. period.

 

[Guest]

imported post

"Cut the nonsense. Another name for the Wilshire 4500 is the Nasdaq? Please stop fooling around..."

S&P 500 (C fund) is the 500 largest stocks....Whilshire 4500 is all the others....Wonder where ALL THE OTHERS trade...on the DOW??? No that is 30 stocks...hmmm....hmmm....wonder where the other stocks would trade....

Hmmm...where would the other stocks trade....transport, utility....hmmmm....hey I guess you are right they other stocks that are not in the S&P 500 probably would not trade on the NASDAQ. That silly other major index that no one cares about...that crazy nutting high P/E, high beta, index...the U.S. government would not possibility have a stock funded indexed to that...no way...that is to dangerous....

I have no problem is you bash me...but you need to do your own research....if you can not figure out the Whilshire 4500 is benchmarked to the NASDAQ I can not help you other then using crayons, chalk and flash cards....what I am saying is if you bash me on the open board you better have your little stars lined up...

TheC fund benchmark is the S&P 500 and the S Fund is the Whilshire 4500 - which is the NASDAQ...so when you combine C and S you have the total U.S. stock market index....

What did you think the Whilshire 4500 was???? Transports, Utilities, what!!!

That kind of frost me. And you are another find example of why social security reform is NOT going to work...she seems like a pretty smart gal...she does not even know what index to utilize to make an investment decision...Geez Us Christ. WOW!!!! Take about handing someone a loaded gun...and saying the side with the barrel goes towards you.

Man overboard.

MT

Another example of a system that will be a failure...does not even know what the fund is indexed to :s...WOW!

 

[Mike]

imported post

From TSP.gov:

Earlier this year, Wilshire Associates, Inc. and Dow Jones Indexes agreed to jointly maintain and publish Wilshire's indexes, including the Wilshire 4500 which the S Fund tracks. As a result, the Wilshire 4500 has been renamed the “Dow Jones Wilshire 4500 Completion Index.” It is called the Completion Index because if you invest in both the Dow Jones Wilshire 4500 Index and the S & P 500 Index, which the C Fund tracks, your investments will cover the total United States Stock Market.

So no, the S fund does not track the Nasdaq. The S fund tracks a larger index which has every US company sans the S&P 500 in it. Here are the 5 year charts of each... they are indeed similar, but the Wilshire 4500 did not fall as much in the bear market as the Nasdaq did (~50% v ~88%). The Wilshire 4500 also began recovering earlier and more strongly than the Nasdaq. As you can see, the 4500 is very close to passing its December high - and is about 15% shy of where it was at the beginning of 2000... the Nasdaq is still 60% off its high from back then.

 

[Mike]

imported post

BTW, MT, you gotta be less abbrasive toward people. Once in awhile, you post some decent nuggets of knowledge from that brain of yours, but it's hard for people to digest it when it's preceded by all that ranting.

As for the S fund, if its index cracks 503, it will make a higher high over December's. That's about 8 points from where it stands right now (approximately 1.6% gain needed). I will be watching closely to see if that happens.

Like I've said a lot lately - we are in a critical period here. A lower high = big trouble. I banked my TSP into G on Friday and will now wait for the signal, one way or another.

I still think C has more upside this year than S. This will especially be the case if the rate hikes keep coming (which they basically have to in order to keep our currency from totally being flushed down the crapper).

BTW, as long as we can keep the insults to a minimum, I think this is great debate. I'm tracking more charts now than I was before, and basically I'm more informed. I can now combine charting to the macro economic picture that I'm more well-versed in and make better decisions... which is really the name of the game.

Now everyone, chill out. :^

 

[Rolo]

imported post

MarketTimer wrote:

...I can not help you other then using crayons, chalk and flash cards....

HEY! You're that little hand-grenade with a bad haircut! (Ross Perot)



[line]

My crayons show that these indicies, although similar, are NOT the same. Personally, I tend to be precise and exacting; little differences are differences nonetheless.



Mike wrote:

BTW, MT, you gotta be less abbrasive toward people. Once in awhile, you post some decent nuggets of knowledge from that brain of yours, but it's hard for people to digest it when it's preceded by all that ranting.

Agreed. You don't have to get defensive, MT, just realise that there can be other views besides your own and only time will ultimately tell who gets the "neener-neener" rights.

Mike wrote:

As for the S fund, if its index cracks 503, it will make a higher high over December's. That's about 8 points from where it stands right now (approximately 1.6% gain needed). I will be watching closely to see if that happens.

For example, I agree with Mike here, but I still hold my 50/50 S/I and will wait to see what happens. It is not that I think "I don't want to miss the next rally" necessarily, but rather "I don't want to get whipsawed" [like Tom, hehe].

Mike wrote:

I still think C has more upside this year than S. This will especially be the case if the rate hikes keep coming (which they basically have to in order to keep our currency from totally being flushed down the crapper).

I don't agree with Mike (and everyone else here as far as I can tell) on this one, but I do know that he can very well be correct and am keeping my eye on S vs. C/small vs. large-caps in case he is.

Mike wrote:

BTW, as long as we can keep the insults to a minimum, I think this is great debate.

Yeah! Having opposing ideas around you is healthy. I know I need others to smack me in the head every so often. Iron sharpens iron.

 

[Mike]

imported post

Rolo, spotting the exact time that C starts dominating is the tough part. S could continue outperforming for weeks or months - who knows... that's why I continue to track all three closely. :^

(This is also why I was split three ways until bailing on Friday).

 

[Rolo]

imported post

I decided to guess less and go with what is happening more. Yes, it sounds pretty simplistic and self-evident, but I have to remind myself of it regularly, not to mention how much I paid for that nugget of wisdom.

i.e. "Small caps will outperform large caps until I see confirmation otherwise and therefore I will stay in S rather than C." It's a "trend is your friend" mentality.

We should come up with a means to track C/S delta and shuffle more to C from S as it narrows. Where did :dude:<-- Frizz B.go?

 

[Guest]

imported post

MarketTimer wrote:

I have no problem is you bash me...but you need to do your own research....if you can not figure out the Whilshire 4500 is benchmarked to the NASDAQ I can not help you other then using crayons, chalk and flash cards....what I am saying is if you bash me on the open board you better have your little stars lined up...

TheC fund benchmark is the S&P 500 and the S Fund is the Whilshire 4500 - which is the NASDAQ...so when you combine C and S you have the total U.S. stock market index....

What did you think the Whilshire 4500 was???? Transports, Utilities, what!!!

That kind of frost me. And you are another find example of why social security reform is NOT going to work...she seems like a pretty smart gal...she does not even know what index to utilize to make an investment decision...Geez Us Christ. WOW!!!! Take about handing someone a loaded gun...and saying the side with the barrel goes towards you.

Man overboard.

MT

Another example of a system that will be a failure...does not even know what the fund is indexed to :s...WOW!

MT, you're a fine example of what excessive trading leads to..burnout. *LOL*

If I put you in an oven, would that make you a biscuit?

Take your crayons, honey..or whatever they allow you to write with, wherever you are..and write this - Wilshire 4500 does not equal Nasdaq 100 or even the Nasdaq Composite Index. If you see them as all the same because they live in similar neighborhoods, then all the best to you, baby.