New Tracker Wanted!

[tsptalk]

Take the poll... http://www.tsptalk.com/mb/showthread.php?p=103282

 

[EW_ret]

I have used a single L fund and mixed with G because its convenient, and easier, to place 30% L2020 and 70% G. Its just simpler than making five allocations. I do not think we should discriminate on what TSP funds a member uses. I agree it makes no sense to use multiple L funds. I do not see why we should not allow trading the L funds, just as we do G, F, C, S, and I funds. Are we going to stop tracking the L fund return performance? Is so, then we can not compare member performance against the L fund returns.

 

[tsptalk]

I was thinking we were not accepting transfers into the L-funds currently? Am I wrong about that?

I can be persuaded - But I am worried about the TSP folks most of all. :worried:

 

[James48843]

Alright- here is a twist to think about:

I DO want to include the "L" funds, and here is why.

Several times, I've run close to the deadline, and had to decide what I was going to do.

I had a gut feeling about where to go, but also harbored "regrets" before pulling the trigger. I would debate myself for a few minutes about how "sure" I was that I was making the right move to go to "X" positions.

But what I really wanted to do was to move to L income, for instance. If I was moving from a fully invested stock position, to a "G" fund position, but was not real sure, I would have to think about how much did I want to split where, and move it there in little pieces.

IN fact, I have intentionally NOT split with an "L" fund, when I wanted to, specifically because it was not trackable in the tracker.

If I guessed wrong, by having some portion in the "L" funds (Example- L income if I was 95% sure I was better off in "G", but would want to use the L2020 if I was only 60% sure- thereby reducing the risk if losing an upside if it came the next day, but still fairly well protected against a large downside move).

I'm all for including "L" funds.

I think a lot like EWGuy. I'd use only ONE of the "L" funds for a secondary placement, most likely on days when I REALLY don't want to go 100% "G" fund, but want to protect against a huge downside risk the next day.

Today is a prime example.

I was 100% "I" yesterday. I debated about following Ebb into "G", or leaving it where it was, and was persuaded to leave it be when I saw that Japan would probably react favorably, and saw that Ebb had said Monday was looking "I" green.

I ended up not touching anything, being 100% "I".

If I had an "L" option, I probably would have gone 50% "I", 50% L2020, as that affords some consierable downside protection, with considerble uprisk reward potential should the maket go up today.

And it could be done with a simple split, rather than having to figure out how much did I want in five different funds.

Quick. easy, dirty.

Count me as a vote for "L".

 

[James48843]

I would only ever use ONE "L" fund at a time as a possible safe harbor.

Most likely it would be the "L INCOME" or the "L 2020", depending on how much downside risk I wanted to avoid.

I would never split between multiple "L" funds.

 

[James48843]

You COULD say that I would want to use "L" funds as a type of easy, quick, convieniet "hedge fund".