I'm not sure why would you want to invest for the long term when we are hitting all time high and the scenario for the global economy is really uncertain... I'd wait october to start investing, don't be in a hurry...

in the meantime, educate yourself, try some trade intraday (of course after you got the knowledge) but don't hold overnight, especially on margin (even if you got other money to pay up).

Trying to time the market is a bad idea for 99% of investors. I don't have the time or desire right now to do research, so I'm content just buying and holding something like VTI, trusting that the market is reasonably efficient.

And intraday trading is a terrible idea also.

You are completely correct, and the S&P 500 is the most efficient index out there.

I don't mind your plan for investing on a loan that costs you 1.8%, provided you do not need the money to be invested for 5+ years and have adequate reserves for a years living costs/emergencys and to cover the repayments. You really have to be sure of your financial situation to do this, but it is perfectly reasonable provided you have the capability and resources.

Do bear in mind investing in single stocks is extremely volatile but I am sure you know this from your comment above.

gl then, buy the rip...
don't read nor study anything, because it's just non useful...

The key is in the quality of what you read and study.

We have been hitting all time highs for decades. That's the whole point of the stock market! It's supposed to go up and be at all time highs.

Piggybacking a bit on the margin lending thing. I've just found out about funds that leverage the S&P 500 ~ 300%. Let's ignore questions of market timing.

Is there a good resource for help with the math here in terms of bankroll percentage? I imagine it's similar to a poker roll. You may well be very +EV at a $1,000 tournament, but if your roll is only $5,000 you probably shouldn't play them. Much like even though you're likely very +EV at this heavily leveraged S&P fund, if the market dips 34% you go to $0. So is there a good rule of thumb? I'm thinking something like keep x amount in there, when it goes too high withdraw, and if it dips or zeroes out, replenish.

There is the wrinkle that at least one of these funds seeks to mirror x3 the S&P500 on a daily basis. So it's not a simple S&P returned 11% one year, you make 33%, or vice versa. But I haven't thought through what kind of effect this has, just that it may vary wildly from the actual market returns (still a risk I'm willing to take with some of my money if it's +EV).

I seem to recall some research that concludes ~25% leverage yields the maximum risk adjusted return.

And yes, the leveraged ETFs tend to suffer from decay due to daily slippage.

not sure if serious..

http://www.marketoracle.co.uk/images...y-23-10-08.png

http://www.multpl.com/inflation-adjusted-s-p-500

http://www.multpl.com/

go long into breakout at all time high... best strategy to lose money if you are long for the long term, without a stop or a price target...

Interesting, will have to look more into that research.

Didn't work out too well for a bogleheads poster that tried exactly this starting in 2007. And using a 3x levered etf is a terrible idea due to decay (mathematically proven decay).

https://www.bogleheads.org/forum/viewtopic.php?t=5934 A different approach to asset allocation. By: market timer , 1429 posts (kind of a long thread if you ask me)

Please explain how you interpret the below graph and when/how you would start and stop investing at the all-time highs:

30K CAD to invest, any idea?

yes, that doesn't tell you much really..

but infl-adjusted the returns of the market are way inferior than the nominal + market will go up forever because people believe that the market will go up forever, until it doesn't like in japan, and then you are f***d.

if you invest for the long term, you never buy the break out, you never buy at way above average multiples, if you invest for the long term you buy when there is blood in the street, when the VIX is hitting highs, when the risk is off. If you value invest you want to be contrarian and not a trend follower, you need to buy on market capitulation and not when it's ripping, you go long on pullback and sell on breakout. buy when it's oversold, sell when it's overbought.


fine, so make me laugh...
how much will your portfolio be worth in 50 years - because the dow (not even market weighted) will grow at the rate that had previously grown for the next 50yrs and beyond - if you start investing money today ? because you are so sure that "there is never a top" and you can make more than -80% and be underwater for more than 5years and do just fine.

If the US/International markets turn into Japan we're ALL ****ed, including you.

I invest in my 401k every two weeks. I buy when the market is high, I buy when the market is low. If it crashes 25-50%, I'll throw every spare penny I have at it.

And again, I'll ask you what this excellent strategy of yours is and how I should capitalize on it. Be very specific

Without reading too much of that, I'm not sure if he did what I'm talking about? He seems like he was heavily leveraged at multiples of his total assets/income. I'm specifically asking about proper bankroll management with regards to leverage.

The thread led me to the book Lifecycle Investing, whose authors found that using leverage early in life (and not later) produced the same returns as non-leveraged but with less risk. I think they advocate for 100% equity leverage in the beginning of your career, eventually bringing non-leveraged equities down to 50% of total assets by retirement. I'll be reading it soon.

Hi guys, thanks for the advice.

Been reading a bit, finished Boglehead's Guide to Investing, knew most of it but not all, also good to have everything together.

Like Sootedpowa said, figuring out the tax situation seems paramount. I'll be reading more, both on that issue and in general.


One question I have is diversification vs fees. TER for trackers in Asia (let alone Latin America) are substantially higher than for EU/America trackers. I don't know how to judge whether that's worth it (eg EU/America could face similar long term political developments; be more collerated than it seems now).

There are many low fee index funds that have exposure to these markets. Check out Vanguard Total World fund for example. If, for whatever reason, you want greater exposure to a certain region (emerging markets for example) to better achieve your desired risk profile you can do that by buying a specific fund for those areas. But it's probably not necessary.

It's also worth nothing that a lot of EU and US companies have exposure to other international markets already since they are selling products there. Many smart people, including Jack Bogle, don't think it is necessary for Americans to hold international funds for this reason. I personally prefer the added diversification and am willing to pay a slightly higher ER to have it.

You should certainly look to diversify across all sectors, how you do it is up to you. IIRC you have a lot of capital and are just starting to DIY so keep up the reading. Have you considered your risk tolerance, timeframe, end goal, requirements both now and in the future? Only when you have come up with these should you start to consider how you are going to split up your capital and only then should you start looking at individual products for each sector. Be wary as almost all advice you receive or books you read will either be someone with an agenda (IE a product to sell) or someone without the relevant knowledge of your situation, risk tolerance and the tax implications of investing in Belgium.

You should always use market cap weighting as a starting point and consider if you want to deviate from it (and if so why). A lot of people employ a bit of a home bias when it comes to equity investments especially. This can be a good thing as it cuts down on currency volatility, or perhaps there are some very good products available to you in Belgium that are home biased. It can also be a bad thing if their portfolio lacks diversification because of it. You mention Asia and certainly emerging markets in general are a popular overweight choice amongst long term diy investors, due to some strong evidence that if you can put up with the severe volatility they have a good chance of outperforming over the long term. Passive/index/tracker funds do tend to have slightly higher charges for these areas but it is a lot easier for an actively managed fund with even higher charges to beat the index in these inefficient markets. At least in the UK where they dont suffer from the same crippling tax problems as active funds in the USA do and I use managed funds to access these sectors. I have no idea about the products available to you personally.

Alright, here's my situation:

26, have ~200k in an account with a FA at a big firm (I got the money in 2008 when I was 18, account was under a FA, I just stick with him cause I'm 18 and don't know anything). Talk with FA every 4-6 months or so. Other than that I didn't pay much attention to it because I'm irresponsible.

I've been meaning to get a better hold on my financial situation, and a few days ago my FA calls me and lets me know he's been terminated from his firm for not disclosing that he was on the board of a local charity org for which he also has account with. Says he'll let me know where he lands and I can transfer funds, etc. I'm thinking now is a good time to make a change. From my minimal research here it seems FAs are generally not worth it, and I'd be better off throwing the $$ in a Vanguard fund.

Other factors to consider:

- I'm about to start a Masters program (~50k) that my company will pay for provided that I stay for 2 years after the end of the program. The problem is that I hate my job currently. Company is large and there is a chance that perhaps I could move into a role that better aligns with my career goals, but there is a large part of me that is considering looking for a new job and paying for the degree out of pocket.

- Fiancee and I are interested in buying a house, but the Seattle market is ****ing ridiculous. We're probably looking at a minimum of 600k. We don't have a lot of savings thanks to the wedding, so down payment would need to come from my 200k.

- Have ~35k in Roth IRA and ~45k in 401k. I always thought that this 200k would contribute to an earlier/better retirement but I'm coming around to the thought of using it for something like a house that would improve life now, and which is an otherwise difficult purchase.

Any thoughts/advice is appreciated. Thanks.

You didn't say what this money is currently invested in or what fees you are paying, so we cannot say for certain how beneficial moving to Vanguard would be. That said, it is extremely likely that you will be paying lower fees at Vanguard and be less vulnerable to conflicts of interest between yourself and your advisor.

It's hard to give you advice on this because we don't know how important the Masters will be to your desired career path. That said, saving 50k when you're net worth is around 270k is a pretty big deal.

Make sure you do a thorough analysis of the rent vs buy calculation. In a lot of situations, renting is the better play. Especially when you have a lot of uncertainty about your career trajectory/income. The NY Times Rent vs Buy Calculator is worth checking out.

If you do decide that there is an amount of money that you need in the short term for a down payment, you should probably invest with an asset allocation that won't experience excessive variance. This way the needed amount will be available to you even in a down market. For example, let's say you are definitely going to need 100k for a down payment on a house. Well, you may not want to put the entire 200k in a US stock market index fund since there is a potential that it could lose 50%+ in value at some point and you will have to scramble to get the remainder. You also don't want to have to tap into your retirement funds and pay an early withdrawal penalty.

I would suck it up and get the degree paid for. No guarantee you will end up liking a new job better.
I'm not saying you should use the money on a house down payment, but I will point out if you put it into a house it doesn't preclude you from unlocking that money at a later date by selling the house and using the money for a better retirement.

Thanks for the responses, guys. Will definitely check out the NYT rent v buy calculator more seriously. We've played with it before out of curiosity but it's probably been a year or so.

re: my current investments. I can list my holding but otherwise I'm not knowledgeable enough to comment much on them. My fee is ~0.3% quarterly.

Definitely list your holdings. 1.2% management fee will add up to a lot of money in the long run and avoiding that almost certainly worth moving away.