Your Favorite Market Writers?

jlev

I'm curious what everyone's favorite market writers are here on the board. Of course David with his terrific Monthly Commentaries (and everyone else who contributes to them) have helped bring many of us here. Liz Ann Sonders has been mentioned and the work of Ritholtz and Josh Brown have often been cited. I've been making a list of bookmarks of writer's whose work to review before making big decisions and was wondering who other people tend to reference?

For what it's worth, my current favorite is Jeff Miller. Though he usually is a place for me to start my thought process before link-delving and other explorations.

Edited: The link for correct host.

scott

I don't always agree with him, but I like Josh Brown a good deal. Brooklyn Investor (http://brooklyninvestor.blogspot.com/) is another. He's more economist than writer, but Stephen Roach writes the occasional article. Another writer who I follow often is Jim Rickards, via his frequent Twitter comments and elsewhere.

Mark

Charles Kirk. Paid site. Worth my pennies per day. Google "The Kirk Report" if interested.

jlev

more worth it than a morningstar premium account? for reference I move money at most once a quarter for now.

Mark

Jlev, for me yes. I'm in sync with his technical approach to the market and trading in general. He also incorporates a large variety of opposing opinions but leaves it to his members to make their own sense out of the information.

Having said that its also important for you to know that my portfolio is way more heavily tilted toward individual equities vs mutual funds, something like 80/20. I own no bond funds. I do not day trade nor do I trade stocks that I know little to nothing about just to try and profit from capital appreciation. I'm pretty much buy and hold (unless the wind changes direction) and heavily tilted toward dividend paying holdings. I should also mention that I became a member when the fee was half of what's shown currently and will remain there as long as I stay a member.

Still, I like how he reads the market or maybe more importantly how he reads Mr. Price. It's the education i am getting, not specific recommendations. YMMV

scott

jlev said:

more worth it than a morningstar premium account? for reference I move money at most once a quarter for now.

Many libraries seem to offer M* Premium (or at least aspects of it) through online reference.

jlev

@Scott that is an excellent thing to know

scott

jlev said:

@Scott that is an excellent thing to know

Happy to help. I haven't really looked in detail, but I know I've seen it at libraries under the library website. I think it might be an instance of most features but not all - primarily fund reports and that kind of thing. In other words, you get the reports but you can't personalize (keep track of your stuff, etc) the service.

Ted

Libraries reference department have made M* Premium available for years.
Regards,
Ted

Lawlar

Over the years, I've been a market letter junky. The one that I have renewed more than the others is The Chartist (and its mutual fund newsletter). It was highly rating by Hulbert over he years. But what I admire is that it has always maintained an actual cash account that followed the newsletters recommendations. Those cash accounts have grown to substantial sums. I just wish I had followed its advice more closely.

rjb112

@Lawlar, I'm familiar with the Chartist mutual fund letter. I believe the author is Dan Sullivan, and he's a well known market timer. Did he get his subscribers out of the market for the October 9, 2007-March 9, 2009 big bear market? Did he get his subscribers back into the market for the March 9, 2009-current bull market?

Lawlar

rjb112: Yes, as a matter of fact, he did steer his subscribers out of the market during the 2008/2009 crash. He uses a moving average approach (it used to be based on 3 indicators, but he's tweaked it over the years) that keep him out the market during the worst parts of declines. It's not a perfect system (none are). But combined with his purchasing the strongest stocks or funds (momentum), it has worked well. The approach doesn't get you out at the exact top or in at the exact bottom. There have been whiplashes as well.

But I think the important aspect of his approach is that he follows his indicators with real money accounts. From time to time, he provides a copy of his Charles Schwab statement so you can verify that he is legit.

He's in his seventies now. He's a California surfer who started his newsletter (in the 70s?) by putting an ad in Barron's.

rjb112

@Lawlar: What date did he 'steer his subscribers out of the market during the 2008/2009 crash'? Did he all in one day go from 100% invested to 100% cash?
What date did he get back in for the bull market that started March 9, 2009, and did he go from 100% cash to 100% invested all in one day?

Same questions for the bear mkt that started March 2000 and ended Oct 2002, or by other accounts, April 2003.

Is he 100% stocks now?

Regarding market timing, Dennis Gartman of the Gartman Letter went from 100% stocks to essentially 0% stocks yesterday. He was on CNBC yesterday.

cman

@rjb112, I hadn't heard of the Chartist, but for momentum technical traders, it isn't about getting all out or all in one day. In fact, anyone who tries to do that will crash and burn. But rather getting out somewhere around top perhaps gradually and getting in somewhere around the bottom often gradually. This prevents whiplash from false signals. The longer the uptrend and downtrend, the better they do compared to a sit tight strategy. The more volatile it is, worse they do.

Your question sets up an unrealistic and umnecessary expectation just as people expecting an active manager to beat the S&P every year or being no good. Nevermind even if the manager may have beaten the S&P by 6% one year and lagged by 1% the next. It isn't necessary for such goals to gain from it.

Lawlar

rjb112/cman: The Chartist does go all in or all out, based on his buy signals. It has worked for him. That doesn't mean he'll beat the S&P all the time. At the moment, he is all in. He doesn't trade very often. He tries to hold for the longer term. You should be able to review his actual record on his website. (He published all of his buy/sell signals and the results at the end of the year)

Anyone thinking of following a newsletter or pundit, should first look for actual past history to justify relying on that person's advice. Hulbert does a good job of chronicling the performance records. It's surprising how many well known pundits have horrible records. You can also check Morningstar's record with Hulbert.

What is Dennis Gartman's actual long-term record? If I didn't know, I wouldn't follow his advice.

Check out Hulbert, then get some trial subscriptions to a number of the better performing letters to see what feels right for you.

scott

As for Gartman, apparently his Canadian ETF is no longer - it did horribly since its launch 5 years or so ago.

"But the Gartman ETF, named after advisor Dennis Gartman, ubiquitous author of the Gartman Letter, an investment advisory, couldn’t harness the benefits of its fortunate timing. The fund went public at $10 a share. Those same shares now fetch around $7.90."

Basically, I think Hussman's fund probably did better than Gartman's during the same time frame.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/globe-investor/investment-ideas/celebrity-advisers-can-cost-investors-a-lot-of-money/article8797031/

Of course, no one on CNBC ever thought to go, "Gee, Dennis, why is your ETF doing so badly?"

cman

Gartman - comes out looking like a wise owl in his demeanor (presumably why he is invited so often) and generic altruisms and is always on something different to provide any meaningful or actionable advice, the kind that will do well pontificating but not much in practical terms. So, I am not surprised by his results.

@lawlar, perhaps we are using the words differently. From the little info on his website, he seems to be doing a straightforward relative strength allocation to high beta funds which will over perform in bull markets. I can see him being fully invested at those times

But relative strengths over asset classes change over time. Does he stick to the same set of funds that he gets in all at once and stay there until he sells everything off or does he have individual sells and buys to rotate part of it? I would be very surprised if it is the former. If the latter, then presumably, equities will rotate out of the portfolio as the markets tend bearish and eventually he will be all out in a long bear market. Same thing with getting back?

He is not trying to guess tops and bottoms to get all in or all out is he?

rjb112

@cman: When I followed him many years ago, at that time he was issuing sell signals to go from 100% equities to 100% cash all in one day; and buy signals to go from 100% cash to 100% equities all in one day. That's his MO. That's why I asked the specific question that I did.