Here's a statement of the obvious: The opinions expressed here are those of the participants, not those of the Mutual Fund Observer. We cannot vouch for the accuracy or appropriateness of any of it, though we do encourage civility and good humor.
Do you know anything about Bill Dirlam? The historical results are impressive but it seems he does exceptionally well during big downturns and generally underperforms during bull markets. I've always been intrigued by technical trading but I've only tried it once or twice with small amounts of money, and small amounts of conviction, and most of what I've read suggests the history for market timers isn't very good. Mr. Dirlam seems like a very big exception, maybe that proves the rule, although I've read that most successful technical traders simply don't talk about or publicize their success.
@VintageFreak, based on the reading I did its an intermediate-term model, and LT Treasuries have been on a bullish run now for most of this year. I don't find it surprising that a technical analysis would recommend them now, although based on the fundamentals I certainly wouldn't be buying.
we are expecting the German 10-yr bunds to stay under 1% due to the Eurozone slipping back to recession. in a relative value world, when Spain yields 2.4, US's 2.4 seems like a bargain!
This is something that I would not go all in with; however, it is something I have, at times, put about five to ten percent of my portfolio’s value into.
Right now I have no timing strategies in play and if I did they would fall under the specialty sleeve within my portfolio. Perhaps, I’ll learn something by watching and digesting the comments of others.
we are expecting the German 10-yr bunds to stay under 1% due to the Eurozone slipping back to recession. in a relative value world, when Spain yields 2.4, US's 2.4 seems like a bargain!
That seems to be the whole thing. Thanks for your post, I seriously wish you'd post more often as I always enjoy your insights.
thank you, gentlemen. i am poking in here and there. i am more of a live discussion fan.. links tire me. will do my best to participate if/when i think i can add value.
That quote was extracted from the FAQ section of The Decision Moose website. It is an accurate summary statement that reflects the controversy between academics and practitioners of that discipline.
I have no ponies in this horserace. So I will not personally handicap the merits of the “Market Timing with Decision Moose” methodology or its track record. I’ll defer to CXO Advisory Group for that task.
I have not done investment market timing strategies for over 2 decades, At one time, I did use methods outlined in the Edwards and Magee classic “Technical Analysis of Stock Trends” book. I won some victories and I suffered some defeats. Overall, I suppose my outcomes were rather ho hum, and did demand a huge time commitment. I mostly shun market timing now, and feel much relieved without its pressures. It can be a task master.
Market Timing has a huge following and has an almost endless array of methods. There are more than 5,000 candidate Timing schemes. Some work for some time. The trick is to discover the appropriate technique at the appropriate time. No easy chore.
My favorite Timing website is operated by Thomas Bulkowski. I especially like his site because he summarizes methods and presents statistical data that helps to define the odds of success for many of these various procedures. Here is a Link to Bulkowski’s powerful and practical website:
The question will always be: How good are these momentum-based market Timing strategies?
William Dirlam’s Decision Moose has generated reasonable results, and respectable reviews from many quarters. But anecdotal statements are not sufficient. A more formal statistical review is warranted. CXO Advisory Group just completed just such an examination. Here is a Link to CXO’s research and findings:
Please access the reference. As usual, CXO did a very honest, unbiased, workmanlike job.
My three major takeaways from the CXO study are:
(1) The Decision Moose performance has deteriorated over time. Change in effectiveness happens. (2) A major factor in the perceived outperformance is coupled to a single Gold call made a long time ago. Tossing away that outlier greatly reduces the purported (costs were not included) excess returns of the method. (3) Decision Moose contrasts its performance against the S&P 500 Index as a benchmark. That is not the best benchmark since the Decision Moose chooses between 9 fund/ETF categories. A 60/40 asset mix of these same categories might be a better measure of relative performance.
The Decision Moose also postulates an All In or All Out policy. Dirlam doesn’t encourage such an extreme commitment, and I doubt if any supporters follow such a concentrated positioning. The non-diversification distorts the scoring somewhat by acting as a result magnifier.
I hope this post is helpful when evaluating the benefits and shortcomings of the Decision Moose’s forecasts. The site seems to be operated by an honest advocate of momentum investing. All this assists the marketplace’s pricing discovery mechanisms.
Thanks for introducing me to the Decision Moose website.
Comments
This is something that I would not go all in with; however, it is something I have, at times, put about five to ten percent of my portfolio’s value into.
Right now I have no timing strategies in play and if I did they would fall under the specialty sleeve within my portfolio. Perhaps, I’ll learn something by watching and digesting the comments of others.
Heck, it is kinda interesting.
Old_Skeet
“Market timing is unproven.”
That quote was extracted from the FAQ section of The Decision Moose website. It is an accurate summary statement that reflects the controversy between academics and practitioners of that discipline.
I have no ponies in this horserace. So I will not personally handicap the merits of the “Market Timing with Decision Moose” methodology or its track record. I’ll defer to CXO Advisory Group for that task.
I have not done investment market timing strategies for over 2 decades, At one time, I did use methods outlined in the Edwards and Magee classic “Technical Analysis of Stock Trends” book. I won some victories and I suffered some defeats. Overall, I suppose my outcomes were rather ho hum, and did demand a huge time commitment. I mostly shun market timing now, and feel much relieved without its pressures. It can be a task master.
Market Timing has a huge following and has an almost endless array of methods. There are more than 5,000 candidate Timing schemes. Some work for some time. The trick is to discover the appropriate technique at the appropriate time. No easy chore.
My favorite Timing website is operated by Thomas Bulkowski. I especially like his site because he summarizes methods and presents statistical data that helps to define the odds of success for many of these various procedures. Here is a Link to Bulkowski’s powerful and practical website:
http://thepatternsite.com/
The question will always be: How good are these momentum-based market Timing strategies?
William Dirlam’s Decision Moose has generated reasonable results, and respectable reviews from many quarters. But anecdotal statements are not sufficient. A more formal statistical review is warranted. CXO Advisory Group just completed just such an examination. Here is a Link to CXO’s research and findings:
http://www.cxoadvisory.com/2663/economic-indicators/the-decision-moose-asset-allocation-framework/
Please access the reference. As usual, CXO did a very honest, unbiased, workmanlike job.
My three major takeaways from the CXO study are:
(1) The Decision Moose performance has deteriorated over time. Change in effectiveness happens.
(2) A major factor in the perceived outperformance is coupled to a single Gold call made a long time ago. Tossing away that outlier greatly reduces the purported (costs were not included) excess returns of the method.
(3) Decision Moose contrasts its performance against the S&P 500 Index as a benchmark. That is not the best benchmark since the Decision Moose chooses between 9 fund/ETF categories. A 60/40 asset mix of these same categories might be a better measure of relative performance.
The Decision Moose also postulates an All In or All Out policy. Dirlam doesn’t encourage such an extreme commitment, and I doubt if any supporters follow such a concentrated positioning. The non-diversification distorts the scoring somewhat by acting as a result magnifier.
I hope this post is helpful when evaluating the benefits and shortcomings of the Decision Moose’s forecasts. The site seems to be operated by an honest advocate of momentum investing. All this assists the marketplace’s pricing discovery mechanisms.
Thanks for introducing me to the Decision Moose website.
Best Regards.