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.
respectfully disagree. only in the last two trading days, 13th and 14th, the long institutional investors started to buy stocks. before -- mostly hedge funds speculated by putting quick ETF positions or covering their shorts. those relative performance instl investors and mutual funds are currently sooo behind their respective indices that they will have to load on beta. this quarter end performance chasing might lead to overheating, but not now. while short term pull back to digest is reasonable, what likely is happening -- called multiples expansion due to the diminishing tail risk in europe and believe in central banks, here and in europe, stand ready to do what it takes. this has been called the most hated rally -- as most of the investors watch in desbelief from the sidelines (including many here at MFO). if you think a lot of corporate underperformance came from europe and europe is not falling apart due to ecb action; a lot of housing related issues in the u.s. bottomed out and are positioned for a reverse (look at the home builders performance -- ytd 70%+), the corporate earnings and spending will come... the stocks are not expensive and are universally underowned.
just a different opinion this sunday morning. jr/fa
I am more on the otherside of the trade, so to speak. In the near term, I too am looking for a pull back; and, long term it is going to be ... Show Me, Don't tell me. The centeral banks form my thoughts are doing all they can to keep the storm formation I feel brewing off shore; but, they don't seem to be getting much help form the politicians. Let's hope the central banks are successful. For me, as stock market valuations move upward so do expectations. Therefore, earnings and revenue will have to grow or the P/E Ratio will be going through the roof through P/E expansion and not growth of.
But ... Hey, Your View vs. My View ... that's what makes the market. Somebody has to be on the other side.
I am going to play this conseratively ... Sell down equties in the peaks ... and, buy up equities in the troughs. It's a simple strategy that has worked well for the family through the years.
Both make valid points - but appear to assume some rationality re: markets & investors. The old saw comes to mind about markets remaining "irrational longer than most investors can remain solvent." Recall when tech stocks could only go up. Also ... housing, junk bonds, & land around Tampa and Miami. So, we need to be wary of predictions from any quarter. What it all points to, I think, is having a judicious allocation that reflects your needs and situation. "Risk tolerance" to me means: don't get so heavily committed to risky assets (or a particular asset) that you're going to panic after the wind changes and abandon those positions - possibly to great detriment. The wind always changes.
Aside from the above, remember all are at different stages in the process. My 43% equity, 15% junk bond, 7% "other" (real estate & commodity) puts about 65% in risk assets - not far from Price Retirement Income's (TRRIX) allocation.* If 20-30 years younger would take more risk. But heck, will hit the RMD point in 4-5 years. Sounds from recent discussions like some in their 70s have pretty much gone to cash. Not what I'd do. But, hey, who can fault them? -
*In interest of accuracy, checked last annual report for TRRIX - Looks like about 40% stocks, 7.5% high yield & em debt, 1.5% commodity-linked, and roughly 50% investment grade bonds.
I think I agree with both Skeeter and fundalarm. Skeeter is being disciplined and working off a very solid plan as to how to allocate and move in/out of investments, paying attention to fundamentals and levels. I find his posts incredibly informative.
fundalarm is discussing the reality of institutional investors, who are (not entirely, but in many ways) worshiping at the church of what's working right now (and sadly I think that's an old Cramer phrase I'm using, but it fits.) Their concern is performance, performance, performance, and if they're underperforming, they're going to chase and push for the now. I think what I'm interested in seeing is whether or not you start to see retail trickle into equity funds.
However, institutional money is going to move the market, and what fundalarm is talking about is important in that, even if you don't fundamentally agree with it, if it's the case, it's going to be the reality to at least some degree. Retail money flow is clearly not what has been moving the market, as so much of it has zipped to fixed income.
I think my concern becomes rising input costs and what companies/sectors may fare better than others and, to some degree, general fundamentals and valuation, but I think the latter is really less and less a concern in the investing reality we are in.
Hmmmm. I grin when I see many of these polls/measuring sticks. They are contrived.
What is the opposite of GREED? Is it FEAR? Bzzzzzzzzzz. WRONG. But thanks for playing, anyway. The OPPOSITE of GREED is a sense of INNER CONTENTMENT aka PEACE OF MIND or SATISFACTION. Certainly not "fear." Both greed AND fear are negatives. To measure the extent of greed vs. fear is like measuring the extent of lust vs. exhaustion. What's the point? The result will be useless.
No concern. Just providing info for you if you weren't aware. I just copy and paste like you do and then edit out unnecessary things after the "?" from the pasted stuff. no problem with me, whichever way you provide links.
Comments
just a different opinion this sunday morning. jr/fa
Thanks for voicing your views.
I am more on the otherside of the trade, so to speak. In the near term, I too am looking for a pull back; and, long term it is going to be ... Show Me, Don't tell me. The centeral banks form my thoughts are doing all they can to keep the storm formation I feel brewing off shore; but, they don't seem to be getting much help form the politicians. Let's hope the central banks are successful. For me, as stock market valuations move upward so do expectations. Therefore, earnings and revenue will have to grow or the P/E Ratio will be going through the roof through P/E expansion and not growth of.
But ... Hey, Your View vs. My View ... that's what makes the market. Somebody has to be on the other side.
I am going to play this conseratively ... Sell down equties in the peaks ... and, buy up equities in the troughs. It's a simple strategy that has worked well for the family through the years.
Good Investing,
Skeeter
Aside from the above, remember all are at different stages in the process. My 43% equity, 15% junk bond, 7% "other" (real estate & commodity) puts about 65% in risk assets - not far from Price Retirement Income's (TRRIX) allocation.* If 20-30 years younger would take more risk. But heck, will hit the RMD point in 4-5 years. Sounds from recent discussions like some in their 70s have pretty much gone to cash. Not what I'd do. But, hey, who can fault them? -
*In interest of accuracy, checked last annual report for TRRIX - Looks like about 40% stocks, 7.5% high yield & em debt, 1.5% commodity-linked, and roughly 50% investment grade bonds.
fundalarm is discussing the reality of institutional investors, who are (not entirely, but in many ways) worshiping at the church of what's working right now (and sadly I think that's an old Cramer phrase I'm using, but it fits.) Their concern is performance, performance, performance, and if they're underperforming, they're going to chase and push for the now. I think what I'm interested in seeing is whether or not you start to see retail trickle into equity funds.
However, institutional money is going to move the market, and what fundalarm is talking about is important in that, even if you don't fundamentally agree with it, if it's the case, it's going to be the reality to at least some degree. Retail money flow is clearly not what has been moving the market, as so much of it has zipped to fixed income.
I think my concern becomes rising input costs and what companies/sectors may fare better than others and, to some degree, general fundamentals and valuation, but I think the latter is really less and less a concern in the investing reality we are in.
What is the opposite of GREED? Is it FEAR? Bzzzzzzzzzz. WRONG. But thanks for playing, anyway. The OPPOSITE of GREED is a sense of INNER CONTENTMENT aka PEACE OF MIND or SATISFACTION. Certainly not "fear." Both greed AND fear are negatives. To measure the extent of greed vs. fear is like measuring the extent of lust vs. exhaustion. What's the point? The result will be useless.
90% of the time you can just post
http://buzz.money.cnn.com/2012/09/14/fear-greed-record/
instead of below which often times contains information pertaining to your browser and how you looked things up, personal info, etc.
http://buzz.money.cnn.com/2012/09/14/fear-greed-record/?section=money_markets&utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed:+rss/money_markets+(Markets)
obviously you can do it either way. one way is a bit easier to read.
I just do copy and then paste ... and, if I was typing it out ... that might be the case.
If it is creating a concern ... I'll edit it in the future.
Skeeter
No concern. Just providing info for you if you weren't aware. I just copy and paste like you do and then edit out unnecessary things after the "?" from the pasted stuff. no problem with me, whichever way you provide links.