Active vs. Passive
90 RepliesJump to last post
Are EIA's an asset class? You could make the argument. However, asset allocation involves more than one asset class.[quote=Moraen]Asset allocation is the man-made global warming of the investment world.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree more.
[quote=Moraen]Asset allocation is the man-made global warming of the investment world.
If you truly believe this, you are not doing it correctly. That is ok though, most advisors don’t. Cap Inc B, BFA, and Inc FofA is not an asset allocation. [/quote]
Sam, I use individual equities and bonds. The occasional ETF. I believe security selection through fundamental analysis is the best method for investment returns, and the portfolios of my clients prove it.
I use absolutely zero managed funds.
Asset allocation and MPT are a joke. Even registered rep is finally catching on.
http://registeredrep.com/investing/finance-asset-allocation-0701/
[quote=Moraen] [quote=Sam Houston] [quote=Moraen]Asset allocation is the man-made global warming of the investment world.[/quote]
If you truly believe this, you are not doing it correctly. That is ok though, most advisors don't. Cap Inc B, BFA, and Inc FofA is not an asset allocation. [/quote]
Sam, I use individual equities and bonds. The occasional ETF. I believe security selection through fundamental analysis is the best method for investment returns, and the portfolios of my clients prove it.
I use absolutely zero managed funds.
Asset allocation and MPT are a joke. Even registered rep is finally catching on.
http://registeredrep.com/investing/finance-asset-allocation-0701/[/quote] I'ver heard capitalism is dead also. 230 years of success followed by one year of failure, let's ditch it for something else. The couterpoint to your argument is simple, have you ever had a fundamentally strong companies stock go down? Fundamentals are a vital component to investing, however supply and demand ultimately decide a stocks (or bonds) price.
Are EIA's an asset class? You could make the argument. However, asset allocation involves more than one asset class.[/quote][quote=Fast Eddie] [quote=Moraen]Asset allocation is the man-made global warming of the investment world.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree more.
Retard, it's not enough to just read. You have to read AND think.
Are EIA's an asset class? You could make the argument. However, asset allocation involves more than one asset class.[/quote][quote=Sam Houston][quote=Fast Eddie] [quote=Moraen]Asset allocation is the man-made global warming of the investment world.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree more.
Retard, it's not enough to just read. You have to read AND think.
[/quote] I thought we were going to play nice for a while. Isn't this site for REGISTERED individuals? RegReps appreciates the income you generate.
Supply and demand unfortunately are flawed when put to the test.
Also, most stocks have been overvalued for quite some time and the bond market has been flooded with too many issues as everyone takes on more debt. Do you really think looking at the balance sheets of companies and municipalities that taking on more debt meant that it was a good thing, and that they would be unlikely to default.
As for capitalism - 230 years is an eye blink in human history. While I fought for this nation and believe in America (as she used to be), we steadily move towards a more socialist country.
As for your counterpoint - have you ever had a portfolio where you had everything perfectly correlated and then a large macroeconomic downturn affects the entire portfolio. Bonds, stocks, commodities, etc.
My guess if Fast Eddie doesn’t really have to worry about it, but then again, we all have different clients.
Fundamentals haven’t been strong in a while. Analysts have been looking at balance sheets much like a sixteen year old looks at $2.50 gasoline - they think that is cheap. Those of us who have been around longer know that’s simply ridiculous. They are anchored to that price. Analysts were anchored to horrible financials.
If you actually look at the financial statements of most companies, it’s easy to spot the companies that are undervalued vs. overvalued. Even Apple (a stock I love) it was obvious that despite their overabundance of cash that there was no way it was a $200 stock. The same with portfolio managers.
In my opinion this is where active management fails. They are anchored to bad analysis.
Supply and demand unfortunately are flawed when put to the test.
Are EIA's an asset class? You could make the argument. However, asset allocation involves more than one asset class.[/quote][quote=Fast Eddie] [quote=Sam Houston][quote=Fast Eddie] [quote=Moraen]Asset allocation is the man-made global warming of the investment world.[/quote]
I couldn’t agree more.
Retard, it's not enough to just read. You have to read AND think.
[/quote] I thought we were going to play nice for a while. Isn't this site for REGISTERED individuals? RegReps appreciates the income you generate.[/quote]
No, pussy. It's for people over 13. Your buttboy, Brent, isn't registered and he's here. By the way...do you know how gay you sound mentioning how I generate revenue for rrmag, DHK?
Sorry, it’s your own site you can’t post on as a non-registered, couldn’t make it out of AG Edwards training dufus. Who’s Brent?
[quote=Sam Houston] Supply and demand unfortunately are flawed when put to the test.
So a stock can go up when there are more sellers than buyers? Please elaborate on your theory. Also, I look forward to your Nobel Prize in Economics lucheon.[/quote]
Sam - you will be invited to the luncheon, not so sure what a lucheon is. Interestingly enough, I just found out I have an additional 36 months of GI Bill left, and I’m throwing the money away if I don’t go back and what am going back for - you guessed it - Ph.D in economics.
But I digress. You need to qualify your question. Do you mean, “More shares being sold than bought”? Or do you mean what you said?
Because if you meant what you said the answer is quite simple. Two guys sell 5000 shares a piece. One guy buys 10000. Price goes up.
[quote=Moraen] [quote=Sam Houston] Supply and demand unfortunately are flawed when put to the test.
So a stock can go up when there are more sellers than buyers? Please elaborate on your theory. Also, I look forward to your Nobel Prize in Economics lucheon.[/quote]
Sam - you will be invited to the luncheon, not so sure what a lucheon is. Interestingly enough, I just found out I have an additional 36 months of GI Bill left, and I'm throwing the money away if I don't go back and what am going back for - you guessed it - Ph.D in economics.
But I digress. You need to qualify your question. Do you mean, "More shares being sold than bought"? Or do you mean what you said?
Because if you meant what you said the answer is quite simple. One guy sells 10000 shares. Two guys each by 5000 shares. Price goes up.[/quote] Actually no. If 10000 share are for sale, and 10000 shares are bought, the price would be the same. If however, the two guys each wanted 6000 shares each, then the price would go up. Why not just answer the question? You can't. But for the sake of boredom, if supply is greater than demand for a stock, how does the price go up eliminating any other outside factors?
[quote=Sam Houston]Sorry, it’s your own site you can’t post on as a non-registered, couldn’t make it out of AG Edwards training dufus. Who’s Brent? [/quote]
I never even made it TO the training. BM was a wack job.
There are ALWAYS outside factors Sam. ALWAYS. Economics ASSUMES that people are rational. It is the only social science that does. Unfortunately, we are not. So most economic theories and laws are subject ot outside factors.
And you beat me to the punch. I had to edit my post. Damn.
You still haven't answered my question or elaborated on your previous statement.There are ALWAYS outside factors Sam. ALWAYS. Economics ASSUMES that people are rational. It is the only social science that does. Unfortunately, we are not. So most economic theories and laws are subject ot outside factors.
And you beat me to the punch. I had to edit my post. Damn.
Your bowel movements have personalities? Strange. Keep trying on the identity.[quote=Sam Houston]Sorry, it’s your own site you can’t post on as a non-registered, couldn’t make it out of AG Edwards training dufus. Who’s Brent? [/quote]
I never even made it TO the training. BM was a wack job. Brent is a friend of David Kinder and Daniel Kennedy.
Your bowel movements have personalities? Strange. Keep trying on the identity.[/quote][quote=Fast Eddie] [quote=Sam Houston]Sorry, it’s your own site you can’t post on as a non-registered, couldn’t make it out of AG Edwards training dufus. Who’s Brent? [/quote]
I never even made it TO the training. BM was a wack job. Brent is a friend of David Kinder and Daniel Kennedy.
There's a lot of losers you could be. Joe, Troy, William. One things for sure is that I'm going to find out. I always do. You won't be happy with the results. You've posted my picture and personal information about me and your career will end.
Your bowel movements have personalities? Strange. Keep trying on the identity.[/quote][quote=Sam Houston][quote=Fast Eddie] [quote=Sam Houston]Sorry, it’s your own site you can’t post on as a non-registered, couldn’t make it out of AG Edwards training dufus. Who’s Brent? [/quote]
I never even made it TO the training. BM was a wack job. Brent is a friend of David Kinder and Daniel Kennedy.
There's a lot of losers you could be. Joe, Troy, William. One things for sure is that I'm going to find out. I always do. You won't be happy with the results. You've posted my picture and personal information about me and your career will end.
[/quote] Blah, blah, blah. I have not posted your picture or any personal information, at least none that you have not posted in public before, making it common knowledge, and open game. It seems to me that you just threatened me, across state lines, via an electronic transmission. I feel that this threat has a negative tone, has made me feel uncomfortable, and generally harassed. Doesn't Texas have a law against that? I could have sworn I had read something about that recently. Nice to see the cost of my education pay off.
[quote=iceco1d]
As far as the investment & economics discussion goes, I find myself on the same side of thee table with Sam, for once...which means, I'm on the other side of the table from Moraen, also for once.
Interesting. It's nice to know that this particular table is a friendly one though; at least until Lame Ass Broker chimes in. Man it was a long day once I got off this board this morning.[/quote] Thanks Ice, although I would say we stand on the same side on many issues. I just use different tools than you, but we are doing very similar work IMO.Your bowel movements have personalities? Strange. Keep trying on the identity.[/quote][quote=Fast Eddie] [quote=Sam Houston][quote=Fast Eddie] [quote=Sam Houston]Sorry, it’s your own site you can’t post on as a non-registered, couldn’t make it out of AG Edwards training dufus. Who’s Brent? [/quote]
I never even made it TO the training. BM was a wack job. Brent is a friend of David Kinder and Daniel Kennedy.
There's a lot of losers you could be. Joe, Troy, William. One things for sure is that I'm going to find out. I always do. You won't be happy with the results. You've posted my picture and personal information about me and your career will end.
[/quote] Blah, blah, blah. I have not posted your picture or any personal information, at least none that you have not posted in public before, making it common knowledge, and open game. It seems to me that you just threatened me, across state lines, via an electronic transmission. I feel that this threat has a negative tone, has made me feel uncomfortable, and generally harassed. Doesn't Texas have a law against that? I could have sworn I had read something about that recently. Nice to see the cost of my education pay off.[/quote]
This is my last communication with you on this forum. Texas has no law against reporting your behavior to your broker/dealer or the regulators. I will find out who you are and you will not like the results. I promise.
It does have a law against making threats, which you just did again. Your ego has exposed you to civil and criminal liability, not because you would report me to regulators, but because you would do it with malicious forethought for the purpose of personal injury. Go back and read your posts, it is plastered all over them. Plus, you have threatened others with the same treatment. This is called a pattern. Do what you must. As far as this being your last communication, I have asked repeatedly to play nice, both on the board and via PM. You have chosen to ignore my requests, again shifting liability away from me to yourself.