Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
Although the broad market "buy and hold" return is a good starting point for evaluating a strategy, I think the volatility of returns and correlation to other asset classes are equally important. I consider my strategies as complimenting rather than replacing traditional investment vehicles. Therefore, the critical decision becomes one of capital allocation between the different alternatives.
Regardless of how promising back-tested and actual returns look, one should never "trust" themselves with all their capital. I'm reminded of a line from "When Genius Failed" about how the fantastically wealthy partners at LTCM survived despite having 90%+ of their net worth tied up in the fund . . . the money they saved was the money they had spent on mega yachts and mansions.
I think the poll was motivated by the classic question if there is any purpose in active management rather than holding the market portfolio, so correlation would be irrelevant. Lowenstein's account is somewhat deceiving, and the guys were modest and inconspicuous with their spending.
