Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Moderator: Global Moderator
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Nice charts!
I’m curious about why you choose different rebalancing bands for stocks.
I’m curious about why you choose different rebalancing bands for stocks.
- LittleDinghy
- Full Member
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:44 am
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Since the GB basically "tilts the [PP] portfolio slightly towards Prosperity" ( https://portfoliocharts.com/2016/04/18/ ... butterfly/), our thought is that the re-balancing band for stocks should reflect the combined stock allocation. For the lower limit we decided to just keep it equivalent to the PP, that is, 15/25 = 24/40, yielding the lower limit value of 24%. For the upper limit we just decided we'd never want our stock percentage to be greater than half our portfolio.
Would love others' thoughts on our reasoning.
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
I'd saved this from earlier in this now epically-long thread:
"Per the quote below, and others from the thread,Sophie recommends 30% re-balancing bands [20% plus or minus 30% of 20% (=6%), meaning a range of 14% - 26%]. You might wonder, as I did, why she did not recommend a 40% re-balancing band, such as used with the PP (meaning a range of 15%-35% for the PP and 12%-28% for the GB). My current understanding of her reasoning is that she does not want the percentage of any asset to go significantly below the lower limit for the PP's 40% re-balancing band, which equals 15%. 14% is only 1% below 15% and conforms to a nice round number of a 30% rebalancing band. My sense at this point is that this is her reasoning."
Earlier still Tyler himself suggested a simple 10/30% rebalancing trigger for the GB.
I must admit I'm tempted to permit myself a further tweak which I guess you could call the Tortoise Pulling His Head Into His Shell rebalance. Since the GB tilts to prosperity and we're going through what surely seems like a prolonged period where such sunny skies aren't in the forecast I've thought about just treating the GB as a PP and reverting to the 4 x 25% stock:gold:bond:cash targets.
"Per the quote below, and others from the thread,Sophie recommends 30% re-balancing bands [20% plus or minus 30% of 20% (=6%), meaning a range of 14% - 26%]. You might wonder, as I did, why she did not recommend a 40% re-balancing band, such as used with the PP (meaning a range of 15%-35% for the PP and 12%-28% for the GB). My current understanding of her reasoning is that she does not want the percentage of any asset to go significantly below the lower limit for the PP's 40% re-balancing band, which equals 15%. 14% is only 1% below 15% and conforms to a nice round number of a 30% rebalancing band. My sense at this point is that this is her reasoning."
Earlier still Tyler himself suggested a simple 10/30% rebalancing trigger for the GB.
I must admit I'm tempted to permit myself a further tweak which I guess you could call the Tortoise Pulling His Head Into His Shell rebalance. Since the GB tilts to prosperity and we're going through what surely seems like a prolonged period where such sunny skies aren't in the forecast I've thought about just treating the GB as a PP and reverting to the 4 x 25% stock:gold:bond:cash targets.
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Interesting Kevin. I’ve thought about rebalancing closer to the HBPP as well, instead of doubling down on stocks at this moment.
- LittleDinghy
- Full Member
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:44 am
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Yeah, I'm pretty sure I wrote that explanation of my understanding of Sophie's thinking. That was when my wife and I were less sure what bands to use. Another way of thinking about the GB that has been mentioned is as "a PP with a VP of small cap value stocks" (quote from memory). Re-balance limits for the PP portion would then be 15% and 35% for each portion, which in terms of the whole portfolio, would be 12% and 28%. And one would want to keep the VP portion aligned, so might as well use 12% and 28% for that too. But then, I think somewhere on gyroscopic investing, someone mentioned that HB thought no one asset should ever comprise less than 15% of one's PP, which makes sense to me. So maybe the lower bounds of 12% should be raised to 15%. Then the lower bands for each of the five assets would be 15% and the upper band for each would be 28%. However, this allows for the possibility of the stock portion to get up to almost 56%. If one wanted to limit the total stock percentage to less than 50%, one could set limits on each stock portion to 25%. Or, alternatively, just limit the sum of the two stock portions to 50%. Thus, one arrives again at the limits we are using, with the exception that our lower limit for stocks is not 30%, but rather 24%. We arrived at 24% because, in alignment with the statement that the GB "tilts the [PP] slightly towards prosperity" (https://portfoliocharts.com/2016/04/18/ ... butterfly/) we use 24% for our lower limit for the full 40% stock portion because 24/40 = 15/25.Kevin K. wrote: ↑Sat Mar 21, 2020 7:22 pm
"Per the quote below, and others from the thread,Sophie recommends 30% re-balancing bands [20% plus or minus 30% of 20% (=6%), meaning a range of 14% - 26%]. You might wonder, as I did, why she did not recommend a 40% re-balancing band, such as used with the PP (meaning a range of 15%-35% for the PP and 12%-28% for the GB). My current understanding of her reasoning is that she does not want the percentage of any asset to go significantly below the lower limit for the PP's 40% re-balancing band, which equals 15%. 14% is only 1% below 15% and conforms to a nice round number of a 30% rebalancing band. My sense at this point is that this is her reasoning."
Earlier still Tyler himself suggested a simple 10/30% rebalancing trigger for the GB.
I must admit I'm tempted to permit myself a further tweak which I guess you could call the Tortoise Pulling His Head Into His Shell rebalance. Since the GB tilts to prosperity and we're going through what surely seems like a prolonged period where such sunny skies aren't in the forecast I've thought about just treating the GB as a PP and reverting to the 4 x 25% stock:gold:bond:cash targets.
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Yes, that was my thinking: I didn't want percentages to drop too far below the PP's safety zone, which is an asset comprising less than 15% of the portfolio. The GB is really a PP in which stocks are kept at the upper end of their "safety" range and the other assets at the lower end.
There was a discussion at some point about the 10% gold that the Desert Porfolio uses. While this is OK under most conditions and certainly was better than no gold in the 1970s, backtests during that period shows that 10% is inadequate and you needed at least 15% - which coincidentally is what Harry Browne determined for the PP. He said as much on an episode of his radio show - a caller said he had less than 15% in one of the assets, I think gold, and Harry Browne told him he didn't have a PP anymore.
There's nothing wrong with using 12-28% bands, it's just that for bonds and gold especially I don't want them dropping below 15%. I guess I'm still not entirely sold on the GB, but I was convinced that it makes sense to overweight stocks because we expect prosperity to dominate over the other economic conditions over long periods of time.
There was a discussion at some point about the 10% gold that the Desert Porfolio uses. While this is OK under most conditions and certainly was better than no gold in the 1970s, backtests during that period shows that 10% is inadequate and you needed at least 15% - which coincidentally is what Harry Browne determined for the PP. He said as much on an episode of his radio show - a caller said he had less than 15% in one of the assets, I think gold, and Harry Browne told him he didn't have a PP anymore.
There's nothing wrong with using 12-28% bands, it's just that for bonds and gold especially I don't want them dropping below 15%. I guess I'm still not entirely sold on the GB, but I was convinced that it makes sense to overweight stocks because we expect prosperity to dominate over the other economic conditions over long periods of time.
- vnatale
- Executive Member
- Posts: 9423
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
- Location: Massachusetts
- Contact:
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Might?dualstow wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2017 10:26 amYou and barrett drinking a lot of covfefe today, eh?
Well, you're so right, Sophie.Anyway, I continue to be curious why people want to discount the gold runups of the 1970s and late 2000's
I would start by saying that I don't think Harry Browne made an error. There are smart people who like gold and smart people who don't like it. When you're playing with your own money, it leads to a lot more hand-wringing than merely reading a book and thinking, hmm, gold looks neat.
And while it's true that you could say the same about other assets, I suppose this has something to do with herd mentality. It's hard to shake the feeling that 10,000 Bogle fans can't be wrong. All those 60/40 portfolios that completely avoid gold and seem to be fine. (Yes, they might experience some pain in the future. One never knows). How many people have the converse, have gold and neither stocks nor bonds? Well, there's our Libertarian666. (sound of crickets)...and...a handful of people who aren't on the internet.
Let's say I did somebody wrong and my punishment is to sell everything and start a portfolio of pure treasuries. No problem. I could do that today, even knowing that inflation would probably ruin my plans. Same scenario, all stocks: hmm, a little bit harder, but I'd probably thank whoever's forcing me to do this in the long run. Like that movie in which Bette Midler's character thanks her captors for kidnapping her, because she finally lost weight exercising while chained up in their basement. All gold: yikes. I don't know.
(Could you answer my t-bill question now? :-)
Never mind, Tyler got it.)
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
- vnatale
- Executive Member
- Posts: 9423
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
- Location: Massachusetts
- Contact:
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
A Tyler "gem" that deserves to be brought back to the forefront.Tyler wrote: ↑Wed May 31, 2017 4:29 pmThe way I look at it, you can always find a better or worse choice over a specific timeframe but gold improves the consistency of a portfolio across all economic environments.Desert wrote: Note: If one backtests starting in 1970, the conclusion will be that gold improves the portfolio significantly. If the backtesting starts in 1980, the opposite conclusion would be reached.
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
- vnatale
- Executive Member
- Posts: 9423
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
- Location: Massachusetts
- Contact:
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
sophie wrote: ↑Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:05 amNope. Why would a bubble be defined purely from price movements, ignoring the conditions that may have triggered it? And still less, why do you attribute the gold gains in this period to something that happened almost a decade earlier? There was a lot going on in 1980 that I don't have time to research at the moment - maybe you should?Kbg wrote:Seriously...you don't think 1978-Jan 1980 wasn't a speculative bubble? I may give you 1978, but no way after that. Pretty much the definition of a bubble is up 400% in a year (79) and down by half the following year (80). Going near vertical in 2 months on a price chart is a pretty good tell as well.sophie wrote:Why couldn't there have been fundamental reasons?
In 1978, US inflation (December -> December CPI) was 9% (average 7.6%). The 3 month Treasury bill was paying 6-7%. In 1979, inflation went up to 13% by CPI (average 11%). The 3 month Treasury bill in that year spent most of the year at 9%, and went up to 12% by the end of the year. At the time, several European countries had much lower inflation rates.
That sounds to me like the exact scenario (rising inflation to > 10% with cash interest slow to catch up) that would cause investors to switch from buying Treasuries to gold. You're forgetting also that while gold may have been controlled in the US earlier in the decade, it was not in many other countries, and they collectively have a lot of power to influence the gold price with investment choices. The US was big at the time, but most certainly not the only player in the world gold market.
Gold and treasuries rose after the 2008 financial shock as well. Treasuries rose ~30% in a very short time in 2008. Was that a "speculative bubble", or a logical result of what was going on in the markets at the time? Regardless of the term you use, those events are precisely why you hold gold and treasuries. People holding PP's in 2008 were calmly rebalancing and reaping the gains from these drastic price movements, while everyone else was in shock at watching their retirement account balances almost cut in half. I'm HAPPY to know that gold can move that fast in the right conditions. That's the whole point of owning it as part of a balanced portfolio.
In 2029 I wonder what people will be writing about what Permanent Portfolio holders did in 2020 and what gold did during the year....
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
My simplistic way of potentially dealing with rebalancing a GB (which is just a HBPP + 20% VB for me) was to track the HBPP portion separately and when the HBPP portion hits a 15%/35% limit on any of the HBPP assets I would rebalance everything back to a GB allocation (20% in all 5 assets). My rational is that whatever environment caused one of the HBPP components to trigger a rebalance would probably hold true for a GB allocation as well.
I currently have 18.4% VTI, 27.2% TLT, 21.9% GLD and 32.5% "cash" in my HBPP portion which is getting close to the 35% limit. My GB allocation currently works out to be 16.7% VTI, 9% VB, 24.7% TLT, 20% GLD and 29.6% "cash". If my HBPP "cash" portion hits 35%, I would try to rebalance everything back to 20% each in a GB allocation (or as reasonably close).
Am I missing something or Is that too simplistic?
Appreciate any input!
Thanks!
I currently have 18.4% VTI, 27.2% TLT, 21.9% GLD and 32.5% "cash" in my HBPP portion which is getting close to the 35% limit. My GB allocation currently works out to be 16.7% VTI, 9% VB, 24.7% TLT, 20% GLD and 29.6% "cash". If my HBPP "cash" portion hits 35%, I would try to rebalance everything back to 20% each in a GB allocation (or as reasonably close).
Am I missing something or Is that too simplistic?
Appreciate any input!
Thanks!
- LittleDinghy
- Full Member
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:44 am
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Thank you! I really like how your rebalancing approach aligns so nicely with the HBPP rebalancing approach. It is so rational and simple. My wife and I will probably adopt it. I'm wondering what others on this thread think of your approach.PP67 wrote: ↑Mon Mar 23, 2020 10:15 amMy simplistic way of potentially dealing with rebalancing a GB (which is just a HBPP + 20% VB for me) was to track the HBPP portion separately and when the HBPP portion hits a 15%/35% limit on any of the HBPP assets I would rebalance everything back to a GB allocation (20% in all 5 assets). My rational is that whatever environment caused one of the HBPP components to trigger a rebalance would probably hold true for a GB allocation as well.
...
Am I missing something or Is that too simplistic?
Below are our portfolio dynamics since Jan 31 (the peak value it has had when I have checked it). GB allocation percentages are top left and HBPP portion percentages are top right. We haven't yet hit a rebalancing limit in either case.
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Hello !
The annual % profit on GBis bigger and the drawdowns are lower than PP
... how is this possible?
Please let me know your thoughts.
The annual % profit on GBis bigger and the drawdowns are lower than PP
... how is this possible?
Please let me know your thoughts.
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Here is a post from Tyler regarding recent drawdowns if the GB and HBPP.
https://portfoliocharts.com/2020/03/23/ ... ful-month/
My Modified GB went down around 9%.
https://portfoliocharts.com/2020/03/23/ ... ful-month/
My Modified GB went down around 9%.
- vnatale
- Executive Member
- Posts: 9423
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
- Location: Massachusetts
- Contact:
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
1) Do you agree with what I once read that an insurance company annuity is not different than buying a bond from that insurance company. If you agree, would buy a direct bond offering from any insurance company?mathjak107 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:56 amno one knows what to expect this time around . these are uncharted times with things right now so i would trust nothing but real time monitoring .
could we have a decade of rising rates back to the historic norms ? could stocks be dead another 15 years and could gold go no where but down with rising rates ?
all very possible so any spending down plan needs a plan B . WHICH MEANS Access to another level of just slightly more volatile assets once cash runs low . .
i wouldn't want plan b to have to decide whether to take a beating on gold , stocks or those long term volatile treasury's .
more and more i like what i see when running simulations with the various types of income annuty's as a base . but we are still a bit to young and rates to low for laddering them .
the new fidelity retirement planner has simulations you can add with various annuity types .
if someone is not retiring today or in the short term , this may all go away and resolve . but with the first 5 years of ones retirement being especially crucial before the cushion of a run up there are no do overs if things do not go as planned .
i had a very comprehensive consultation with my team at fidelity on monday and gave them lots of homework . they are running all kinds of simulations for me with various social security points , pulling from different types of accounts and using various annuity products .
we were supposed to meet again on monday but they needed more time so i will report back .
2) I don't believe that you ever reported back.
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
I'd just like to take this opportunity to say I'm thankful that you're not an IRS agent, Vinny. If you were assigned to audit all of my old tax returns, I'd be in a world of pain.
- vnatale
- Executive Member
- Posts: 9423
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
- Location: Massachusetts
- Contact:
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
A business for which I was its financial person underwent an IRS audit. The person they sent was with us for three days. At the end of the three days, he issued a "No Findings" report and told me that he could on his first day there that he was not going to find anything.
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
CEO: "Yo Vinny, we got ourselves a bit of a problem here. Some inquisitive IRS agent has been sniffin' around, and I don't like it. Why don't you make the problem, you know... go away?"vnatale wrote: ↑Fri Apr 24, 2020 4:56 pmA business for which I was its financial person underwent an IRS audit. The person they sent was with us for three days. At the end of the three days, he issued a "No Findings" report and told me that he could on his first day there that he was not going to find anything.
Vinny: "I'm on it, boss. You just rest easy."
- vnatale
- Executive Member
- Posts: 9423
- Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
- Location: Massachusetts
- Contact:
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Follow all you say here....however the part of "later sell equity's"....why "many years later"?mathjak107 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 19, 2015 5:43 amthat is the issue spending down from the pp.
all well and good you have 25% cash but now that you spent it down below your rebalance point you have to rebalance and refill selling volatile assets . it may be no different from leaving the cash and spending it down equally from the other parts right from the get go ..
in a typical bucket system you exhaust the cash , then refill from short and intermediate term bonds which are no where near as volatile as stocks would be like long term bonds are. finally many years later sell equity's to refill bonds and cash
so instead of refilling from short and intermediate term bonds which may be down a little you are selling long term bonds which are something as volatile as the stocks or selling stocks or gold which run an equal chance of being down as much you are trying to avoid selling at a bad time .
with the pp you do not really have a non volatile 2nd line of defense to draw from if rates rise . .
i think anyone spending down from the pp has to examine this and find away to provide a secondary source for spending without selling assets as volatile as stocks are .
perhaps an income annuity may add time to allow other assets to at least recover before they are needed and prolong rebalancing to cash .
i don't know , how it would shake out as i never looked at the pp in that regard .
What if the cash bucket has depleted and there is also not much left in the next bucket and you have to sell equities? Are you not in the same position as regarding your criticism of the Permanent Portfolio System.
My understanding of the bucket system is that you have 3 years worth of spending in the cash bucket, 5 years in the next bucket, with the remainder in equities. And, as each year goes by you have to shift from the higher bucket to the lower bucket. Therefore, isn't the bucket system even worse in that it's guaranteed selling of equities each year while the Permanent Portfolio system is, on the average, once every two years?
Vinny
Above provided by: Vinny, who always says: "I only regret that I have but one lap to give to my cats." AND "I'm a more-is-more person."
- mathjak107
- Executive Member
- Posts: 4456
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
- Location: bayside queens ny
- Contact:
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
In practice each bucket is refilled over those years as assets are in a good position to do so ....vnatale wrote: ↑Fri May 01, 2020 6:18 pmFollow all you say here....however the part of "later sell equity's"....why "many years later"?mathjak107 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 19, 2015 5:43 amthat is the issue spending down from the pp.
all well and good you have 25% cash but now that you spent it down below your rebalance point you have to rebalance and refill selling volatile assets . it may be no different from leaving the cash and spending it down equally from the other parts right from the get go ..
in a typical bucket system you exhaust the cash , then refill from short and intermediate term bonds which are no where near as volatile as stocks would be like long term bonds are. finally many years later sell equity's to refill bonds and cash
so instead of refilling from short and intermediate term bonds which may be down a little you are selling long term bonds which are something as volatile as the stocks or selling stocks or gold which run an equal chance of being down as much you are trying to avoid selling at a bad time .
with the pp you do not really have a non volatile 2nd line of defense to draw from if rates rise . .
i think anyone spending down from the pp has to examine this and find away to provide a secondary source for spending without selling assets as volatile as stocks are .
perhaps an income annuity may add time to allow other assets to at least recover before they are needed and prolong rebalancing to cash .
i don't know , how it would shake out as i never looked at the pp in that regard .
What if the cash bucket has depleted and there is also not much left in the next bucket and you have to sell equities? Are you not in the same position as regarding your criticism of the Permanent Portfolio System.
My understanding of the bucket system is that you have 3 years worth of spending in the cash bucket, 5 years in the next bucket, with the remainder in equities. And, as each year goes by you have to shift from the higher bucket to the lower bucket. Therefore, isn't the bucket system even worse in that it's guaranteed selling of equities each year while the Permanent Portfolio system is, on the average, once every two years?
Vinny
In practice one system uses 7 years safe money in bucket 1 ...that is basically cash instruments and annuities as well as other income sources ...bucket 2 has 7 years in assorted bond funds , income funds , reit income ,etc , durations are matched to need ———bucket 3 is equities ......
You have as much as 15 years before equities need to be sold ..... you likely don’t want to spend down buckets 1 and 2 and be 100% equities at age 80 prior to refilling .....so users tend to refill at different points along the way
- LittleDinghy
- Full Member
- Posts: 53
- Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:44 am
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Last night I just did my end-of-month adding up of our GB portfolio (our whole nest egg for retirement - 2-1/2 years away for me and 7 years away for my spouse) and was pleasantly surprised to find it had hit a new high, a little larger but essentially the same as its previous high the end of January (I usually only check at month-end). And we never quite hit a re-balancing limit and the only change was the automated paycheck additions to the equity part of our portfolio over Feb, Mar and April, which over the three months is probably not more than 1% of portfolio value (I'll check this weekend). The lowest value I calculated over the last three months (on March 21) was down about 11.8% as compared to our previous highest value ever at the end of Jan.
I have at best a surface understanding of how all this works but my spouse and I are so appreciative of Harry Browne, Craig Rowland, J.M. Lawson and Tyler for making this sufficiently understandable that even we, as ignorant as we are about investing, could implement it. Also, I'm so appreciative of this forum, especially Sophie, pmward, and Smith1776, for their responses to my and other's questions that have helped us so much.
For grins, below are some charts of our portfolio dynamics from Jan 31, the previous maximum value of our portfolio. Looking at the charts it seems that LTTs and gold increased in value enough from 1/31 to 3/20 or thereabouts to partially offset the equity losses during that period. And then as equity values have risen since 3/20 or thereabouts, LTT and gold values have held their values sufficiently such that they, in combination with the equity increases in value since 3/20 have enabled the entire portfolio to recover all of its losses from 1/31 to 3/20.
I have at best a surface understanding of how all this works but my spouse and I are so appreciative of Harry Browne, Craig Rowland, J.M. Lawson and Tyler for making this sufficiently understandable that even we, as ignorant as we are about investing, could implement it. Also, I'm so appreciative of this forum, especially Sophie, pmward, and Smith1776, for their responses to my and other's questions that have helped us so much.
For grins, below are some charts of our portfolio dynamics from Jan 31, the previous maximum value of our portfolio. Looking at the charts it seems that LTTs and gold increased in value enough from 1/31 to 3/20 or thereabouts to partially offset the equity losses during that period. And then as equity values have risen since 3/20 or thereabouts, LTT and gold values have held their values sufficiently such that they, in combination with the equity increases in value since 3/20 have enabled the entire portfolio to recover all of its losses from 1/31 to 3/20.
- Attachments
-
- 20200430_PortfolioDynamics.png (108.97 KiB) Viewed 17464 times
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
I know this is the cardinal sin but anyone else thinking about switching back to PP from GB? I am just having a hard time seeing how stocks are going to perform much better in the upcoming several years in real terms. They'll prob go sideways. Then again, they seem to be doing OK and the world is a basket case, so is there all upside? My gut tells me the current stock market is a potemkin village.
- mathjak107
- Executive Member
- Posts: 4456
- Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
- Location: bayside queens ny
- Contact:
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
I run the pp and I run a 25% equity model of another type too ..I am holding for now at the 25% level in both
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Regrets, I've had a few, but then again, too few to mention.gull1 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:07 amI know this is the cardinal sin but anyone else thinking about switching back to PP from GB? I am just having a hard time seeing how stocks are going to perform much better in the upcoming several years in real terms. They'll prob go sideways. Then again, they seem to be doing OK and the world is a basket case, so is there all upside? My gut tells me the current stock market is a potemkin village.
I switched from the pure PP to the GB a few years back because it seemed like a good idea looking at Tyler's chart when stocks were doing well. Will that turn out to be a bad decision in the long run based on current events?
How the hell do I know and neither do you or any of the "experts". I try to make it a habit not to look at my portfolio very often but when I do I see that SCV is not doing so well right now. Is that going to hold true in the future? Again, how the hell do I know? My attitude is that you just make the best decisions you can based on available information at the time. What more can you really do?
-
- Executive Member
- Posts: 750
- Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 7:32 pm
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
By my calculations IWN is up 40% from its lows this year.
I was moving slowly into GB and I have been buying SCV because it was my lagging asset. I have made some nice percentage gains on my latest contributions because of this.
I was so close to hitting a re balance band right before it reversed course going back up. I was about back up the truck and missed it.
I will keep buying it while it is my lagging asset.
I was moving slowly into GB and I have been buying SCV because it was my lagging asset. I have made some nice percentage gains on my latest contributions because of this.
I was so close to hitting a re balance band right before it reversed course going back up. I was about back up the truck and missed it.
I will keep buying it while it is my lagging asset.
Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio
Found this random article which seems reassuring https://osam.com/Commentary/a-historic- ... -small-cappp4me wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 7:01 pmRegrets, I've had a few, but then again, too few to mention.gull1 wrote: ↑Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:07 amI know this is the cardinal sin but anyone else thinking about switching back to PP from GB? I am just having a hard time seeing how stocks are going to perform much better in the upcoming several years in real terms. They'll prob go sideways. Then again, they seem to be doing OK and the world is a basket case, so is there all upside? My gut tells me the current stock market is a potemkin village.
I switched from the pure PP to the GB a few years back because it seemed like a good idea looking at Tyler's chart when stocks were doing well. Will that turn out to be a bad decision in the long run based on current events?
How the hell do I know and neither do you or any of the "experts". I try to make it a habit not to look at my portfolio very often but when I do I see that SCV is not doing so well right now. Is that going to hold true in the future? Again, how the hell do I know? My attitude is that you just make the best decisions you can based on available information at the time. What more can you really do?