Golden Butterfly Portfolio

A place to talk about speculative investing ideas for the optional Variable Portfolio

Moderator: Global Moderator

Kevin K.
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Kevin K. » Sat Mar 21, 2020 4:25 pm

Nice charts!

I’m curious about why you choose different rebalancing bands for stocks.
User avatar
LittleDinghy
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:44 am

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by LittleDinghy » Sat Mar 21, 2020 5:52 pm

Kevin K. wrote:
Sat Mar 21, 2020 4:25 pm
I’m curious about why you choose different rebalancing bands for stocks.
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.
Kevin K.
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 516
Joined: Mon Apr 26, 2010 2:37 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Kevin K. » Sat Mar 21, 2020 7:22 pm

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.
ppnewbie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 850
Joined: Fri May 03, 2019 6:04 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by ppnewbie » Sat Mar 21, 2020 7:50 pm

Interesting Kevin. I’ve thought about rebalancing closer to the HBPP as well, instead of doubling down on stocks at this moment.
User avatar
LittleDinghy
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:44 am

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by LittleDinghy » Sat Mar 21, 2020 8:25 pm

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.
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.
User avatar
sophie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1959
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2012 7:15 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by sophie » Sun Mar 22, 2020 11:40 am

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.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by vnatale » Sun Mar 22, 2020 8:16 pm

dualstow wrote:
Wed May 31, 2017 10:26 am
You and barrett drinking a lot of covfefe today, eh?
Anyway, I continue to be curious why people want to discount the gold runups of the 1970s and late 2000's
Well, you're so right, Sophie.
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.)
Might?


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."
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by vnatale » Sun Mar 22, 2020 8:23 pm

Tyler wrote:
Wed May 31, 2017 4:29 pm
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.
The 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.
A Tyler "gem" that deserves to be brought back to the forefront.


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."
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by vnatale » Sun Mar 22, 2020 9:38 pm

sophie wrote:
Tue Jun 06, 2017 7:05 am
Kbg wrote:
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.
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.
Nope. 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?

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."
PP67
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 188
Joined: Tue Dec 27, 2011 8:19 am

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by PP67 » Mon Mar 23, 2020 10:15 am

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!
User avatar
LittleDinghy
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:44 am

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by LittleDinghy » Sat Apr 04, 2020 7:33 pm

PP67 wrote:
Mon Mar 23, 2020 10:15 am
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.
...
Am I missing something or Is that too simplistic?
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.

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.
20200331e_GldnBttrflyDynmcs.png
20200331e_GldnBttrflyDynmcs.png (105.36 KiB) Viewed 17158 times
User avatar
frugal
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 947
Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 12:49 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by frugal » Sat Apr 11, 2020 4:09 am

Hello !

The annual % profit on GBis bigger and the drawdowns are lower than PP

... how is this possible?

Please let me know your thoughts.

???

:o
ppnewbie
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 850
Joined: Fri May 03, 2019 6:04 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by ppnewbie » Fri Apr 24, 2020 12:45 am

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%.
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by vnatale » Fri Apr 24, 2020 4:24 pm

mathjak107 wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2015 8:56 am
no 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 .
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?

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."
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Tortoise » Fri Apr 24, 2020 4:48 pm

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. ;)
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by vnatale » Fri Apr 24, 2020 4:56 pm

Tortoise wrote:
Fri Apr 24, 2020 4:48 pm
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. ;)
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."
User avatar
Tortoise
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 2751
Joined: Sat Nov 06, 2010 2:35 am

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by Tortoise » Fri Apr 24, 2020 5:36 pm

vnatale wrote:
Fri Apr 24, 2020 4:56 pm
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.
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?"

Vinny: "I'm on it, boss. You just rest easy."
User avatar
vnatale
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 9423
Joined: Fri Apr 12, 2019 8:56 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by vnatale » Fri May 01, 2020 6:18 pm

mathjak107 wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2015 5:43 am
that 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 .
Follow all you say here....however the part of "later sell equity's"....why "many years later"?

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."
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by mathjak107 » Fri May 01, 2020 6:27 pm

vnatale wrote:
Fri May 01, 2020 6:18 pm
mathjak107 wrote:
Thu Nov 19, 2015 5:43 am
that 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 .
Follow all you say here....however the part of "later sell equity's"....why "many years later"?

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 each bucket is refilled over those years as assets are in a good position to do so ....

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
User avatar
LittleDinghy
Full Member
Full Member
Posts: 53
Joined: Sun Mar 17, 2019 11:44 am

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by LittleDinghy » Fri May 01, 2020 7:50 pm

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.
Attachments
20200430_PortfolioDynamics.png
20200430_PortfolioDynamics.png (108.97 KiB) Viewed 17464 times
gull1
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 7:48 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by gull1 » Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:07 am

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.
User avatar
mathjak107
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 4456
Joined: Fri Jun 19, 2015 2:54 am
Location: bayside queens ny
Contact:

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by mathjak107 » Thu Jun 04, 2020 6:21 pm

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
pp4me
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 1190
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2020 4:12 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by pp4me » Thu Jun 04, 2020 7:01 pm

gull1 wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:07 am
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.
Regrets, I've had a few, but then again, too few to mention.

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?
whatchamacallit
Executive Member
Executive Member
Posts: 750
Joined: Mon Oct 01, 2012 7:32 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by whatchamacallit » Thu Jun 04, 2020 9:53 pm

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.
gull1
Junior Member
Junior Member
Posts: 16
Joined: Wed Mar 08, 2017 7:48 pm

Re: Golden Butterfly Portfolio

Post by gull1 » Fri Jun 05, 2020 6:51 am

pp4me wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 7:01 pm
gull1 wrote:
Thu Jun 04, 2020 11:07 am
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.
Regrets, I've had a few, but then again, too few to mention.

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?
Found this random article which seems reassuring https://osam.com/Commentary/a-historic- ... -small-cap
Post Reply