Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Investing
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old Yesterday, 07:22 AM
 
106,828 posts, read 109,073,990 times
Reputation: 80256

Advertisements

pre market shows reaper up a lot on the jobs report this morning .

hopes it holds
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old Yesterday, 08:06 AM
 
Location: PNW
7,672 posts, read 3,301,256 times
Reputation: 10844
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
Bil or mint are closer. They are very very short term etfs

2020 to april 2024 , 75% bil , 25% shy

100k is 122,873 4.87 cagr, worst year down 3.49


reaper is 156,411 10.87 cagr worst year down 2.79


https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/...nalysisResults

Okay, I will try it later with 75% BIL and SPY 25%..

Last edited by Lizap; Today at 08:22 AM.. Reason: Deleted off-topic comment
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 08:24 AM
 
106,828 posts, read 109,073,990 times
Reputation: 80256
[quote=Wile E. Coyote;66701592]Okay, I will try it later with 75% BIL and SPY 25

i ran it above from 2020

Last edited by Lizap; Today at 08:23 AM.. Reason: Deleted prior poster’s off-topic comment
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 09:07 AM
 
Location: Texas
849 posts, read 470,553 times
Reputation: 2109
Okay, Thank You to you, moguldreamer, and anyone else here who has contributed to this thread. When I try finding novel ways to invest I usually wind up not being able to see the trees for the forest. This thread with specific etfs, links, what one should expect, etc. definitely helps.


I started with 10K to see what you have been seeing.


I have done leveraged funds in the past specifically ProFunds when they first came out but lost track of how far things have come with the etf side of these. This is a real eye opener.

Last edited by amil23; Yesterday at 09:24 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:28 AM
 
106,828 posts, read 109,073,990 times
Reputation: 80256
Quote:
Originally Posted by amil23 View Post
Okay, Thank You to you, moguldreamer, and anyone else here who has contributed to this thread. When I try finding novel ways to invest I usually wind up not being able to see the trees for the forest. This thread with specific etfs, links, what one should expect, etc. definitely helps.


I started with 10K to see what you have been seeing.


I have done leveraged funds in the past specifically ProFunds when they first came out but lost track of how far things have come with the etf side of these. This is a real eye opener.
These forums can be fun when new ideas we would never have thought of come in to our heads
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:29 AM
 
7,903 posts, read 3,879,821 times
Reputation: 14896
Quote:
Originally Posted by amil23 View Post
mj, at what point do you rebalance?
In other words does only one component have to get out of whack or do you have a way of determining using all 3?
Remember: unlike traditional investing, you do not rebalance to achieve a target asset allocation. You rebalance to achieve a target RISK allocation. It takes a bit to wrap your head around it.

There are several studies published on rebalancing to achieve asset allocation (e.g., monthly, quarterly, twice-yearly, yearly) but I haven't run across a study on rebalancing to achieve a target risk allocation.

Two to four times per year seems to be the sweet spot for rebalancing to achieve a target asset allocation, so I'd start in that range for rebalancing for target risk allocation.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:32 AM
 
106,828 posts, read 109,073,990 times
Reputation: 80256
in this case the reaper targets a 60/40 so i stay with the original recommendation..60/40 returns with smaller drops in down turns
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:42 AM
 
7,903 posts, read 3,879,821 times
Reputation: 14896
Quote:
Originally Posted by mathjak107 View Post
in this case the reaper targets a 60/40 so i stay with the original recommendation..60/40 returns with smaller drops in down turns
As a practical matter that makes sense.

But with risk parity portfolios, the question becomes "what if one of the asset categories contained inside the portfolio has a fundamental change in its risk profile?" This isn't something likely to happen often, and so on a daily basis it doesn't matter. But as we all know, back in 2008, bonds as an asset class fundamentally changed insofar as risk was concerned. Bonds exhibited a risk profile much closer to equities but without the expected return. That was a game-changer in the thinking of what it means to have a diversified portfolio.


And the original target allocation, if I recall correctly, is (correct me if I'm wrong):
  • 20% UPRO
  • 13% TYD 3x
  • 67% DBMF
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:50 AM
 
Location: Texas
849 posts, read 470,553 times
Reputation: 2109
Quote:
Remember: unlike traditional investing, you do not rebalance to achieve a target asset allocation. You rebalance to achieve a target RISK allocation.

That's an interesting observation. I wonder if Sharpe ratio would be a proxy for risk or is there some other metric with a more direct correlation?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old Yesterday, 11:51 AM
 
106,828 posts, read 109,073,990 times
Reputation: 80256
Quote:
Originally Posted by moguldreamer View Post
As a practical matter that makes sense.

But with risk parity portfolios, the question becomes "what if one of the asset categories contained inside the portfolio has a fundamental change in its risk profile?" This isn't something likely to happen often, and so on a daily basis it doesn't matter. But as we all know, back in 2008, bonds as an asset class fundamentally changed insofar as risk was concerned. Bonds exhibited a risk profile much closer to equities but without the expected return. That was a game-changer in the thinking of what it means to have a diversified portfolio.


And the original target allocation, if I recall correctly, is (correct me if I'm wrong):
  • 20% UPRO
  • 13% TYD 3x
  • 67% DBMF
correct , 20% upro and 13% tyd equal the 60/40 and the un leveraged managed futures gets 67% out of every dollar .

it’s funny i started out with 20k in it and now it’s almost 10x that
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Economics > Investing

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top