That is always a tricky comparison as all things have to be equal. So higher than previous all-time high for the exact same time period?
And, is that 7.7% higher 7.7% added to the previous return? Or 7.7% of the previous return?
Moderator: Global Moderator
Opposite: I thought you were going to say not putting so much into cash. Still, if you were in your late 50’s or older by then, I can undertand the desire to sock more away in non-stocks.yankees60 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 8:52 am ..
I made my only investments now 21 years ago in January 2003. All investments since have gone into cash.
..
Seems like I would have been much better off over these last 21 years by having done the exact opposite. Having the bulk in Growth and giving away the Value funds.
dualstow wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 7:18 pm
yankees60 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 8:52 am
..
I made my only investments now 21 years ago in January 2003. All investments since have gone into cash.
..
Seems like I would have been much better off over these last 21 years by having done the exact opposite. Having the bulk in Growth and giving away the Value funds.
Opposite: I thought you were going to say not putting so much into cash. Still, if you were in your late 50’s or older by then, I can undertand the desire to sock more away in non-stocks.
pretty much the same if i take all my models plus cash and make one big portfolioyankees60 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 10:01 pmDoing all that cash worked out well during 2007 / 2008 and other down periods. At this point, I'm at about 50 / 50, equity / (fixed + cash).dualstow wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 7:18 pmOpposite: I thought you were going to say not putting so much into cash. Still, if you were in your late 50’s or older by then, I can undertand the desire to sock more away in non-stocks.yankees60 wrote: ↑Sat Feb 10, 2024 8:52 am ..
I made my only investments now 21 years ago in January 2003. All investments since have gone into cash.
..
Seems like I would have been much better off over these last 21 years by having done the exact opposite. Having the bulk in Growth and giving away the Value funds.
The mean expected real rate of return for this portfolio is 5.6% over the last 46+ years. If you take the real rate of return from 1978 and plot highs and lows, the mean is 5.6%. Projected over a long time horizon, it gives you an idea of what the expected value of these assets as a whole should be. Keep in mind:
I recently watched this video and it made me think of you.mathjak107 wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2024 2:42 am not enough history yet to declare the pp a poor choice in comparison to the newer leveraged risk parity portfolios but so far they look very promising as the next wave of risk parity design
All good. The lesson might only be applicable in one in ten lifetimes or so.mathjak107 wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2024 4:43 pm i gave up trying to watch it unfortunately..to long and boring for me to focus on it..
It's mostly the long bonds' fault, isn't it?mathjak107 wrote: ↑Wed May 01, 2024 7:52 am from 2021 it’s just about been flat
100k has gained about 1200 bucks from jan 2021 to april 30th 1 2024 . a .38% cagr
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... SUlrdyQOt3
Aren't they a killer of any portfolio that heavily relies on nominal bonds? Many people over at the Bogleheads forum weren't satisfied with their 60/40 portfolios either over the last years either.mathjak107 wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2024 9:32 am long term bonds and if short term bonds funds were used , them too, plus a negative year for equities in 2022.
like i said years ago , rising rates would be kryptonite to the pp
Yes. But a time period that short carries no weight in making any kind of interpretations of the facts.mathjak107 wrote: ↑Fri May 03, 2024 2:32 pm depends on the bond funds held and their duration as far as how bad they would get hit.
a leveraged risk parity portfolio performed very differently in the 2022 down turn as well .. it had better returns , lower risk , less draw down then the pp did. i posted the carolina reaper results above which i use compared to the pp over the last few years which were awful for the pp
so rising rates can have a different effect on different portfolio design
look at the results thru the worst years we just had that i posted above.
i am starting to think that conventional portfolios with their inherent risks may no longer be the best way to be defensive.
here is jan 2024 to may 1 as well . big difference in risk vs reward
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... vYmswKLj1q
It would save quite a bit of money on the MER to use something like EDV instead of TYD though, plus it is more liquid.mathjak107 wrote: ↑Thu May 02, 2024 2:42 am tried a comparison between the pp and the leveraged risk parity portfolio i have been experimenting with which is
20% upro a 3x leveraged equities fund
13.333% tyd a 3x leveraged bond fund
and 66.666% dbmf a non leveraged managed futures fund
i wanted a real tough patch for assets to look at so i picked jan 2021 to present
the pp averaged a cagr of .38% , 100k grew to 101,256 from jan 2021 to april 30 2024
there has been quite a bit of research on these by cliff asness over the years
the leveraged risk parity portfolio grew to 146,408 dollars , a return of 12.12% cagr
the sharpe ratio on the leveraged risk parity portfolio called the carolina reaper is .85
the ratio for the pp is minus .19.
i have been steadily growing the reaper , it looks very promising .
like the pp it takes crazy volatile assets and smooths them out greatly .
but it seems to do it with better gains then the ppl and less risk .
worst down year for pp minus 13.85% . 2022
worst year for reaper minus 2.79% 2022
max drawdown for pp is 17.20%
for reaper 8.96%
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... 1Mz32vxRYK
even going back to jan 2020 right before covid , the reaper blew it away in all respects , most importantly , risk vs reward
https://www.portfoliovisualizer.com/bac ... Ou41UHBuS9
not enough history yet to declare the pp a poor choice in comparison to the newer leveraged risk parity portfolios but so far they look very promising as the next wave of risk parity design