The same people say itâs statistically safer to just invest in the S&P as most people canât pick stocks well. Iâd rather stick with stocks that give me 700% in less than 12 months, thanks.
Sigh! It isnât a case of people looking down on millennials (though boasting about swanning off into the sunset doesnât help) but cautioning that youâre taking a very risky strategy that historically doesnât pay off. You might get lucky with timing but that doesnât mean that youâve really understood the markets rather than just been lucky. Being lucky is of course a good thing!
Bits of what you are saying are correct ie if you really understand a stock then that does allow you to focus on a less diversified portfolio but letâs not fool ourselves that it isnât a much riskier strategy as most people wonât properly understand the stock in sufficient detail.
Tesla is an interesting one because I think that there are good reasons to invest in it but it is difficult to justify on any sort of numerical analysis basis. So non-financial knowledge is useful but also more subjective. That is starting to get closer to gambling that a share price will continue to increase - that may be an educated decision/guess but it is still risky.
1 Like
The answer to your question is solely on you.
Do you plan to be active investor or passive?
Active as in invest time to do monthly researchâs on companies invested?
Or as passive investor you just want to put money in and let it grow ower years?
If active is your call, then you need a lot of DD and study, almost like 2nd job.
Otherwise just take few ETFs and set it to autoinvest, dont look at it for 5-10 years 
Not quite - it isnât just that some people canât pick stocks well it is that most/all people canât pick stocks well.
1 Like
Trust me, you canât use reason here.
1 Like
Are any of my stocks I have money in a good buy and maybe hold onto? If not what are the best etfs to have and how many?
nobody knows this, newsflash stock prices are random, so no point asking anyone
The yacht comment was obviously tongue in cheek (no matter how likely 
)
Perhaps most people canât research a stock in sufficient detail but that doesnât mean a smaller portfolio of stocks you have a high conviction in, held over many years, isnât the safer way of doing things. I say safer, I also balance that with trying to make a good return. The safest by diversification standards would be something like an all world index but good luck making strong returns with that.
I agree that Tesla canât be judged using conventional methods, thatâs why Iâm saying the game has changed.
I would consider a lot of your stocks good buys tbh
Thereâs a few I wouldnât touch and a few I think could go either way but overall not bad
Literally all youâve said is âlol at millennialsâ, âteach me about innovation as I canât be bothered to search for myselfâ and âI love value investingâ
Nah, I want to see with eyes of optimist.
I am pesimist. So obviously good thing is to see from perspective of âenemyâ. Right?
Scientifically the best to do is to invest consistently into a well diversified portfolio. You said your time horizon is 5-10 years, so over that period just going with some broad ETFâs (SP500, world, etc.) would have the best chance of being the best option over that time frame.
An often overlooked part is investor psychology, and thatâs the most difficult (and maybe even most important) part. If you have a low risk tolerance having a risky portfolio, even with high expected returns over longer periods of time, could yield you pretty bad returns due to selling stocks at the wrong moment. The difference in performance between a 30 individual stock portfolio and an broad ETF is small. But if the 30 individual stocks give you more motivation to invest or more resilience to selling (you might then know better what you own preventing you from panicking) then that might be the better option.
This is comparable to the debt payoff psychology, theoretically itâs best to pay of the highest interest rate debts first but in practice most people succeed in paying of their debt if they pay of the debts which give them the most guild/embarrassment (family loans etc.) even though that theoretically isnât the best way to go.
In the end the decision is yours to invest in a portfolio of which you have a high conviction and with which you can still sleep at night.
(assuming you have an emergency fund, no high interest debt etc.)
Again, I donât know what youâre referring to with that response.
If youâre talking about learning about innovation from me, then I referred you to people equally as optimistic as I am
While I agree with where you come from.
One thing needs to be looked at.
5-10 years is low span.
In current valuations it might take far longer then 5-10 years to get decent returns even with broad index.
If you check S&P valuation, highest it has ever been from the median. So we might very likely have a lost decade ahead of us from index perspectiveâŠ
But anyway if OP will DCA along the way it will pay in âdividendsâ later on. Just that it might be challenging to have red for quiet some time. A possible scenario that is.
Try exploring and analysing:
Vanguard FTSE All-World
ish MSCI ACWI (All country World Index) USD (Expense ratio is higher)
https://www.ishares.com/us/products/239600/ishares-msci-acwi-etf
XTrackers MSCI USA Information Technology GBX
Thankyou everyone for taking time to help with this itâs really helped , the way Iâm kind of thinking now is to maybe get rid of the pies I have because thereâs no control really and maybe keep the stocks Iâve been more interested in and build on them ? Like maybe 8-10 stocks? And really keep an eye on them???
I agree with you that 5 years is pretty short, and under normal circumstances, some bonds should be an option to consider with such a time span. The problem is that the bond yields are pretty low right now.
If you check S&P valuation, highest it has ever been from the median.
The valuation is indeed pretty high, but we also must take into account that earnings dropped and stimulus/QE forced money into the market creating the higher valuations (note that the valuation also spiked just after the GFC because earnings look backwards and prices forward).
So we might very likely have a lost decade ahead of us from index perspectiveâŠ
We simply donât know but itâs always is a possibility, but are there any alternatives? Picking stocks might or might not be a solution and bonds with current yields will not help too much.
If I remember correctly (am too lazy to look it up rn 
) but didnât the 5 year minimum for stocks come from the longest period of time before stocks reached a new all-time high from their earlier high (great depression) and thus the 5-year minimum? Taking that into account how likely is it that another lost period happens which is even longer (especially as governments have become better at combatting crisises). But weâll see, the longer the time period the better.
I personally always take the worst scenario. Dot.com.
MSFT from 2000-2015 without dividend reinvested.
Bonds definitely donât look attractive.
There is however value in individual stocks. So I guess mix of 40-80 % index 60-20%% individual stocks based on how much free time individual has to spare. Wouldnât go full on with any single strategy.
how did you get my portfolio allocations? 
Iâm ~40% broad market ETFâs and 60% individual stocks (a whopping 48 of them)
1 Like
A lot of arm chair experts here lol
The thing I find is most people are always saying this method is better that method is better but they never really show a newbie what they do or have.
Iâm no expert myself but I do find it a little frustrating reading done comments on here.
The thread was started by a newbie asking about getting some help and as far as Iâve seen itâs not really helped him.
Those who are the better investor with done or lots of experience know what I am saying.
Maybe the answer is to join a Patreon and then answers will be answered.
Nothing is free in this world.
Good luck
1 Like