But as you said, even if my portfolio looks like a copy of the hot list, that hot list is there because everyone is talking/investing/trading with those stocks, right? I believe 90% of mine are strong well based companies. Some of them down like RR but eventually they will come back. Donāt you agree?
Well personal opinion is definitely not something I base my investment on. Nor mine nor others.
If valuation and fundamentals donāt meet requirements I donāt consider putting cash.
With that said, at current valuation, 90% of that list is overvalued compared to historical valuations.
Very few picks would fit the fundamentals criteria I put before decision making.
ATT/BABA/AMZN, of which at current price I would only buy BABA.
AMZN if dips sub 3000.
T historically underperformed.
AMD
BABA
AMAZON
APPLE
ASTRAZENECA
BP
COCA-COLA
COSTCO
J&J
JP MORGAN
MICROSOFT
NVIDIA
Based on your list, I think that would be a smarter more stable but with great growth.
2 Likes
Thank you. It is sorter and I like it. Appreciate it.
As a long term investors, donāt you do DCA if a company dips?
Well DCA is actually not determined by dip, DCA by its nature is buy all the time no matter what the price.
Dip is dip, opportunistic buying.
So to answer question, I use dividend reinvesting for DCA purpose. However buy the dip or buy as per fundamentals/valuation is done via new funds.
If great company overextends above its historic valuations, I donāt buy it with fresh capital, only dividend reinvested.
There is always a good company trading at discount, even in longest bull markets.
I allocate my new funds only to investments that meet criteria of margines of safety, X years of dividend growth etc.
Anyway I still believe you are best of investing in ETF, until you get experience with research/DD/emotions etc. No good to have great company in portfolio if you sell it as soon as you see 10%+ RED.
To get you started on research, look into valuation metrics.
A good book on this would be what works on wall street third/fourth edition.
1 Like
Thanks for the advice. I do think ETFs in my case are a good option too. On the other hand I donāt need the money invested so far for the next 10-15 years minimum. So I can wait 10 years until they go up to green. It is said 80% of stocks in the market go up over time.
Could you tell me why in your opinion the companies I have chosen will make me lose money?
Nowhere did I state you would lose money.
I would put it more in a way, you are priced to earn less by paying higher then average historical premium/valuation and taking higher risk.
Obviously some companies can increase their historical premium due to change in business model, higher growth/margines etc.
But I donāt speculate on that part.
I have my set of principal rules of investment. Majority on the list does not fit them.
3 Likes
But then, as you will see, not many people agree with Vedran 
.
I personally think it is good advice and Iād say most of my investments are āvalueā investmets, partially in line with the thought of some very successul investors such as Warren Buffet, but I am also happy to invest a fraction of my portfolio in some growth companies that may appear to be over-valued using some of the typical metrics, for a variety of reasons (eg. Amazon, Microsoft, Cellnex, Salesforce, Alfen, Astrazeneca, etc).
Whilst you learn, you might want to have the bulk of your portfolio in large ETFs (potentially a mix of S&P 500, EuroStoxx500, DAX, a complete Emerging Market ETF, etc) with a fraction of your portfolio, lets say under 10%, in stock pickings whilst you learn and understand more. Every investor probably has a different style and rulebook.
Obviously we do not give investment advice, just some points for you to think about.
2 Likes
Thanks for the response. I am learning a lot with your advice
Because T stands for Trash 
80% go up over time => strong statement and based on what I have read not accurate.
A study from the John M. Olin School of Business at Washington University estimates that 40 percent of todayās F500 companies on the S&P 500 will no longer exist in 10 years.
at the current churn rate, about half of S&P 500 companies will be replaced over the next ten years.
Keep in mind that % percentages matter. For example letās say you buy Tesla @615. A stock that has made a lot of people a lot of money this year. But now letās say the price stays where it right now and only fluctuate between -5% and +5%. You sell in 10 years @650. Although this is in the green you are actually loosing money because of inflation and maybe tax (if not using an ISA or something else).
Another idea where you might end up loosing money is FOMO and not having enough liquidity in your portfolio. If you max out your budget today and 3 months from now a new Tesla comes to market but you donāt have money to invest you will end up being frustrated and emotional. And that tends to be bad because emotions and the stock market donāt play nice together. Again this is a matter of percentages. How much cash do you plan to add to your portfolio every month in order to always have liquidity to add more positions to your portfolio?
So very true and @Trader121 you need to define yours. Keep in mind that a Strategy is not stock picking.
A Strategy is composed of:
- Universe Selection - Select your assets.
- Alpha Creation - Generate trading signals. (Fundamentals of when and why your are buying)
- Portfolio Construction - Determine position size targets.
- Execution - Place trades to reach your position sizes.
- Risk Management - Manage the market risks.
Hope somehow this helps but keep in mind that @Etypsyno said it best
Hey, thanks for your excellent response. I really appreciate you taking your time to answer and teach me another lesson. I got one question about what you talked about taxes. Even if after 10 years the profit percentage is just 5% despiste the fact that I would be affected by inflation, in terms of taxes it would just affect the profits tho.
What are in your opinion the best ETFs you would include in your portfolio so I can start doing a research?
Thanks again
1 Like
Thatās indeed not true.
I think it came from misinterpretation on something similar from the graph below.
It implies that investing in stocks yields a higher change for a positive outcome the longer you hold, but some people also take away that most stocks in an index must go up for this to be true, which isnāt necessarily the case.
To back you up on your claims (found the corporate longevity a really interesting read) I could site you a study which found that only a small percentage of stocks drive most returns (entire gain in US stock market since 1926 is attributable to only 4% of stocks). It states that investments in the majority (57.8%) of stocks led to reduced rather than increased shareholder wealth.
But keep in mind that emotions, tax treatment, investor liquidity and among other things have really large impacts on investor returns aside from what they actually invest in.
1 Like
I personally really like SPDRĀ® MSCI World UCITS ETF (SPPW), itās basically developed world ETF with a 0.12% expense ratio.
FTSE All-World UCITS ETF (VWRL) has an expense ratio of 0.22% which is high in comparison while owning similar stuff (VWRL does have emerging in it so thatās mainly the diffrence). S&P500 etfs mainly have 0.07% expense ratios. VUSA, CSPX are examples.
I personally own SPPW (large part of my porfolio) and SDUS (iShares MSCI usa esg screened at 0.07% expense ratio), the latter one being very similar to SP500 but with some added mid cap. I mainly chose it because it had the same expense ratio as SP500 while also being a tiny bit more diversified (it contains some stuff as well thatās not in sp500).
1 Like
That is really helpful. Thanks for sharing. Where could I see the dividend % they pay? On trade 212 app doesnāt show anything
sppw is accumulating (so no dividend distributions), I had taken a quick look at Spain and it said there was capital gains tax and I think (am not sure about it though) you would get taxed again on dividend received (income tax-wise aside from the withholding, but again I could have gotten this wrong), thatās why I put an accumulating fund there as I thought it would be more efficient to have less taxable events (but again could be completely wrong there, I only know my local tax stuff). But if you donāt get taxed again on dividends aside from the withholding in the countries of origin then go ahead and get distributing ETFs (they also get charged withholding but in the latter case you donāt so all distribution from funds are 0% taxed after withholding taxes)
To see distribution in general just go to the providers page, iShares has a nice table and trailing yield, vangaurd has the distributions page etc.
1 Like
Yes you get taxed like 14%. But then what is your strategy with that ETFs sell it when you retired?
Justetf.com is good source for ETFs in general.
As @Etypsyno said, good thing to find out pre choosing ETF, your country taxing.
Some countries donāt tax dividend for Accumulating ETFs. So it makes much more sense to invest in accumulating version. Also there was talk about synthetic swaps ETFS being more efficient tax vehicles.
I believe there is Invesco S&P 500 which is synthetic so might check on that available in T212 already.
3 Likes