He simply showed a 100% stock allocation. It's mostly used for asset allocation--like how would 50% U.S. stocks, 25% international stocks, 25% bonds have performed, etc. It does a few momentum indicators, too. Those you need to be careful with. I burned myself jumping in and out with a system that backtested beautifully but fell apart in real time.
Starting 401k near the highs in a bull market?
- Thread starter heavenskrow
- Start date
He simply showed a 100% stock allocation. It's mostly used for asset allocation--like how would 50% U.S. stocks, 25% international stocks, 25% bonds have performed, etc. It does a few momentum indicators, too. Those you need to be careful with. I burned myself jumping in and out with a system that backtested beautifully but fell apart in real time.
Well, in fairness, it certainly could happen here as well. Some people think that Japan is a bit ahead of the curve as the modern economies go (in terms of declining fertility rates, preference for low inflation etc), but you can see similar symptoms in the developed Europe and some glimpses of it in the US.
Even then you should do OK if you invest over time, which most of us do, thus take advantage of cost averaging and compounding, instead of putting all in at one time.
as I said, if you are investing for retirement, you don't put all of it in at the end of 1990.
My bad, I had thought I read back earlier in the thread something about buying into a crash real time.
Result would be better if you also do "Volatility Pumping"
Last edited:
Yep. And again--starting a 401k at the peak just before 2008 (or the 2000 dot com crash) would actually be good, since you accumulate most of your early shares at a good price. People keep acting like this is a lump sum instead of a gradual, bi-monthly investment. For the record, I have invested a lump sum near a market top--I just put the funds in over 6-12 months, which still may not be the best odds statistically, but made me feel a little better.
https://www.doughroller.net/investing/dollar-cost-averaging-versus-lump-sum-investing/
"Imagine you’ve come into a lot of money. You may have received an inheritance.... A lump sum investment could see your portfolio drop by 20% or more if you invest just before a bear market....Here, it would be better to dollar-cost average into the market over, say, 12 months. You may or may not be better of than lump sum investing. You would, however, lessen the effect of a major market downturn."
How skilled are you? Have you thoroughly studied market history and invested through several major bull and bear cycles? I thought the same thing when I started and backtested some ideas, but most of my timing really burned me. Very few people win at this game. I now buy-and-hold in all of my retirement accounts except one. For that account I use a combination of long-term momentum and several confirming indicators. Using pure momentum (e.g., 12-month SMA of the S&P 500) hurts more than it helps. Pull up a chart over the last 10-20 years and see how many whipsaws there are.
To this point, I recommend you contribute to retirement vehicles and a non retirement trading account. I did just that and the non retirement trading account has grown quite nicely and I have used it to help fund a startup venture.