Justin

1.4K posts

Justin

Justin

@jclooce

Trying to bring Evidence-Based Investing to GenZ on TikTok | Boglehead & Factor Investor

Katılım Mayıs 2020
253 Takip Edilen138 Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
Just posted my first TikTok about the risk-free rate and stock returns 🙌🏼 trying to bring evidence-based finance content to GenZ, any feedback appreciated! (pls don‘t rip me to shreds fintwit) #finance #stocks #investing
English
1
1
7
1.2K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@halfkelly @BlondiePredicts How? I thought must-hit-by progressives and visible banked features are essentially phased o out. I want to learn more, if you have a link to a resource
English
0
0
1
95
Aggie
Aggie@BlondiePredicts·
To be successful in prediction markets month over month, you need real skill and a real edge. Who in gambling has a positive PnL month over month? Pressing a slot machine button isn’t a skill you can improve
Domer❤️‍🔥@Domahhhh

I've noticed sports bettors are a bit obsessed with classifying PMs as gambling, or at least in the same breath as casinos. It's stupid. A tweet yday on Kalshi (but applies to Poly, BF, etc.) made this point & it drove me nuts. Responding in 2nd tweet. howgamblingworks.substack.com/p/kalshis-favo…

English
18
3
25
12.8K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@choffstein I ❤️ LSD* *leverage, shorting & derivatives
English
0
0
2
533
Corey Hoffstein 🏴‍☠️
Invited an advisor to a local event we are hosting. He said, "Leverage? Derivatives? An opaque Cayman blocker? Red flags." He signed off, "Madoff-esque?" I mean, a simple "no" would've sufficed... But if you're going to cast aspersions, I'm gonna have to reply...
English
25
0
106
24.1K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@choffstein does he think Madoff would have been able to pull off the same thing in ‘40 act ETFs? I get the scepticism. Sometimes I also struggle to explain leveraging a diversified portfolio or managed futures. They can seem too good to be true. But no reason to be an asshole about it.
English
0
0
4
1K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@HML_Compounder @Leo_Traydes If you are under 30, try to give any argument that is not just looking at past returns To me it doesn’t make sense.
English
0
0
2
47
HML_Compounder
HML_Compounder@HML_Compounder·
@Leo_Traydes Whether your are over or under 30, you are suffering from severe recency-bias. Stop looking at recent past returns and try to better understand the characteristics that lead to higher expected FUTURE returns.
English
4
0
17
497
Leo Invests
Leo Invests@Leo_Traydes·
If you are under the age of 30 please explain to me why you buy $VOO over $QQQ To me it doesn’t make sense.
Leo Invests tweet mediaLeo Invests tweet media
English
207
36
1.3K
822.3K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@BullandBaird Would you rather have $1M today or an inflation-adjusted $1M ten years from now? I’d want the first option. So yes, in my view money has a time value so risk-free rates should be positive even after inflation.
English
0
0
1
47
Michael Antonelli
Michael Antonelli@BullandBaird·
Should a risk free asset have a positive real return?
English
15
0
6
8.5K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@jbulltard1 Do you understand what a beta of 0.1 means? Absolute return strategies should be evaluated against the appropriate benchmark, which is definitely not relative to the S&P500
English
0
0
1
318
jbulltard
jbulltard@jbulltard1·
It takes alot of effort to underperform a market that goes up all the time over a decade but I can see why this guy did it
Patrick OShaughnessy@patrick_oshag

Paul Tudor Jones says the US is more dependent on equity prices than ever, and explains what a 35% correction would trigger in the economy: "We're 252% of stock market cap to GDP. In 1929 we were 65%. In 1987 we got to ~85-90%. In 2000, 170%. If you think about the periodicity of significant bear markets. Since 1970, we get a mean reversion about every 10 years. Let's say mean revert to the past 25 or 30-year PE. That would be a 30, 35% decline. Well, 35% on 250% of GDP is 80, 90% of GDP. 10% of our tax revenues are capital gains, they go to zero. So you can see the budget deficit blowing up. You can see the bond market getting smoked. You can see this kind of negative self-reinforcing effect. In the stock market, we're over-equitized as a country. We have the highest individual equity weightings in the history of the country. And then the real problem is if you look at private equity in 2007-2008, that was about 7% of institutional portfolios. Now it's about 16% of the institutional portfolios. We're so much more illiquid than we were in 2008. The problem is that if you buy the S&P at this current valuation, the 10-year forward return is negative when you buy the S&P with a PE of 22. That's what history shows. So yes, the S&P is spectacular long-term, if you have a hundred-year view. But that's because that's an average of a hundred years, including times when the S&P 500 PE was 6, 7 and 8, or one third of what it is right now. Valuation matters a lot, and the stock market's really high and it's gonna be really hard to make money from here with any kind of long-term view."

English
25
3
195
67.3K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@mattcerminaro AQR has created the data going back to 1877, see the link below. However, I'd be very careful in drawing conclusions from that data. Those were not investable, and survivorship and other biases that make futures data from before the 1960s problematic. aqr.com/Insights/Datas…
English
2
0
3
125
Matt Cerminaro
Matt Cerminaro@mattcerminaro·
Does anyone know where I can get annual commodity returns back to 1928? Need it for a chart. I have the Bloomberg Commodity Index back to 1960
English
3
2
8
4.7K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@dailydirtnap Wow! Would not have expected that. Grinblatt et al.: IQ, trading behavior, and performance in the JFE
Justin tweet media
English
0
0
0
83
HML_Compounder
HML_Compounder@HML_Compounder·
@jclooce @choffstein I asked Gemini if it was a silly word-salad joke or a coherent statement and it said it was a very insightful and nuanced take :).
English
1
0
1
24
Corey Hoffstein 🏴‍☠️
One question I get all the time with return stacking is, "what does the optimal stack look like?" Without constraints, it's an intractable question. What's our base? What's our objective? What are our constraints? We explore this in a new blog post (link below).
Corey Hoffstein 🏴‍☠️ tweet mediaCorey Hoffstein 🏴‍☠️ tweet media
English
8
3
63
9.5K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@HML_Compounder @choffstein It’s just jargon 😂 if I ever feel the need to communicate simple ideas like that to make it seem more impressive, I’d be very disappointed in myself
English
1
0
1
20
HML_Compounder
HML_Compounder@HML_Compounder·
@jclooce @choffstein It is a sign of my respect for your intelligence that I can't tell whether this is an actual thing you're suggesting here, or you tossed a bunch of concepts together as a joke (sort of like this classic gem: youtube.com/watch?v=Ac7G7x…).
YouTube video
YouTube
English
1
0
1
47
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@choffstein Fair enough Sounds like you applied a Black Litterman posterior over reverse-optimized equilibrium priors with manager views incorporated via confidence-weighted tilts
English
2
0
1
57
Cashflow King
Cashflow King@cashflow_king94·
I watched my dividend income drop from $804/month to $92/month. On purpose. $9,655 a year down to $1,110. That was money hitting my account every single month like clockwork. 16 income ETFs. Covered call premiums. Monthly distributions. Gone. It was painful. Really painful. But here's what I was too blind to see while I was celebrating that $804 a month. My portfolio was barely growing. Covered call ETFs were selling away my upside every single month. I was optimising for income I didn't even need. My business already pays me every month. I didn't have a cashflow problem. I had a wealth problem. So I made the switch. 26 holdings became 9 stocks. 2 accounts became 1. Income focus became pure growth. $804/month became $92/month. The result? +48% total return in months... That $9,655 in dividends? My portfolio made multiples of that in pure growth. And here's the thing most people miss. That $92/month isn't static. These growth stocks are increasing their dividends at 13%+ per year. That $1,110 is quietly becoming $2,220. Then $4,440. Then $8,880. All while the share prices compound at the same time. I'll eventually be earning more in dividends from 9 growth stocks than I ever did from 16 income ETFs. And I'll have a portfolio worth multiples more on top. The painful decision was the right decision. Income investing isn't wrong. It's brilliant for people who need the cashflow RIGHT NOW. I just wasn't one of those people. And it took me years to figure that out. Know which problem you're actually trying to solve. Are you investing for income or wealth?
Cashflow King tweet media
English
20
1
65
11.4K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@markcecchini “Better than nothing” *inflation has entered the chat*
English
1
0
2
473
Mark Cecchini, CFP®
Mark Cecchini, CFP®@markcecchini·
Hey that's awesome you put some $$$ in a high-yield savings account earning 3.5% interest It would be a real shame if the government came and turned that into 1.6% after tax
Mark Cecchini, CFP® tweet media
English
12
1
62
13.2K
Justin retweetledi
Brent Sullivan
Brent Sullivan@TaxAlphaInsider·
When you borrow from the options market via box spread.
Brent Sullivan tweet media
English
2
1
32
3.9K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@choffstein that guy is the biggest clown. very entertaining how ridiculous it is though
English
0
0
1
374
Corey Hoffstein 🏴‍☠️
I don't know why, but it's the little grifts that get to me more than the big ones.
Corey Hoffstein 🏴‍☠️ tweet mediaCorey Hoffstein 🏴‍☠️ tweet media
English
13
3
56
10.3K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@OptimizedPort @IndexAndForget Where did that 40% number come from? On an annualized basis that appears way too high. And on a cumulative basis, isn't it highly dependent on the time period looked at, with the percentage rising continously over longer time frames due to compounding?
English
1
0
1
29
Index & Forget
Index & Forget@IndexAndForget·
Dividends are a scam How is a $100,000 dividend portfolio only giving you $5,000 per year
English
8
0
12
1K
Justin
Justin@jclooce·
@MarkTMeredith @diyreturns As an Avantis investor, that's pretty cool! However, for full intellectual honesty, six years are likely not enough to provide statistical significance. It could be interesting to look at the t-stats of the outperformance as well.
English
1
0
1
72