Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Gold/Mining/Energy : Big Dog's Boom Boom Room -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (83894)	5/1/2007 9:54:47 PM
From: tom pope	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206334

It's the risk mitigation and consistency most folks don't have. Most never will. That is why I think those that do have these qualities make money. Exactly. That's what the skill is. Not the making of money but keeping it. And proving St Augustine wrong.

To: Cogito Ergo Sum who wrote (83894)	5/2/2007 9:36:13 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 206334

It's the risk mitigation and consistency most folks don't have. Most never will. i agree that these things are very important. i have read some of dabum's stuff on this subject and it strikes me as sensible, e.g., having looser stops on long-term holdings because tight stops will get hit too easy. although personally i do not use stops--some of my best stocks dropped 80% or more from my initial buy-in (e.g., VLO, FCX)--i can see how others would use them to reduce risk. in 1999 and 2000 i had no "risk mitigation", which obviously made it easier to get high returns, but amplified the risk (and the required luck). since then i have been very much in the risk reduction camp. while daytraders may use stops, i simply have my fixed/equity split. also, even though my PF is heavily weighted to energy these days, i think diversification is a good idea. if your assets are uncorrelated with each other, your PF will have lower volatility. after a great January last year, energy stocks were "challenging". but many other sectors did great. having some noncorrelated assets was a big help. i had a big position in Brazilian bonds and some value stocks that helped ease the pain. nowadays, my problem is that "everything's a bubble" as Grantham puts it. if that is true, then different asset classes will no longer exhibit their historical covariances (the degrees to which they are uncorrelated with each other), and not be very helpful at PF diversification.