It's worked for me for the last decade. Seems to work for a few more well known people than me. Yes, I have over-simplified and much better for people to learn and understand the other parts themselves. Which is why I included a link to a good initial source. Suffice to say the focus should be on price which is widely available to everyone.
It is identifying trends based on price and they happen over time. Find a trend, get in and wait until the trend moves against you and then get out. You lose a bit of profit at the beginning and end, however, you are also not trying to predict anything.
My apologies, I reread the title and yes it says investing not trading so I'll stop, to avoid derailing the thread.
Oh, hi Martin - I see some people are still around since I left nice, nice. Alright What is CrystalBall saying ?Below
No mate, it's good ! Yes, I am aware of turtle system. Good to know and expand the knowledge. But how you monitor what you look at when deciding to make investment/trade. You use free tools ? Threat is indeed more on investing but 'traders' are welcome to discuss and share info. From your posts I assume you are pure algo/trend follower, but this year CTAs among other asset classes inside HF spectrum had the worst performance, didn't they ?
Or ACWI
This.
This is much prehistory of portfolio balancing, it’s no longer 2008.
How do you keep your 60/40 in place then?
Read: it is unbalanced, hence not a true “global” fund. But if you are happy to invest most of your funds in the US, let’s be it.
Rad above about prehistory of portfolio balancing.
Until they become the next blue chips.
Nothing prevents “global” to be like Japan. Uncorrelation is a good thing.
With bonds you could do better with picking the right ones, assuming you have the min. 100/200/500k required for some of the most interesting ones.
. Cue the crypto crowd 
.
If you forget about it without ever rebalancing, it will not remain 60/40
US makes up 25% of the global economy. I look at the present and forecasted growth of the world economies.
MPT is history.
2% is unrealistic and falls into the "diworsification" category described by Warren Buffett (btw BRK.A holds less than 50 stocks).
$1.5-2m is enough to build a well diversified portfolio.
In my view, your investment philosophy is better than anyone. It is hard to find a professional who don't rob you. I don't even trust my mother these days. The whole world is like an ocean.As I said I am 100% in physical real estate. But you put 60% in BNDW and 40% VT and forget about it - fire and forget. You don't ever rebalance.
US makes up around 42% of global equity market....lol. Do you understand anything about the global equity markets....lol?
Not sure what your point is here...but each to their own.
No chance. Unless you have at least $10m to ensure that no individual bond issuer makes up no more than max 2% of your portfolio you are better of with a bond fund. A lot of bonds have an initial minimum buy size of $200k + $1000 increments also. So getting the diversification is not possible without huge deployment of capital. And hence there is no easy way you can replicate BNDW's 17,822 investment grade bonds it contains....lol. Bond picking is extremely risky due to interest rate risks. I exited my AAA government bonds before rate rises. I would be sitting on 30-35% of capital lose or more if I didnt time it right...lol.
Anyway my crystal ball is now a door stop for the day.
Everyone should should seek professional investment advice anyway. Maybe we can have a 5 year bet thread and see whose strategy performs best with a prize at end
P.S Back to thread topic....
