4 ms·
That’s ironic. If you’d sold your S&P500 on Monday and bought back on Friday, you’d have gained 2.7 shares per 100 sold. If you’d sold your S&P500 a month pri
by zmgsabst 5y ago
That’s ironic.
If you’d sold your S&P500 on Monday and bought back on Friday, you’d have gained 2.7 shares per 100 sold.
If you’d sold your S&P500 a month prior and bought back on Friday, you’d have gained a 8 shares per 100 sold.
If you’d sold your S&P500 six months prior and bought back on Friday, you’d have gained 14 shares per 100 sold.
- gabereiser 5y agoYou just described a hobbyist. Institutions don’t sit on cash for that long, nor do they buy S&P in any significance. [0] Berkshire Hathaway - https://www.dataroma.com/m/holdings.php?m=BRK https://www.dataroma.com/m/holdings.php?m=BRK
- carnitine 5y agoInteresting that you cite BRK, who famously have been sitting on ~150bn in cash recently. Professional investors absolutely sit on cash all the time.
- gabereiser 5y agoYeah, they did, and within a month or two it was reinvested elsewhere. Whether it was pulling out of American Airlines in favor of more shares of Chevron, or doubling down on tech stocks. BRK doesn’t just sit on 150bn in cash for longer than they have to. Not saying they don’t sit on cash but they definitely don’t sit on it for a year or more.
- gabereiser 5y agoShow me a hedge fund that sat on more than 1% of their holdings for more than a year. I’ll wait.
- zmgsabst 5y agoYes — I called it ironic because a hobbyist sitting on cash out performed the market over the past six months. Institutions “making moves” aren’t magic — and often fail to beat indexes, which in turn failed to beat cash over the past six months. Sometimes the hobbyist mindset wins.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- gabereiser 5y ago>sometimes the hobbyist mindset wins. In this case, you’re absolutely right. Had they just sat on it they wouldn’t have the losses they do today, furthering the panic selling.