6 ms·
Timing is quite important in the longterm. This article is saying that you can still make a profit despite bad timing (assuming the stock market does well), not
by medvezhenok 4y ago
Timing is quite important in the longterm. This article is saying that you can still make a profit despite bad timing (assuming the stock market does well), not that timing is not important.
It also only analyzes a single time period (1970s - 2015), which happens to be quite a good one for stocks, and then makes an implication about markets in general which is quite speculative.
- 988747 4y agoYes, but the point is: even with the worst possible timing you still get ahead of inflation ($1.1M from $184k invested). With regular investments you could double the profits. Also, 1970-2015 period includes three big crises, with crashes of around 50% (1972, 2000, 2007), and a bit milder crash of 1987 (34%), calling it "quite a good one for stocks" is kind of a stretch.
- medvezhenok 4y agoThe U.K. stock market peaked [inflation adjusted] in 1899 and never hit that mark in real terms again: https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2019/12/how-has-the-u-k-stock-market-fared-lo-these-past-300-years/ https://fredblog.stlouisfed.org/2019/12/how-has-the-u-k-stoc... Notably ~1917 is when global power shifted from the U.K. to the U.S., cemented in 1945. (not sure if they included dividends - would probably change the calculations, but for sure you see that 1815-1900 was a ~85 year general bull market in U.K. stocks, followed by ~75 years of real-term declines from 1900-1975). ----- Also, the U.K. stock market went nowhere from 1874 to 1952 in pound terms, a whopping ~70 years!