Tag Archives: #AntiFragile

Cluster of Blessings

Posted on by
Reply

Hey.

We realized…

…that what we’re doing…

…is anti-fragile in nature.

How, you ask.

Since what we’re doing is in stocks. Equity. Robust at best. Not anti-fragile.

?

Well, take a definition, and expand it a bit, and the definition starts to make broader sense. One draws on the definition, and creates a utility for that definition in one’s own line of work. That’s what we’ve done. Creator of the term anti-fragile, Mr. Taleb, could turn around and say, hey, you’ve just taken my thing and used it in your thing. Of course we’ve done that. We stand on the shoulders of giants, giants like Mr. Taleb. And now we’ve got his thing, projecting onto our thing, making something new out of our thing. Bottomline, we have a thing that is anti-fragile, and Taleb gets credit for his thing starting to develop universality, at least across another asset class.

So how are we doing stocks in an anti-fragile manner?

We benefit from chaos, volatility, uncertainty, fear and the like.

How?

Before these conditions cause mayhem in stocks, we have gravitated, in a growth market, over the years, to exhibit meaningful holding power. Both mentally, and financially. So, what do we possess before topsy turvy conditions, like now? Holding power.

What else are we armed with?

Liquidity.

Liquidity is a state of mind. Our state of mind causes us to be liquid at the right time.

Next.

We have…

…high conviction. In a basket of market players. Our due diligence regimen, over decades, has allowed us the means to recognize such stocks. In these, we have developed what?

High conviction.

We are itching to buy these underlyings, at huge…

…margins of safety.

Cut to current conditions. Chaos, volatility, uncertainty, fear, war, maniac, missiles, nuclear threat and what have you.

The margin of safety that we look for starts to abound. We accumulate high conviction underlyings, over multiple buys, ending up with low buying averages.

As conditions amplify, buying averages get lower. We are benefiting from chaotic conditions in that our buying averages are getting lower and lower.

Perceptions change for the better. They always do. Gone is 1929, where it took the better part of two decades for circumstances to change. Till 2019, one used to talk about max 15 to 18 months being the length of a bear market. Information flows very fast. When efficient, whenever that is, markets are then super-efficient. Factoring in is taking days, perhaps only a day. A change in perception is incorporating very, very fast. Frankly, we’re talking months, not even years. And, we’re mentally and financially prepared, with our holding power, for a time-frame measured in years.

Comes the turnaround. Sooner than later, such are the times.

Our low buying averages multiply fast. In fact, very fast. The lower they are, in our high conviction holdings, the faster they multiply. We start to hold many 2-baggers in 3 to 6 months, for example.

Now we call the shots. In fact, our very low buying averages do.

We can choose to pull our principal out, full 100%, at 2x, 3x, 4x, 5x or what have you, depending on our muse.

The moment we go cost-free, we have moved into 100% margin of safety. Nothing can break our cost-free-ness (except ourselves). We can choose to leave our cost-free-ness to our children, by which time it will have majorly compounded. Since we have no principal invested in our cost-free-ness, we won’t be in a hurry to liquidate it. In fact, we won’t even be looking at it.

We’re calling our low buying averages anti-fragile. The lower they get, the more anti-fragile they behave in the aftermath of chaos. We’re adding an allowance towards fast incorporation of change in perception to the definition of anti-fragile, because of which our inherently anti-fragile low buying averages get to benefit from their anti-fragile nature (thanks again to Nassim Nicholas Taleb for giving us the framework of anti-fragility).

And what are we calling our cost-free-ness? I mean, it is seeming to be beyond fragility. It is giving benefit beyond any scale. Generational benefit. I don’t have a name for this effect, yet.

Our cost-free-ness has generated generational well-being. It has allowed us to not liquidate it, by the state of mind it has caused in us. It has allowed itself to be passed on.

Hmmm. Taking a phrase from Nichiren Buddhism, it is our…

…cluster of blessings…

…that we pass on…

…to the next generation.

Constants

Posted on by
Reply

Hey.

We play the game…

…with numbers.

Numbers are…

…our thing.

The thing with numbers is…

…that once we create a constant for ourselves…

…a pivot…

…something like a compass…

…AI doesn’t have access to it.

It’s our number.

It’s in our mind.

By the time AI gains direct access to our mind, we’ll be gone.

For example, we establish a low buying average, over many buys, in something we consider to hold value.

Each individual establishes their own, meaning…

…it’s each person’s own low buying average.

It decides the multiple.

It’s the centre-half. The libero. It creates the play. It’s unique to a person. No AI access. The whole game has been taken away from AI. It remains a human game. It’s not what the masses are doing. It’s contrarian. It’s going to make money.

Volatility is a constant.

Disruption is a constant.

Fear is a constant.

Greed is a constant.

Mass-behaviour is a constant.

Pigs getting slaughtered is a constant.

We play it by constants.

We’ve even started using unique mass-logic defying indicators, that only we have defined, that no one else knows about or can dream of, and we’re using them successfully, with no access to AI.

We’re functioning from within a matrix where we control the game, AI doesn’t.

Beauty is, outside of our protective matrix, we have access to all of AI’s capabilities, should we choose to use them.

Not yet though. Specifically after the 160+ girls murder rumoured to be caused by intel provided by AI, correct me if I’m wrong. AI as it currently is doesn’t seem ready for seamless implementation. All those foolishly believing so at this moment are the pigs referred to above. Pigs get what? Slaughtered. I didn’t say this first. It’s a common market saying. Markets are a – constant. We trust constants.

There will be many more blow-ups before seamlessness is achieved.

Think of banking systems causing and compounding massive errors because of blind reliability on AI.

This of AI suggested war strategy backfiring because of lack of understanding of human psyche.

Think of investment strategy imploding, left with eyes wide shut to AI, owing to lack of proper understating of human behaviour and its unpredictability. Anyways, on the plus side…

…think of any level of positive upheaval that AI will cause.

Think maximum.

Thought?

Since we play it by constants, we’ll continue to thrive, maximum disruption and beyond.

Such is the power of constants, that we successfully harness.

Matrix Diaries

Posted on by
Reply

Hey.

I think…

…you’ve pretty much understood…

…that we’re buyers in this whole mess.

I’d like you to add one more word to your understanding.

We’re…

…fearless…

…buyers.

We were not always fearless.

The human being is born with fear built in as a protective emotion.

During the process of rewiring, we wired this emotion out.

How does one do that?

Before I delve into it, wish to reiterate the we.

Who’s the we here?

Everyone who gets taught forward in this space and from this space, and then goes on to implement successfully, that’s the we. Why do such a thing? Gives me a kick. What’s a good life? A collection of meaningful things that give one a kick, implemented repeatedly.

Now imagine a matrix.

We are in the matrix.

Outside the matrix are all things that cause us fear.

Inside the matrix we implement our strategy without fear.

We have built systems that have automatically thrown out of the matrix all things that cause us fear against acting in the markets.

First we created a safety net. An emergency fund. Perhaps two. Out went fear of existence.

Starting with a small networth, we plunged into the markets. Luckily, we tasted failure fast, and lost it all, broken down, emergency fund to fall back on, young, enough energy and will power to bounce back. Now we had a model of how not to do it. We knew where we didn’t want to land up, and understood somewhat how not to do it. The experience of a blow-up and the knowledge of how not to do it made more fear exit the matrix, as we itched to get back into the game.

Slowly we built a system. Incorporated models. Saw what worked. What didn’t work for us exited. Model developed a slight edge. Tasted some wins. Confidence started to grow. As it grew, more and more fear exited.

Then came replication. Would the model work again? It did. Would it work bigger? Scaled up a bit. Working. Till not working. Fine-tuned. Working again. Knew we had something now. Came a black swan and its aftermath. Model excelled. Realized we were anti-fragile. Whatever was left of fear was now outside the matrix. We were tready for all out implementation.

And that’s where we are functioning from in this crisis.

If you say might last a year, no fear, we silently implement. We’re liquid because the model creates liquidity in good times. Two years? Still no fear. Liquidity might run out after 18 to 20 months, probably, but that’s the whole goal, to be fully invested, as per a model in which one has high conviction. Three years you say? We say still no fear.

The biggest money is made by…

…sitting…

…and we didn’t say this first. Someone you look up to did.

We’ve learn’t how to sit. Sitting is an integral part of the model.

While we sit, we do many constructive things. Since we’re investors, while we sit, we invest heavily…

…in OURSELVES.

Do the math.

Fool?

Posted on by
Reply

I don’t mind.

What?

Being called that.

Why?

For me, it’s an indicator.

How?

When someone in my environment expresses that he / she considers me foolish, this acts for me like a guage.

Where?

In order formulation.

Which?

Good till traded orders.

Explain.

Ok. Let’s say someone considered my 787 GTT HDFC Bank entry foolish. With price having fallen to 745, and still not showing signs of stability, someone might consider me foolish for having entered ‘early’ at 787. I want this to happen. I want to sense this attitude in another person’s behaviour.

Then?

Simple. Formulate and enter next GTT for HDFC Bank at 690.

What’s the logic?

That’s just the way I use this indicator.

Position-sized small quantum?

Absolutely.

Considered bulk-entry at bottom?

What’s the bottom? Who claims to know the bottom?

499?

No idea. How do you know you’ll catch the bottom? What if you miss entry altogether?

What if I get full entry in lumpsum, at 499?

What if price stays below 400 for a month after that? Your lumpsum entry will hardwire you to your terminal, and it’s one month of sleepless nights, I can promise you that. Neurosis. Psychosis. Freeze. God knows how long it will be before you can take another rational decision.

And your staggered full entry with a higher buying average will not cause all these things?

That’s the whole point. It will not.

It will not? How?

Market psychology is counter-intuitive. When are you going to understand this one basic point? Going in, let’s say ten times, between 800 and 499, over three months, at every new entry, the nervous system forgets older price. It focuses on newer price, not even on buying average. It actively registers one small quantum entry at 499 as per this strategy, and forgets other entries above, at least forgets them well enough to suit the purpose. Bottomline – such a nervous system is poised to avoid neurosis, psychosis and the like.

You’re just making this up.

Try it out. This is what works for me towards full strategy implementation. I am able to successfully fool my nervous system into buying maximum units without setting it up to hurt itself, should the market fall more, and stay lower for longish periods. This is my win, and a cornerstone of my lowering the buying average strategy in high conviction stocks during crises. Tested successfully during CoViD. No more testing. Current crisis is about full implementation. Will keep this buying strategy on through the entire crisis, or till fully invested, whatever comes first.

Why put in everything?

This is money sidelined to go in. It’s not daily resources money, or college fund money, or family expenses money. It is investing money. It’s supposed to go in. What’s better for it than to go in low?

Where is the courage coming from?

High conviction is a state of mind. It’s a reflex. Over time and over many, many studies, observations, behaviour analyses etc., you develop it for a stock. Once you have high conviction in a stock, nothing should come in between you and full entry, if price allows.

Am still trying to decided whether you look foolish or intelligent?

Though I don’t care for your opinion, I don’t mind it either if you give it to me, for I will use the encounter as an indicator.

Is that what you’ve gravitated down to, using ridiculous and self-concocted indicators to navigate the markets?

Doing things which no one else has before sets me up for vindication no one else has gotten before. No more questions, do the math.

Miners

Posted on by
Reply

Hey.

We’re miners.

We mine for…

…margin of safety.

Surprised?

As in, can one mine for…

…something abstract?

Sure, no biggie.

Ok, bear with me on this.

Entry quantum = shovel.

Wedge it in deep enough = Good Till Traded (GTT) Order = Poise.

Emotional sell most likely on open or on close = mined material falling into basket.

GTT executed = margin of safety mined successfully.

All the time?

No. In times like this, specifically, when there’s blood on the streets.

Isn’t margin of safety already available in times like this?

Yes it is. However, we want to mine for extra on top of what is available.

Like your yesterday’s experience with the HDFC Bank GTT hit well below trigger, a couple of seconds after open?

Exactly like that. Oh, there’s another add on.

Tell me.

We buy with a lag.

Meaning?

Let’s say something’s fallen big, and has come on our radar owing to levels broken.

With you. Then?

We let it fall for the whole session, setting up GTT only after the session, and placing GTT around 4 to 5% below close. Time and price lag.

Isn’t that way below?

That’s the whole point. An emotional sell will hit, and then price will stabilize.

What if no hit?

Possible. Good with that. What’s also possible is, there could be no hit for two or three sessions, and then there might result a soft execution. We’ve still mined the extra margin of safety, even though it’s taken us a few more sessions.

What was your experience with the recent HDFC bank buy?

GTT was set up on 2nd March, for 809, when price was at 887.

Just fishing in the air or what?

Didn’t want it at 887. Wanted it at 809. That’s all there is to it.

So, 78 points were mined, that’s almost 8.8%, wow!

Hold on. There was so much emotion in play, that scrip opened at 770, a massive 72 points below previous close, order triggered at 773 a second or two later, and was executed at 778 after some more seconds. So that’s about 12.3% mined. It took 17 days and 13 trading sessions. By the way, the extra 12.3% mined goes a very long way.

Explain.

In 25 years, at 15% per annum compounded, it compounds to 4 times plus the entire sum that’s gone in just now.

Tremendous!

Welcome to the world of compounding, and that of…

… mining.

Specialization

Posted on by
Reply

Hey.

Calls have started coming in.

Am I doing ok?

Is the panic getting to me?

Am I going under?

I was waiting for this.

Calls of this nature, coming in, are a fantastic guage for the onset of panic.

You see…

…I specialize in guaging panic. You could call me a fall-specialist. A crash is my field of action.

During the crash in CoViD wave 1, I categorized two levels of panic.

Level I was classified as middling panic and identified at the point when calls were coming in asking if people should cancel their systematic investment plans. Aversion to invest with blood beginning to flow on the streets. Noted.

Level II was classified as grave panic, and identified at the point when calls were coming in of the nature, that now that all companies would be bankrupt, why was I still putting in money, into the markets? Questioning the whole financial system. Noted too.

In current scenario, questions about my health followed by queries about which stocks to invest into, after I had answered with a ‘never been better’ reply, for me, corresponds to level I of panic, identified.

Am still waiting for those other calls, asking why I’m putting in money when everything was going bankrupt anyway. Probably coming soon.

So, what’s the course of action, now that level I prevails.

We take it up a notch.

Meaning?

Look harder for entries.

Weren’t you already entering?

Yes, but wasn’t trying very much. Was letting the market punch me hard into an entry.

Meaning?

I’ll give you an example to drive this point home.

Ok.

HDFC Bank, right?

Right.

I had a GTT on for the last many sessions for entry at 809. Wasn’t coming. GTT remained. Either the market socked me into this position, or I wasn’t entering. Happened this morning. Triggered during open, at 773, executed at 778. Market pushed me into the position with force. I let it.

And now?

Will leave myself open to a lesser force push. Will put nearer GTTs, let’s say ~3% away.

If such prices don’t come?

Then not interested in entries.

What happens at level II of panic?

Even lesser force required to enter. Only GTTs lesser than 1 to 2% away perhaps. Many entries.

How come you are so liquid?

This approach creates liquidity during good times. Entering with small quanta now, as compared to networth. Can go on buying for more than one year from this point, if required. Such is the strategy.

Good to know, thanks for sharing.

Mind you, buying during panic does take a toll on one’s psyche. One needs to recuperate and regenerate. It’s not as easy as it sounds. I try very hard though, to recover mentally before the next session. Wish to last very long in the markets, …

…successfully.

Constants

Posted on by
Reply

Waldermort…

…overplayed his hand.

Thought he had the nuts…

…and bet the farm.

Turns out…

…that the adversary’s hole cards…

…plus the flop, turn and river…

…are leading to a full house.

As opposed to Waldy’s…

…ordinary nut flush.

Waldy is oversmart and a half.

Backfires at times.

This one has backfired at the worst possible time.

Only one result.

Waldy loses…

…everything.

Reserve status.

Serious player status.

Reputation, if there was any.

Loyalty, which was abundant from former allies, but is now…

…not even zero, but minus.

What more can one lose?

Whatever one can. It’s lost.

When this is over, a new methodology of doing everything business and financial will have emerged.

Meanwhile, a few constants remain.

There are areas in the world, where there is growth.

And will be, for the next 25 years.

Like India.

Semblance of stability?

Yes.

Integrity?

Yes.

Win-win attitude?

Yes.

Loyalty?

Yes.

Balance?

Yes.

Clout?

Yes.

Consumption.

Yes.

Period.

Buy India during this fall.

As long as the fall lasts. One year. Two years. Three years. No one knows.

What one also doesn’t know is whether India will give this buying opportunity again.

So, buy India.

Even if it means that you get fully invested during current fall.

That’ll be just great.

How to?

Posted on by
Reply

How does one…

…position oneself…

…for what’s coming?

What’s coming?

Yeah.

Meaning the turbulence ahead?

What else. First up, we’re taking turbulence to be the norm, from this point onwards.

All right. Turbulence = norm. Baseline set.

Then, how do we maximally exploit our understanding, …

…simultaneously creating income…

…but then also allowing wealth to accumulate and compound?

Yeah, how do we?

You tell me.

We need to start with an asset class.

Right.

Which asset class?

Again, you tell me.

What we’re comfortable with.

Yes. Beautiful. And then we weaponize the asset class chosen, the one we’re comfortable with.

Weaponize?

Yeah. Otherwise it will be no good for these times. We need to make it time-befitting.

Example?

Let’s say you choose gold, ok? What good are your efforts in gold if after a point governments nationalize it and then confiscate it, paying you a reasonable price at that moment, and then, from that point onwards, in the hands of enough governments, gold turns a 100-bagger, for them, not for you?

Yeah, what good are my efforts in gold then?

No good. You need to trade gold, use some profits as income, and another portion of profits you invest in other asset classes, bought cheap, which the government has issues regulating harshly.

Like? Crypto?

Some think so. That’s their weapon of choice. Personally, I have problems with storing my entire networth on a pen-drive. That alone takes crypto off the table for me.

So where do you go?

Stocks. They come naturally to me.

Stocks can be harshly regulated.

In isolation, if we’re looking at stocks-stocks, yes, I’ll give you that. In a solid framework encapsulated within an income-generation cum wealth-creation mechanism operating with fundamental, evergreen principles like margin of safety, letting profits run, position-sizing and what have you, even stocks can be made to behave like the anti-fragile system they are a part of.

Would that not be valid for any asset classes, then?

Yes, provided the government can’t seize that asset class overnight from you.

Like cash?

True.

Gold?

True.

Silver?

Yeah.

Bonds?

Not sure. Risk of default though.

Real-estate?

Prices of real-estate follow demand and supply, and demand is reciprocally proportional to negative regulation. Governments can crash real-estate. So, yes.

Crypto?

I’m not so sure that crypto is beyond regulation. However, exchanges collapsing regularly are not my scene.

Stocks?

Have we heard of governments seizing stocks? As long as no illegal activity, all debts paid off, clear ownership and succession, I don’t think the government can do that. So stocks of companies, for me, remain in the fray. On top of that, we encapsulate them into a system. The system has an edge. It’s multi-faceted. It generates income, approximately when required, in cash. Otherwise, it creates wealth through compounding. Throw in 20 -30 models like margin of safety, letting most profits run, position-sizing, fine-tuned Fibonacci, income dynamos, etc. etc., and what we’re looking at is a unique entity, which behaves differently when compared to fragile stocks, or even to robust stocks.

So what you’re trying to say is that it all depends how you handle each asset class is what makes that asset class either fragile, robust or anti-fragile.

Exactly.

Is that your word?

Which word?

Anti-fragile.

No. It belongs to Mr. Taleb. In whatever way a word or a concept can belong to a person…

Like governments can crash real-estate, they can also crash stocks. What do you say to that?

Oh, that’s an anti-fragile part of this system, which leaves the user liquid enough to benefit greatly from such crash, seen from a 15 month perspective. User of such system is positioned to take huge advantage of temporary and large price dips. Stocks have a very low ticket size as compared to real-estate, and can be readily swooped up in a crash in bulk, unlike real-estate, which is heavy and is a huge liquidity-enemy.

Where do you stand with your system, personally?

As a whole, I’m working towards making my system with stocks, income-generation and wealth-compounding as antifragile as I possibly can.

What’s the critical mass, above which the system can be considered safe for the new world order?

I’m not sure. It’s all experimental.

So how will you know?

If I make the transition to the new world order whilst preserving a large portion of my portfolio, I’ll know that I’ve succeeded.

Any other method apart from the make or break one suggested by you?

No. Everything else is theory. Surviving reasonably well and then thriving is the only practical method that counts for me.

Thanks.

🙂

Washing a Stock “Sin-Free” with Cost-Free-Ness

Posted on by
Reply

Each stock has sins on the balance-sheet.

Many sins don’t show up even, on the balance-sheet.

You see, they’ve been swiped under the rug.

One’ll never know the whole story, unless one is the promoter oneself.

Some stocks have nothing noteworthy to hide, though.

Others have a side they don’t want you to see.

Still others are brimming with skeletons in their cupboard.

It doesn’t matter what you’re holding, …

… when you make the stock cost-free, …

… for you, the stock just became sin-free.

Congratulations.

You’re done already.

That’s the beauty of cost-free-ness.

Yeah, in cost-free-ness, …

… one has a universal balsam…

…that rinses the underlying completely clean to hold, like, forever.

Cost-free-ness is like a magic potion that turns around the whole story, …

… any story.

So, …

… what’s the motivation…

—in making the wholesome effort…

…of creating cost-free-ness?

Multibaggers, developing within our high quality, and now cost-free, holdings.

And how could one classify our feat of cost-free-ness, in another, very meaningful and currently “hot, happening and insider” way?

Nothing’s happening to one if markets go down even to zero, as far as one’s cost-free holding is concerned, since one has pulled out all the principal. Since one is not incurring any loss whatsoever from the holding, even upon market-reversal, for one, this cost-free holding, if I’ve understood Mr. Taleb (coiner and first-user of the phrase “antifragile”) correctly, is antifragile in nature, also then because, price contraction in the cost-free holding is a good thing for us, in that more purchase of the high-quality holding can subsequently happen, with the goal of making more and more holding cost-free, as markets swing back upwards. Market reversal after cost-free-ness is setting us up for a larger cost-free holding in the future. Seen from our initial sweet-spot of cost-free-ness, since market reversal betters our poise and increases our potential to make our cost-free holding grow in units (and size), that would be the last tick mark, required and now ticked, which makes our cost-free and high-quality holding, also, antifragile.

Making Equity Antifragile

Posted on by
Reply

Yeps, Taleb’s the famous one. 

Moi, je ne suis pas célèbre.

Néanmoins, j’aime le terme “antifragile” de Taleb.

Also, Taleb has termed equity as robust.

I do equity. 

I’d like my interaction and future with equity to be antifragile.

Let’s first look at Taleb’s definition for antifragile.

He says that anything that has more upside than downside from random events (or certain shocks), is antifragile; the reverse is fragile.

Robust equity will eventually crack when subjected to shock.

We are aware of that.

What do we do now?

Firstly, we take time, and put it in infinity mode. Meaning, that we stay invested, for a long, long, long time. 

We’re now allowing equity amply sufficient time to recover from not one shock, but many shocks.

Also, each time there is a shock, and equity tanks, we go in and buy some more.

How can we do this?

We are sufficiently liquid, all the time. 

Our small entry quantum approach is ensuring that. 

Also, we’ve chosen such equity first-up that is minimally susceptible to cracking. That’s the best we can do. 

We have either avoided debt altogether or chosen debt-levels that are adding value to the stock and can be easily taken care of in the short-term. 

We have chosen equity with decent quick and current ratios. 

We have chosen adaptable managements that function as optimal human capital, fighting inflation, showering shareholder-friendliness and adding value at all times. 

However, crack they do, eventually, and we keep picking up more. 

Since we’ve kept ourselves “infinitely” liquid as per our small entry quantum approach, we are then also “infinitely”poised to benefit from the cracks. 

As we keep getting more and more opportunities to buy with meaningful margins of safety, markets show us more upside than downside. 

Thus, antifragility comes to us as a function of falling price, given that the underlying has sound fundamentals, low to nil debt and benevolent, versatile and diligent management. 

Now, let the shocks come. 

In fact, let 20 shocks come. 

We want shocks to come…

…so that we can continue to buy at rock-bottom prices, which work in an antifragile manner for us, because of the characteristics of the equity and management we have chosen. 

Profiting from shocks?

More upside than downside? Owing to the effects of a shock?

What kind of behaviour is that?

That’s antifragile behaviour.

Sheer Moat Investing is not Antifragile 

Posted on by
Reply

There we go again. 

That word. 

It’s not going to leave us. 

Nicholas Nassim Taleb has coined together what is possibly the market-word of the century. 

Antifragile. 

We’re equity-people. 

We want to remain so. 

We don’t wish to desert equity just because it is a fragile asset-class by itself. 

No. 

We wish to make our equity-foray as antifragile as possible. 

First-up, we need to understand, that when panic sets in, everything falls. 

The fearful weak hand doesn’t differentiate between a gem and a donkey-stock. He or she just sells and sells alike. 

Second-up, we need to comprehend that this is the age of shocks. There will be shocks. Shock after shock after shock. Such are the times. Please acknowledge this, and digest it. 

To make our equity-play antifragile, we’ll need to incorporate solid strategies to account for above two facts. 

We love moats, right? 

No problem. 

We’ll keep our moats. 

Just wait for moat-stocks to show value. Then, we’ll pick them up. 

We go in during the aftermath of a shock. Otherwise, we don’t. 

We go in with small quanta. Time after time after time. 

Voila. 

We’re  already sufficiently antifragile. 

No magic. 

Just sheer common sense. 

We’re still buying quality stocks. 

We’re buying them when they’re not fragile, or lesser fragile. 

We’re going in each time with minute quanta such that the absence of these quanta (after they’ve gone in) doesn’t alter our financial lives. We’re saving the rest of our pickled corpus for the next shock, after which the gem-stock will be yet lesser fragile. 

Yes, we’re averaging down, only because we’re dealing with gems. We’ll never average down with donkey-stocks. We might trade these, averaging up. We won’t be investing in them. 

Thus, we asymptotically approach antifragility in a gem-stock. 

Over time, after many cycles, the antifragile bottom-level of the gem-stock should be moving significantly upwards. 

Gem-stock upon gem-stock upon gem-stock. 

We’re done already. 

What is an Antifragile approach to Equity?

Posted on by
Reply

Taleb’s term “antifragile” is here to stay.

If my understanding is correct, an asset class that shows more upside than downside upon the onset of shock in this age of shocks – is termed as antifragile.

So what’s going to happen to us Equity people?

Is Equity a fragile asset class?

Let’s turn above question upon its head.

What about our approach?

Yes, our approach can make Equity antifragile for us.

We don’t need to pack our bags and switch to another asset class.

We just approach Equity in an antifragile fashion. Period.

Well, aren’t we already? Margin of safety and all that.

Sure. We’ll just refine what we’ve already got, add a bit of stuff, and come out with the antifragile strategy.

So, quality.

Management.

Applicability to the times.

Scalability.

Value.

Fundamentals.

Blah blah blah.

You’ve done all your research.

You’ve found a plum stock.

You’re getting margin of safety.

Lovely.

What’s missing?

Entry.

Right.

You don’t enter with a bang.

You enter at various times, again and again, in small quanta.

What are these times?

You enter in the aftermath of shocks.

There will be many shocks.

This is the age of shocks.

You enter when the stock is at its antifragile-most. For that time period. It is showing maximal upside. Minimal downside. Fundamentals are plum. Shock’s beaten it down. You enter, slightly. Put yourself in a position to enter many, many times, over many years, upon shock after shock. This automatically means that entry quantum is small. This also means you’re doing an SIP where the S stands for your own system (with the I being for investment and the P for plan).

Now let’s fine-fine-tune.

Don’t put more than 0.5% of your networth into any one stock, ever. Adjust this figure for yourself. Then adjust entry quantum for yourself.

Don’t enter into more than 20-30 stocks. Again, adjust to comfort level.

Remain doable.

If you’re full up, and something comes along which you need to enter at all costs, discard a stock you’re liking the least.

Have your focus-diversified portfolio (FDP) going on the side, apart from Equity.

Congratulations, you just made Equity antifragile for yourself.

🙂

Focused Diversification : Mantra for all Times

Posted on by
Reply

I’m more into focus.

One can focus on one thing at a time.

Agreed.

What if after that one thing starts running, it doesn’t require any more focus?

Wow.

Then I focus on another thing.

Get it running.

Then another.

Till my focus window is full.

Let me tell you about my focus window.

I focus on cash, debt, equity, forex, gold, real-estate, arbitrage, and options.

With that, my professional focus in finance is full full full.

I get something running.

That’s it.

Then I don’t need to be with it. Mostly.

Let me run you through.

1). Cash – Bind it in a worry-free and accessible manner. Done.

2). Debt – Study the underlying very thoroughly. Reject 10 underlyings. Take up the 11th which passes all criteria. Be happy with a slightly better than FD-return. Done.

3). Equity – Invest for life. Study till you drop the stock or take it up. Only invest in what meets all criteria and offers margin of safety at time of investing. On top of that – SIP (systematic investment plan). Done.

4). Forex – Get a software robot to trade it for you. Or some human-capital. All available online. Requires a bit of fine-tuning. Keep tuning till you start making a return. Done.

5). Gold – Buy physical gold. Research your source. Needs to be impeccable. Bullion. Coins. SIP. Accessible. No jewellery. Done.

6). Real-estate – Make your real-estate yield you an income. Regular income? Done.

7). Arbitrage – Understand what this is, and why it gives you a tax benefit. Get an online MF account going with Kotak MF or DWS. Divert some funds into their arbitrage MF, either or. I prefer Kotak. Monthly dividend payout option. Done.

8). Options – Get the option-strategy going. You don’t require a desktop. Mobile is sufficient. All you now need to do is take care of square-off. On mobile. This means a slightly higher level of engagement than the above avenues. Only slightly. Are you ok with that? Fine. Done.

In a flow, it’s all doable.

And, you remain focused.

Why all this?

Times demand it. You never know what might come in handy, and when.

Yeah, times are tough.

However, you are tougher.

To use Nassim Nicholas Taleb’s terminology, you are antifragile.