Tag Archives: #BullMarket

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.

Cost-Free-Ness

Posted on by
Reply
Why…
 
…do we play this game?
 
I play it to…
 
…win.
 
What’s one’s definition of a win?
 
It’s different for everyone.
 
I’ll tell you mine.
 
I want to be completely cost-free in the markets before the end of a bull-run. 
 
What does being cost-free mean?
 
It means that whatever one has in the market, has been completely freed up of its principal. 
 
That’s done by taking the principal out, over time, as markets climb. 
 
What purpose does cost-free-ness serve? 
 
Firstly, whatever’s in the market now, in a cost-free state, is all high quality material. 
 
It can’t be otherwise. 
 
What’s not high quality will be pulled out as markets persist in their climb. 
 
Why?
 
The impulse to book is very strong. 
 
In that state of mind, whatever is not worth holding anymore, will be automatically booked. 
 
It’s human nature. 
 
Secondly, what’s in the market now, can stay in, like, forever, without causing us any tension. 
 
That’s an ideal state of mind for the creation of multibaggers, and the underlyings in question are all multibagger material, being the essence of one’s entire market-play. 
 
Thirdly, one has gotten one’s soldiers home, to fight more battles, as valiantly as ever, in the times to come. 
 
Ya, cost-free-ness means that one has pulled one’s principal out. 
 
This very principal will now be utilized to make more and more shares cost-free.
 
Fourthly, we are not going to suffer any pangs about the markets climbing and climbing further. 
 
Further climb benefits our material in the market, immediately. 
 
More material, picked up at trading levels, is likely to yield a small chunk of cost-free shares, in the form of a winning trade. As one exits such trade, one leaves one’s profit in the market, in the form of cost-free shares. 
 
Sure, eventually the market will collapse, and we’ll be left with some material which is not only not cost-free, but is now losing, perhaps big.
 
That’s ok.
 
Why?
 
Because, quantities are relatively small. These are trading levels, remember? Thus, entries will be small.
 
Then, these are the same underlyings as already existing in our portfolio. 
 
We want to hold these. 
 
We are holding many cost-free units of these very underlyings. 
 
Current loss-making units of these underlyings can be averaged as markets sink further, because we are highly convinced about these holdings.
 
Eventually, the curve will turn, and a new cycle will start.
 
As markets climb in the new cycle, eventually these new units will start becoming cost-free.
 
Such positive loop outlined above is the market sweet-spot I always wish to be in.
 
It’s the essence of almost seventeen years of first-hand, in-the-field market learning, with personal funds on the line at all times, struggles, losses, beatings, the works and what have you. 
 
And now, there’s cost-free-ness.
 
That’s my win in the markets!
 
🙂
 
 
 
 

Investors whine, and traders cry, when they try the other’s Art

Posted on by
Reply

In a breakaway bull market,…

…one starts to find faults with Trading in general…

since, to make money, one just needs to sit, rather than actively trade. 

Almost everyone is happy with their investing,…

…in a breakaway bull market. 

What kind of factors does one start pointing fingers at?

Timing.

One almost always gets this wrong, specifically with regard to futures and options, which are time-bound.

Not having enough on the table…,

…yeah, yeah, heard that one before. 

While trading, one doesn’t bet the farm. 

When one’s trades run, one makes a bit,…

…which is not, by far, as much as any odd investment portfolio would be appreciating.

Second-guessing.

While investing, one is focused in one direction. 

While trading, one looks at both directions, to initiate trades, and the market-neutral trade is another trade in a category of its own. 

Hence, one is always second-guessing the market, and when one is off, it results in opportunity loss and brokerage generation. 

Time consumed.

Trading consumes almost all of one’s time. 

When markets are closed, one’s mind is not detached. 

It’s exhausting. 

Has many side-effects too. 

One doesn’t have time for many other things, because of trading. 

Whatever one does try to participate in, consists of half-baked efforts, because essentially, one’s mind is on the market simultaneously. 

Leads to a loss in quality of life.

Now, let’s reverse the situation. 

When markets slide downwards, the trader feels light. 

He or she cuts longs and initiates shorts.

It’s a superior feeling versus the investor, who is stuck with large holdings on the table. 

Feel-good factor is huge, and quality of life gets enhanced.

Good traders don’t have a liquidity problem. 

Also, they can shut operations and switch off from the market any time, if they are able to do so, in practice. 

Tappable markets are many for the trader. 

Trading leads to income generation. 

Investing leads to wealth creation.

What do you want from your life?

Both – is a valid answer, but confuses. 

If one wants to dabble in trading, but is basically an investor, one can think about initiating positional trades, which have a investing-like feel, and one’s time is less bound to the market.

If one wants to dabble in investing as a trader, hmm, this one will be markedly tougher, I think.

Don’t know what to say here, since I’m an investor who dabbles in trading…

…, but intuitively, I feel, that this one would take a lot of effort.