How to?

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.

🙂

Process

In the markets…

… actions are decisions.

No decision taken means no action.

Well, no action is also an action.

Ok.

However…

… eventually …

… to generate wealth …

… or income …

… we are confronted with decisions.

I’m not afraid to act, upon seeing a confluence of supportive indications.

If I were afraid to act, well, I could have just sheer chosen another line, but would have been confronted with the same deficiency, there too.

Acting upon enhanced win probability should do away with any fear.

However, there’s always that thing before trigger-press.

What if I’m wrong?

Let’s not be afraid of being wrong.

We’ll take our stop and then we’re done with this action, now looking at implementing another action.

Our ability to take the decision for this other action, and for all future actions should remain intact.

How do we ensure that?

When we’re wrong, let’s be wrong small.

Then let’s move on to whatever new action is coming our way.

If we let ourselves be wrong big, that, my friends, is crippling.

Let’s not cripple ourselves.

Crippling does away with the capability to act further.

Now, decisions are a fry cry.

The day becomes heavy.

Nights …

… well …

… sleepless.

That’s not going to happen to us.

Why?

As traders, will do everything in our capability to stop a big loss from happening.

How?

Losses are small in the beginning.

Let’s define their limit.

If you want to take it trade by trade, fine. Each trade has its own dynamics. However, small nature of stop remains common. Define what is small for you.

How?

My formula – anything that stops the day from becoming heavy and the night from becoming sleepless. For me, that’s small. You decide your formula. Whatever works for you, take it.

This is called process.

We follow process.

We don’t focus on profit and loss.

We focus on process.

We want to get our process correct, day in, day out, forever.

Losses will follow. They will be taken small.

Profits will follow. We will allow these to become big. Though that is a difficult one, we will need to learn to, because without this one thing working for us, we won’t be long-term profitable.

Here’s a formula regarding letting profits run.

After a profit has touched 3 x your stop, allow 50% breathing space. If this is squeezed completely, exit with small profit. If underlying inches higher, inch your stop upwards, always allowing for breathing space. At 4 x you can allow 40% breathing space, at 5x 30%. Etc. Make your own formula that allows profits to burgeon.

Wishing you lucrative trading and ample wealth creation!

🙂

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

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.