Tag Archives: #LongTermPortfolio

Side-Hustling

Posted on by
Reply

You’ve started a…

…side-hustle…

…and are still thinking it through.

As in, why go through the rigmarole of starting a new thing, …

…when you’ve gotten another – main thing – going, …

… and, the main thing is lucrative, engrossing, sizable, and on auto.

Right.

What’s the key phrase here?

On auto.

Yes.

You said it yourself.

Why disturb the peace?

Let it remain on auto.

That’s what it likes best.

An important big-wig did say, that the most money was made by sitting.

Think the big-wig was right.

Boils down to what you are doing while sitting.

Don’t wonder why.

Just do your side thing.

Distract yourself away.

That’s the purpose of your sideology.

What, you thought you would make money out of your side-o-nomics?

Hmmm.

Not a bad thought.

Not going to happen in a jiff, though.

You’ll need to refine away, and play it without any pressure.

A side game that demands quasi constant attention, as in three odd hours a day, cumulative, and enough captivity of your interest, such that you don’t feel like looking at the main-frame during market hours – that’s what would solve your purpose.

The side stuff has now allowed your main stuff to compound unimpeded.

Isn’t that a big thing?

What, you want more? Right, thought so.

You want this constant-attention-captivator to yield an income.

Knew it.

You couldn’t just let it go, right?

Knew you’d react like this.

Compounding wasn’t enough, now that you’ve had your cake, you want to eat it too.

Just keep it at distraction, no?

No.

Ok. Let’s work on how. Hone. Fine-tune. Start slow. Paper-trade first. One year. Two years. I know, not the same thing. No actual money involved makes the effect negligible. However, your AI keeping ledger of your paper trades makes it feel more real. You see graphs and numbers go up and down, coloured flags flaring, and you port into a whole new world.

Losses translate into small profits. System versions bump up weekly on the AI. Eventually, consistency, the holy grail that your system seeks, is achieved.

Hurray, your system is profitable. Happy now?

I knew you wouldn’t be.

I knew what you were going to say.

Now you want the sideH to scale up, right?

Overtake the main cash cow, right?

Possible, possible, but why? Be happy. Enjoy your ride. Mains working, sides working, brilliant sunshine, 22 degrees, mild breeze, what more can you ask for?

Once the sides become the mains, life will have no breathing space.

So…

…careful.

Distraction

Posted on by
Reply

Fooling the people…

…all the time?

For how long?

What’s the historical precedent?

Did anyone get away with such behaviour…

…forever?

No.

No one…

…ever…

…has gotten a free pass…

…to indulge in reckless actions, …

…insulting the entire world’s intelligence, …

…obstructing the earning power of all but self, …

…the king with no clothes, …

…with obnoxiousness at its peak…

… ad nauseam.

Since nothing seems to be happening, as in there seems to be no change in the situation, and things keep taking a turn for the worse after showing some signs of healing, what’s the recourse?

We bide our time.

Time turns the table.

We hone our skills.

Silently implementing our long-term work, we dabble with the new kid on the block, AI, to create new systems. We work at seamlessness. Connectivity. Automation. We’re working at 25x. Thanks to AI. From a complete skeptic, these last seven weeks have turned my tide towards areas which were but a dream.

There was a pinpointed trading system I wished to implement. I’ve spent my years learning many skills, but not the languages and infrastructures to create such trading systems. Not required now. I don’t need to know anything about programming languages and such infrastructures. Creation is now about dialogue. A sincere dialogue with Claude, over seven weeks, has resulted in a multi-layered, automated trading system, semi-seamless, in that order yes or no is still in the hands of my human self. I can make the system completely seamless, have kept it semi out of sheer choice, just saying. Even things like app to app connectivity are completely handheld by the AI, till successful completion and implementation.

System will not go live till required success rate is hit consistently. Tracking and understanding performance has now become a breeze. Fine-tuning, almost daily, is a religion. All thanks to the AI. One must give credit where it’s due.

Now, why, for a long-term investor like me, does the question even arise?

Why even create a trading system?

Income?

That’s one reason. Main reason for me?

No.

So, if income is not the main reason, then what?

Distraction.

Distraction?

Yes. I wish to take my attention away from my long-term portfolio. Perhaps open this once a month, on a weekend. Operate through GTTs only. No interaction at all during market hours. Forget. Switch off. Out.

Why?

No focus means no action. That’s the space where we want to be. We will act once a month, and that should be good enough. Give the long-term a chance to become very long-term.

So you’re saying that your attention remains on the video game action.

Yeah. Working life is punctuated by the video game action of trading. Seamlessly, with max automation except actual buy and sell implementation. In fact order is fed into trading account through the AI itself. The implementation angle is the money loading from my end. Without fuel, the order is rejected by the trading platform.

Wow.

Yeah.

A whole new world.

Yeah.

25x seems right.

Yeah.

So a lot of people could be doing the same thing as you right now, right?

Yeah.

Where’s your edge?

It’s how you handle after entry. That’s where the edge is. How you manage. How you exit.

And how?

Hey, that’s the edge, remember. Not going to give that away. That’s my hard earned edge over more than two decades. Earn your own edge. There’s no substitute for diving in.

Could somebody replicate your edge through AI discussion and development?

Others could develop an edge, yes, through AI. It won’t be my edge though. I don’t care what others develop. I’ll just keep honing my edge and making it sharper day by day, trade upon trade, tirelessly. My edge will keep adapting.

What’s the end outcome for you, from this exercise?

Well, ideally, for me, the tool that I’m creating for the sheer purpose of distraction, shall then go on to yield…

…regular income.

SuperFlowers, anyone?

Posted on by
Reply

How do we get to…

…superflowers?

Imagine a garden.

It’s got grass.

Grass is a weed (?).

Garden’s got other zero-benefit (?) weeds.

In general, it’s got weeds.

And, some flowers.

We don’t want the weeds.

We want the flowers.

Weeding out has activation barriers built in.

Toolkit – buy.

Or – gardener – hire.

Spend energy doing the job.

Take that extra time out of your normal routine.

A million excuses, each one seeming valid.

As mentioned earlier, weeding comes with baggage.

Overcome.

Weed.

Out.

What remains?

Flowers.

Right.

We’re still not at superflowers.

Expenditure comes up. All the time. Does it not?

If there’s a weed, sell the weed and use the proceeds to meet the expenditure.

No weed?

Well done.

Sell the least performing flower to meet the expenditure.

Done?

Income comes in?

Put it into a new opportunity. Weed or no weed status activates after some years, you decide how many years.

So, seeing only flowers now?

Wonderful.

Keep pushing. Pushing is the secret ingredient.

Any spend whatsoever, now gets met with a flower expended, or at least some part of that flower.

After some years, have a look.

What remains are your best performers.

Hope you’ve been adding to these.

Decade or so later, upholding this chronology, you are only left with…

…superflowers.

Congratulations.

Staring Facts in the Face

Posted on by
Reply

Mongerers…

…are very, very busy.

After all, the target is in a corner.

Why not strike massively, and keep striking?

Punish the vanquished multiple times per misdemeanour.

Unfortunately, Core IT has gone quiet.

They’ve stopped caring about their share price.

Focus is now on intrinsic growth, not on quarter to quarter looking good attitude.

Pushed to the wall, the instinct to survive and regain lost ground is on all fours.

Forget about all this, is the aggressor AI actually so capable as to completely substitute the need for Core IT with regard to enterprise level programming, already?

No.

Perhaps in a year?

No.

5 years.

No.

10 years?

Possibly not.

20 years?

Possibly yes.

And, look at the mass reaction.

Masses believe they are ready to take over, like, yesterday.

Then comes the black box introduction.

AI companies are offering a black box to corporates, which will be their in-house AI, all data stays at home, let’s all bypass Core IT.

Does the data stay in the black box? Does it go anywhere? Does anybody know?

No.

Where is the trust coming from?

A bank entrusting its internal data to a black box, the big four doing the same, doctor’s records, hmmmm, not adding up. To a human under non-disclosure agreement? Plausible.

Departments being trained in corporates to become the tech arm?

It’s like an additional wing being added to a hospital, to handle book-keeping. Use the wing for expanding the hospital? What a preposterous idea! Let’s all become jack of all trades. Why even bother specializing. For that we have AI, right, to handle the specialist surgeries?

Panics almost always take to ridiculous trajectories.

This one has now cracked open genuinely clean-balance-sheeted free-cashflow-generating companies. Who have decided to take on all blows without responding. Probably want their CMPs to hit three digits and then some before announcing anything. They seem to have forgotten what buybacks are.

With nothing to go on, where do you stand, regarding Core IT?

Clean balance sheets.

Zero debt.

Track record of navigating through disruption.

Free cash flow being generated year upon year.

That’s enough.

Two choices.

Hold on to your holdings and look elsewhere currently, for investing.

Add on, as in average down.

Depends upon your risk profile, which option you choose.

Liquidation, for me, is not an option, given this :

Clean balance sheets.

Zero debt.

Track record of navigating through disruption.

Free cash flow being generated year upon year.

What am I doing?

Till lately I was averaging down.

Recently, I stopped averaging down in Core Tech. That’s a change in trajectory. Ya, have been investing elsewhere recently. Going to hold Core IT through, and accumulate further only above my buying averages for Core IT stocks. The exact change that’s happened is that now I need these stocks to speak out with their deeds and propel themselves to above my buying averages, before buying more. Might not happen soon. That’s fine. The reasons for comfort in holding are these :

Clean balance sheets.

Zero debt.

Track record of navigating through disruption.

Free cash flow being generated year upon year.

As long as these reasons exist, holding beyond while focusing elsewhere is the change that’s happened at Magic Bull.

Why, you ask? Why a change from the staunch attitude earlier?

It’s a matter of being in tune with one’s risk-profile. Till it wasn’t speaking up, I was comfortable averaging down. When it started to be bewildered by the goings on, I changed to being comfortable holding.

It’s ok. One can’t have the right opinion all the time. For a while, one can be wrong also. In those times that one feels one can be wrong also, making the switch from averaging down to only holding is ok, provided these exist :

Clean balance sheets.

Zero debt.

Track record of navigating through disruption.

Free cash flow being generated year upon year.

A Tale of Two Worlds

Posted on by
Reply

Like the plus…

…to the minus…

…and day to night, …

…like forwards to backwards, …

…like North to South, …

…so is…

…investing to trading…

…or trading to investing…

…spin it any way around, like you’d like to.

These two worlds have their own tales, and, you guessed it, each is…

…diametrically opposite to the other.

In the one, you average down. In the other, you pyramid.

In the one, you buy low. Ideally, you don’t sell for a long time, and when you do, you sell high.

In the other, you buy high and sell higher, or sell low and buy back lower, ideally sooner than later.

In the one, you welcome notional losses in high conviction bets, so you can put in more at lower cost.

In the other, you abhor the sight of notional losses, and cut these beyond small thresholds.

In the one you are not glued to the screen, and can even choose to operate completely from after hours.

In the other, especially while taking big positions, significant screen-time is important.

In the one, you have time for other things in life, many other things.

In the other, perhaps not as many.

In the one, emotional and nervous overhang can be reasonably manageable with lifestyle and mental training.

In the other, management and mental training required is tougher.

One could go on.

That’s not the point though.

What do we take from this?

We want something concrete.

There’s a potent and vital point where the two worlds meet.

Let’s say you engage in the one world.

You then need the other – one way or another.

How?

Let’s say you are a trader.

You need to divert some profits to long-term holds, to build wealth, to secure yourself and your family.

Let’s say, on the other hand, you are a long-term investor.

Where does the world of trading fit in, for you?

To control your gambler’s instinct.

To not allow passage to your repeated inclination towards opening up your long-term portfolio, again and again.

Trading gets your trigger-happiness out of the way.

You tire mentally.

Perhaps take a few small losses. Wins are a small bonus.

Bottomline is, you don’t open your long-term portfolio to fiddle with it, unnecessarily. That action is grounded by a rule imposed by you yourself. Once a week. Once a month. Half-yearly. Annually. Whatever suits. At that time, open, fiddle, rearrange, do what you wish, but then close till next window. In the meantime, satisfy your need for action with some mild trading.

Even better if your small trading operation only shorts the market.

With that, you’d automatically be hedging your long-term portfolio.

Elegant.

Symmetrical.

Purposeful.

For a long-term portfolio in a growth market, …

…very…

…winning.

Nath on Equity – Yardsticks, Measures and Rules

Posted on by
Reply

Peeps, these are my rules, measures and yardsticks. 

They might or might not work for you. 

If they do, it makes me happy, and please do feel free to use them. 

Ok, here goes. 

I like to do my homework well. 1). DUE DILIGENCE. 

I like to write out my rationale for entry. 2). DIARY entry.

I do not enter if I don’t see 3). VALUE.

I like to see 4). MOAT also. 

I don’t commit in one shot. 5). Staggered entry.

I can afford to 6). average down, because my fundamentals are clear. 

My 7). defined entry quantum unit per shot is minuscule compared to networth. 

I only enter 8). one underlying on a day, max. If a second underlying awaits entry, it will not be entered into on the same day something else has been purchased. 

I’ve left 9). reentry options open to unlimited. 

I enter for 10). ten years plus. 

Funds committed are classified as 11). lockable for ten years plus. 

For reentry, 12). stock must give me a reason to rebuy. 

If the reason is good enough, I don’t mind 13). averaging up. 

Exits are 14). overshadowed by lack of repurchase. 

I love 15). honest managements. 

I detest 16). debt. 

I like 17). free cashflow. 

My margin of safety 18). allows me to sit. 

I pray for 19). patience for a pick to turn into a multibagger.

I keep my long-term portfolio 20). well cordoned off from bias, discussion, opinion, or review by any other person. 

There’s more, but it’ll come another day. 

🙂