Tag Archives: #Taleb

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.

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.

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.

🙂

Where do you want to be?

Posted on by
Reply

Where do I want to be?

Do I want to look at a stock price and know where things stand with the stock in question?

Yes.

That’s where I want to be.

It’s not going to come for free.

What will it take?

Looking at the stock…

…for an year or two.

That’s what it will take.

How boring, you say?

Sure.

When stock market investing seems boring…

…that’s when you’re doing it right.

Excitement and roller-coaster rides are for video-game pleasure, and for making losses.

Money is made when it’s outright boring out there.

Where do you want to be?

In the money?

I thought so.

Then, please get used to boring and don’t ever complain again that things are boring.

How does one position oneself in such a manner that one studies a stock for an year or two.

Hmmm.

Let’s put some skin in the game.

I know, this phrase is becoming more and more popular, what with Nicholas Taleb and all.

Yeah, we are picking up stock.

What stock?

The one we wish to observe for an year or two.

Why pick it up? Why not just observe it?

You won’t. You’ll let it go.

Why?

Because it’s not yours.

So we pick up the stock? What’s the point of observing if we’re picking it up now?

Well, we’re picking up a minute quantity – one quantum – now. That gets our skin into the game. Then we observe, and observe. Anytime there’s shareholder-friendly action by the management, we pick up more, another quantum. We keep picking up, quantum by quantum. Soon, while we’ve kept picking up, we’ve observed the stock for so long, that now, one look at the stock price tells us what kind of margin of safety we are getting in the stock at this point.

Wow.

Now, future entries become seamless. One look and we have a yes or no decision. Isn’t that wonderful?

Absolutely.

That’s where we want to be.

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.