Youtube comments of Magic Beans (@Magic_beans_).
-
11000
-
1100
-
732
-
539
-
519
-
382
-
260
-
206
-
150
-
147
-
126
-
122
-
113
-
71
-
65
-
65
-
63
-
58
-
48
-
47
-
46
-
45
-
38
-
38
-
30
-
28
-
27
-
26
-
26
-
23
-
23
-
23
-
22
-
21
-
18
-
16
-
16
-
16
-
13
-
13
-
11
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
Re: “If you’d invested back then you’d have this much now” - there’s also this thing called reversion to the mean, also illustrated by phenomena like ARKK Innovation or the Madden Curse.
Someone has a great year, better than anybody would have expected, so they suddenly get loads of press coverage, endorsement deals, new investors, or whatever. Before jumping on the bandwagon, remember that their great performance was noteworthy because it was unusual. True, it may represent a turning point in the player’s career or the emergence of a brilliant fund manager, but often they just had one good year. After that they go right back to being average, sometimes worse.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
They’re basically all the same, they hold a basket of assets and each of these funds’ baskets hold just one thing: Bitcoin. Unless you have a reason to seek out or avoid a certain provider, you may as well go with the cheapest. ARKB, BITB, IBIT, and FBTC are all in the 0.20-0.25% range. As our host mentioned, some funds are temporarily waiving part or all of their management fee.
Just my conjecture, but I suspect that they’re doing this is because within a couple years they expect the market to have consolidated into maybe three dominant funds, and everyone will flock to those going forward. We already have that with S&P 500 index funds: there are dozens of such funds but SPY, VOO, and IVV dominate. Even within a company, SPLG is 1/20 of the size of SPY and sees 1/10 the trading volume despite being the same holdings with a lower expense ratio. Since asset managers make their money as a percentage of assets under management, becoming one of those really big funds would be great for the bottom line.
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
As with so many problems, I don't believe the Internet caused it, but merely exposed it. George Carlin observed decades ago that a moment of silence at a ballgame was a nerve-wracking ordeal. Everything we've ever created -- art, science, literature, sport -- is an attempt to fill our time, to avoid silence, stillness, and boredom.
Can one go too far in that direction? Of course. If you check your phone so often that it disrupts your daily activities and social life, or if you spend so much time at the office that your spouse is basically a single parent, you should probably think about your priorities, and whether your actions are working toward or against them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@jo2305 Exactly, people are confusing pain relief with happiness. The first is important for sure and can free up resources toward pursuing the second, but they’re not the same.
Research on what brings happiness typically finds the same few things: meaningful relationships, helping others, and having a sense of purpose to your life. A certain amount of money can help with that; if you’re working 60+ hours a week just to get by, you won’t have much time for relationships or helping others, and those jobs may not align with your purpose, they just pay the bills. So yeah, get that person a basic income or a living wage and they probably would be happier.
Beyond that though, it tapers off. Going from a salary of $50K to $100K a year helps somewhat, but $100K to $1M a year doesn’t. Once you’ve removed the obstacles to pursuing happiness, money doesn’t help much. In fact some people horseshoe around to where they’re working such long hours that they have no time for relationships.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Regarding pitch decks and use cases, if you intend to hold your stocks for 5+ years, TA doesn’t terribly matter because any timing advantage gets dwarfed by compounding. Let’s say you bought into Microsoft at some point in 2018. At the close of the day 2023-12-13, MSFT was $374.37.
- The lowest price all year was $83.83 on Feb 9, 2018. If you’d bought there you’d be sitting on a 347% return, about 29% annualized.
- The highest price all year was $116.18 on October 10, 2018. If you’d bought there you’d be sitting on a 222% return, about 25% annualized.
- If you’d dollar-cost averaged, buying equal amounts at the opening price on the first trading day of each month, unsurprisingly you’d wind up right in the middle: $99.95 average cost basis, 275% gain, ~27% annualized.
Granted, some of these did better than others, so you if you have time to look for good entry points you may be able to juice your returns a little bit. That’s what I do, I see if theres a chance I can get a better price and set a limit order for that price.
The more important thing though is there were no wrong answers. You may kick yourself for buying at $116 when a couple months later the price was down to $95 (assuming you even notice, which is a point in favor of dollar-cost-average and chill) but everybody did well in the long term.
(See also: Bob, the world’s worst market timer.)
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Why wouldn't it track the asset price? That's how it works for other commodity funds. Only rarely and briefly does GLD get more than 1% off its net asset value. This happens pretty much on its own; if the price varies too much from the underlying, some investment analyst notices and buys or sells until that gap disappears. With heavily traded funds there are people and algorithms that'll intervene if there's even a nickel of profit to be made.
In fact, these ETFs should track BTC better than prior solutions. because they hold exactly one asset: Bitcoin. Prior solutions like GBTC before this change or BITW (a top-10-coin index) used futures and swaps as a proxy for holding Bitcoin.
Why buy a fund at all?
- For someone who keeps their own wallet and doesn't trade often, no reason. In fact it may be preferable because you're cutting out intermediaries.
- For someone who's been keeping their coins on an exchange, trust. If I held BITB (or any of the others) in a Schwab account and Schwab collapsed tomorrow, the SIPC would ensure that my BITB holdings get transferred to another brokerage. Compare that with FTX, where as far as we know the money's just gone.
- For those who do trade regularly, cost. Even on day 1 of these funds, the spread was about 0.5%. Over time I'd expect that to drop to 0.1% or less for trades (on blue-chip stocks the spread is usually a penny or less per share). That plus 0.25% per year is cheaper than Coinbase in many cases*.
- Probably the biggest reason is retirement accounts. Workplace retirement plans (about $7 trillion total) generally haven't had a mechanism by which employees could hold crypto, and now they do.
* Don't worry too much about Coinbase; as long as their fees are denominated in crypto, anything that's good for the currencies is good for them.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
4:07 Tangent, but this also relates to the psychology behind false confessions to crimes. If the suspect has never had reason to mistrust the justice system, they may confess to a crime just to get out of the interrogation room. In research and case studies confessors have reported that they believed that something else would kick in, the truth would come out, and it would set them free.
Unfortunately that’s not how it works. When someone confesses, both police and juries believe it. Unless someone really pushes them to, they don’t consider whether the confession is forced or inconsistent, or how their story may contradict other facts of the case. We’re social creatures, so when someone tells us themselves what happened, especially when it’s unflattering, why not believe it?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@GhostlyNomad130 Semi-retirement is pretty much what it sounds like: you get some level of income, maybe not enough to live off of entirely but enough that you don’t have to work a “normal” job. Instead you can dial back to part-time or seasonal work. Sometimes it works the other way around, people go back to working out of economic necessity, but for others it’s a way to “downshift” to a less stressful life.
Not everybody hates working in and of itself. UBI experiments and workplace survey suggest many people like work; it’s a good outlet for their talents or a way to contribute to society. What sours the deal is the obligation of it all, the idea that they have to put in 40-plus hours a week 50 weeks a year for 40 years, basically nonstop, or else risk a swift descent into homelessness. Semi-retirement is essentially being able to work on your own terms.
I knew some Silicon Valley guys who did that. Not the folks who got IPO windfalls, but regular programmers and designers. They’d grind for ten years and live as cheaply as possible, saving up half a million dollars or whatever. Then they’d move somewhere cheaper like Oregon (cheaper relative to Silicon Valley, of course). They could partly live off their nest egg, supplementing it with a couple days a week working at a coffee shop. Or maybe they’d keep programming but as a contractor, only taking as many gigs as they felt like. That leaves plenty of time to put toward parenting or hobbies.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
One thing I’d add here is that while index funds provide market-average returns, that’s way better than most individual investors get following a do-it-themselves approach. If someone doesn’t take the time to learn about the market and develop a solid plan, they’re very likely to buy on hype and sell due to fear.
Why is this important? In 2022 Amazon saw a 50% drop in their stock price, but by the end of 2023 when I’m writing this they’ve pretty much recovered. If someone saw the drop and sold their shares, they’d wind up taking a loss. Suppose instead they’d kept their head, reassessed whether they still believed in the company long-term. If they did, they could hold on and recover their money, or even buy more shares at the cheaper price and make some money as the stock recovered.
Anyway, index investing. If that appeals to you, a next step might be to look up the “three-fund portfolio” or the broader idea of the “lazy portfolio.” It’s not specific funds so much as a concept: pick a handful of funds representing different asset classes — just an example, but let’s say one for US stocks, one for foreign stocks, one for bonds, and one for real estate — and allocate your money across those according to your risk tolerance. From there you can just keep depositing and maybe check in every few months or even years to see if it needs rebalancing.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Day traders lose money because they overwhelmingly have no training and too little capital. Experienced day traders know there’s a phase of 6-12 months where you’ll lose money while making rookie mistakes, learning the process, and refining your strategy. You could be three years in before your life-to-date return is positive. Novices usually don’t have enough money to endure 6-12 months; they expect to earn a full-time income immediately from their $25,000 portfolio.
As for hedge funds, they’re not meant to beat the S&P. It’s a broad category but they’re meant to provide diversification from the mainstream markets. That means either (1) downside protection, investments that’ll gain when stocks drop, which is a minority of the time, or (2) steadier gains regardless of what the market’s doing, but with lower risk comes lower return. Hedge funds aren’t a cheat code for wealth, they’re a place you put a portion of your wealth to reduce the overall volatility of your portfolio. You know, a hedge.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@harrisonfreund7845 Exactly. Individuals may choose to invest according to the social-justice criteria many commenters are railing against, but ESG reports from rating agencies are more about managing business risk. What might make the company look bad, drive customers away, or attract lawsuits? Common topics include:
Environmental: Is the company meeting industry standards for responsible waste management and responsible marketing? If not, they risk attracting regulatory attention. Back in Ye Olden Days, McDonald's used to package their burgers in styrofoam containers, and it was customer demand that led them to switch to paper.
Social: Is the company responsive to shifts in consumer preference? For example Monster Energy's ESG report by MSCI notes that demand for low-sugar options has grown in recent years, and the company hasn't done a whole lot to respond to that. They have over 30 flavors and only about five have a sugar-free option.
Governance: Are a sufficient number of the Directors independent from the company and its owners? Do they rotate out regularly, or are their Directors so entrenched they may as well be employees? Companies like Tesla and Meta are structured so the CEO also holds a huge share of the voting power, so if you don't like where the company's headed you can't do anything about it.
That being the case, it's important to consider what you personally value as an investor. You can't outsource your ethical decisions to rating agencies. For example, Nestle is constantly catching flak for everything from price fixing to child labor. But they score well enough in other areas like data security and product safety that overall they tend to get pretty solid ESG ratings (AA according to MSCI).
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1