ZingPowZing v bowlhead challenge

Andrew31

I dont think we will be hearing from Zingpowzing, looks like he has been barred from the site.   Wonder what happened  

Albermarle

Andrew31 said:

I dont think we will be hearing from Zingpowzing, looks like he has been barred from the site.   Wonder what happened  

There was a lot of bad tempered e mails between ZPZ  and one of the IFA's on the site .
As you know the pro and anti IFA discussions are not unheard of on the forum but maybe it went too far .
My main issue with ZPZ is that he used to suggest very high risk investment strategies to newbie investors , rather than the usual VLS 60 etc 

eskbanker

Albermarle said:
There was a lot of bad tempered e mails between ZPZ  and one of the IFA's on the site .

The forum admins have fairly broad powers on here but those don't extend to accessing emails between individuals!

Albermarle

eskbanker said:

Albermarle said:
There was a lot of bad tempered e mails between ZPZ  and one of the IFA's on the site .

The forum admins have fairly broad powers on here but those don't extend to accessing emails between individuals!

Ok I meant forum exchanges of views .

NoMore

eskbanker said:

Albermarle said:
There was a lot of bad tempered e mails between ZPZ  and one of the IFA's on the site .

The forum admins have fairly broad powers on here but those don't extend to accessing emails between individuals!

DM's via the forum are available to the admins, emails are of course are not as they are outside the site.

DairyQueen

Ah well. Shame that BH won't have the opportunity to show newbies that ZPZ's hubris was dangerous for the majority. 

bowlhead99

Albermarle said:

Andrew31 said:

I dont think we will be hearing from Zingpowzing, looks like he has been barred from the site.   Wonder what happened  

My main issue with ZPZ is that he used to suggest very high risk investment strategies to newbie investors , rather than the usual VLS 60 etc 

That was the reason this thread was created. He wanted to demonstrate his contention that it was better for the person on another thread who had reduced life expectancy and was looking to preserve and grow a nest-egg for her sister's family over the coming decade, to ignore the guidance about suitable mixed asset collective investment schemes. He believed she would be better equipped to navigate the perils of impending Brexit if she just invested into, say, four well known international companies with high dollar revenues. After all, if you select the shares yourself, you are not paying some scoundrel from the financial services industry a fee to assist with investment selection or portfolio construction. You just need to know which shares to pick, but that's easy enough if you are savvy.   

DairyQueen said:

Ah well. Shame that BH won't have the opportunity to show newbies that ZPZ's hubris was dangerous for the majority. 

I expect his approach will prove to be better than my 'slow and steady' approach over the year if there is a decent market recovery. As of yesterday (ignoring dividends for simplicity) since the start of the thread Apple was up 18% in sterling terms, Microsoft flat, Glaxo down 15%, BHP down 47%; ZPZ temporarily had a weighted average return of -11% against the -12% we currently see on RIT.  But today the pound has lost another couple of percent against the dollar while Apple, Microsoft and BHP are all up double digits for the day; so the ZPZ portfolio has now only lost 2% over the timeframe which looks much better than the 12%  fall over at RIT.

Still, results of fortuitous stockpicking against a diversified fund are not really meaningful. For example, the chart below shows how AAPL did against RIT CP  over the five years prior to the start of the 'challenge' and then continuing through to now. As you can see, AAPL was sometimes losing value, sometimes doubling in value and then losing 30% again; after about four and a half years in, it was back at the same 44% gain seen at RCP, something like a perfectly respectable 8% a year. Then all of a sudden the market decided it should be valued twice as much (300% of the start price instead of 150% of the start price) - so off it went.

There's no way a diversified fund holding a mix of asset classes will keep up with that potential growth, where a company does something really clever or really lucky and its price launches into the stratosphere at the drop of a hat. Still, plodding along and outperforming the FTSE with lower volatility, is fine for many. 

DairyQueen

DairyQueen said:

Ah well. Shame that BH won't have the opportunity to show newbies that ZPZ's hubris was dangerous for the majority. 

With the caveat that other than that I won't be sorry to see the back of him.

DairyQueen

bowlhead99 said:

Albermarle said:

Andrew31 said:

I dont think we will be hearing from Zingpowzing, looks like he has been barred from the site.   Wonder what happened  

My main issue with ZPZ is that he used to suggest very high risk investment strategies to newbie investors , rather than the usual VLS 60 etc 

That was the reason this thread was created. He wanted to demonstrate his contention that it was better for the person on another thread who had reduced life expectancy and was looking to preserve and grow a nest-egg for her sister's family over the coming decade, to ignore the guidance about suitable mixed asset collective investment schemes. He believed she would be better equipped to navigate the perils of impending Brexit if she just invested into, say, four well known international companies with high dollar revenues. After all, if you select the shares yourself, you are not paying some scoundrel from the financial services industry a fee to assist with investment selection or portfolio construction. You just need to know which shares to pick, but that's easy enough if you are savvy.   

DairyQueen said:

Ah well. Shame that BH won't have the opportunity to show newbies that ZPZ's hubris was dangerous for the majority. 

I expect his approach will prove to be better than my 'slow and steady' approach over the year if there is a decent market recovery. As of yesterday (ignoring dividends for simplicity) since the start of the thread Apple was up 18% in sterling terms, Microsoft flat, Glaxo down 15%, BHP down 47%; ZPZ temporarily had a weighted average return of -11% against the -12% we currently see on RIT.  But today the pound has lost another couple of percent against the dollar while Apple, Microsoft and BHP are all up double digits for the day; so the ZPZ portfolio has now only lost 2% over the timeframe which looks much better than the 12%  fall over at RIT.

Still, results of fortuitous stockpicking against a diversified fund are not really meaningful. For example, the chart below shows how AAPL did against RIT CP  over the five years prior to the start of the 'challenge' and then continuing through to now. As you can see, AAPL was sometimes losing value, sometimes doubling in value and then losing 30% again; after about four and a half years in, it was back at the same 44% gain seen at RCP, something like a perfectly respectable 8% a year. Then all of a sudden the market decided it should be valued twice as much (300% of the start price instead of 150% of the start price) - so off it went.

There's no way a diversified fund holding a mix of asset classes will keep up with that potential growth, where a company does something really clever or really lucky and its price launches into the stratosphere at the drop of a hat. Still, plodding along and outperforming the FTSE with lower volatility, is fine for many. 

Balanced and fair analysis as usual.

Username999

Is the competition over?