ZingPowZing v bowlhead challenge

bowlhead99

ZingPowZing said:

bowlhead99 said:
Here you go - congrats:

Much appreciated, for sure.

No problem - I'm sure there's no need to remind avid followers of this thread of my weasel-words mentioned on Jellydream's thread ahead of you setting up the 'challenge':

"Sure, why not. Loser pays £100 to the charity of the winner's choice after a year, while the winner acknowledges that a 1-year return is meaningless?" 

[Deleted User]

bowlhead99 said:

ZingPowZing said:

bowlhead99 said:
Here you go - congrats:

Much appreciated, for sure.

No problem - I'm sure there's no need to remind avid followers of this thread of my weasel-words mentioned on Jellydream's thread ahead of you setting up the 'challenge':

"Sure, why not. Loser pays £100 to the charity of the winner's choice after a year, while the winner acknowledges that a 1-year return is meaningless?" 

I would not hear of them described as "weasel words" bowlhead; rather, an affirmation of faith that, over time, your approach will prove more successful. Which I find admirable. And there are several good reasons to believe that your portfolio could be ahead of mine on a certain anniversary of August 15th. 
Time always tells. I agree that one year is an unsatisfactory return on which to conclude. Jellydream mentioned a 5 to 10 year time-line but - as has been noted - in all probability the investment would be carried forward some years further by the beneficiary, so we can keep score as long as anyone has an interest, up to a maximum of fifteen years - if it hasn't happened by then, it probably never will.

bowlhead99

ZingPowZing said:

bowlhead99 said:

ZingPowZing said:

bowlhead99 said:
Here you go - congrats:

Much appreciated, for sure.

No problem - I'm sure there's no need to remind avid followers of this thread of my weasel-words mentioned on Jellydream's thread ahead of you setting up the 'challenge':

"Sure, why not. Loser pays £100 to the charity of the winner's choice after a year, while the winner acknowledges that a 1-year return is meaningless?" 

I would not hear of them described as "weasel words" bowlhead; rather, an affirmation of faith that, over time, your approach will prove more successful. Which I find admirable.

I think they were described along those lines (or other similies) earlier in this thread, though you did delete a couple of your posts last summer early in the thread chain, so there are a couple of posts of me replying to quotes from within your posts where the trackback comments just lead to a dead link. Ah well, no hard feelings.

It's unlikely that my fund pick will be able to produce the same 10-15 year return as yours as it isn't a 100% equity portfolio, but whatever it does achieve is likely to be lower volatility. In my book, 'success' is achieving the objective for Jellydream, rather than going balls-out for the best possible return. I would still stand by my earlier comments that a diversified 'collective investment scheme' is more suitable than stockpicking, especially for an inexperienced investor - a majority of stocks for 2020 year-to-date are in negative territory and some of the market movements seen in the last year would have been a very tough place to try to 'learn' stock selection and research.

For example if Jellydream had gone as suggested for largecap companies with high global non-sterling revenues, they might have settled on something like:

- Coca Cola, probably the best known, profitable and dividend-paying beverage giant;
- AT&T, multinational telecoms conglomerate.
Together, they are worth $420bn today. But each of them are worth 8% fewer dollars than they were worth this time last year even after adding on the dividends received along the way, and dollars themselves are worth 8% fewer pounds.

- Delta Airlines or American Airlines - last summer the largest carriers with dollar revenue. Delta down 49% from this time last year including divs received. American down 49% in share price which would be 48% when including dividends. The stats say the historic yield is 3-4% (last year dividends over current price) but the actual yield this quarter is 0% because they only paid the first 3 quarterly dividends and have stopped paying to try to stay solvent. Again, the 'losing half your starting money' is in dollars, and dollars themselves lost 8% in pounds.

- Exxon Mobil - a monster energy business, worth $180bn - only the Saudis offer public market access to a bigger player in the industry. But including dividends received over the last year, investors have lost a third of their value in dollars (37% share price fall) and of course, more than that in pounds

- How about the tech sector - tech is always the future, so nobody would have been surprised to see gains posted by Microsoft, Google, Tencent, Apple, Samsung, Taiwan Semi etc, although we know any of these can drop huge percentages from time to time. Older tech stalwarts like IBM not so rosy, delivering a similar loss to Coke or AT&T mentioned above. Intel pretty flat.  Nokia lost half its value before the US cracking down on Chinese electronics firms such as Huawei helped European groups like Nokia and Ericsson move sharply upwards in recent months. For a pick in the $20-$40bn size range a year ago, perhaps some would have gone for Tesla (and got a 7x return) while others would have been tempted by Wirecard. Wirecard was worth about €20bn earlier this year. Since then it's lost 99% of its value after a fraud was uncovered that had been running unnoticed for years.

I suspect Jellydream would not have known which ones to pick and which to avoid, and whether to stick or twist with the same highly concentrated share pick for the next year and the next and the next etc. So I think a packaged mixed asset investment vehicle would be fine. The portfolio held by RIT Capital Partners didn't actually do badly compared to the median share or bond investment out there, with its net asset value per share flat from June to June. However, it's now trading at a discount to NAV instead of a premium, meaning a lower share price for anyone looking to exit.

[Deleted User]

The right to dismiss or ignore anything inconvenient is kind of the First Amendment of the social-media playground. In which case, terms like "meaningless" can simply be read as "pretend it didn't happen."
 I don't believe bowlhead ever meant that. I think bowlhead meant that his choice would prove superior in the long-run. Indeed, bowlhead went further, saying that a four-stock SIPP was "a barking mad idea", that "Someone may be a conscientious objector to using investment funds, and not think that using funds will give a more stable or reliable route to long term wealth generation than picking 4 blue chip stocks" which would be  "something that might be expected to end in tears."

But that was last year, before a £77,000 delta. Now, bowlhead is saying, rather, "It's unlikely that my fund pick will be able to produce the same 10-15 year return as yours as it isn't a 100% equity portfolio, but whatever it does achieve is likely to be lower volatility. In my book, 'success' is achieving the objective for Jellydream." 

Isn't there something terribly patronising about that position? I won't speak for Jellydream but it may well have occurred to him that, when he wants to de-risk, he could simply liquidate his 4-stock SIPP  and wait to see how many years it takes for bowlhead's portfolio to catch up (I would never recommend that other than for illustrative purposes).

Second Amendment of the SM playground is the right to take offence. I did not delete any of my posts on this thread.

AnotherJoe

bowlhead99 said:

ZingPowZing said:

bowlhead99 said:

ZingPowZing said:

bowlhead99 said:
Here you go - congrats:

Much appreciated, for sure.

No problem - I'm sure there's no need to remind avid followers of this thread of my weasel-words mentioned on Jellydream's thread ahead of you setting up the 'challenge':

"Sure, why not. Loser pays £100 to the charity of the winner's choice after a year, while the winner acknowledges that a 1-year return is meaningless?" 

I would not hear of them described as "weasel words" bowlhead; rather, an affirmation of faith that, over time, your approach will prove more successful. Which I find admirable.

I think they were described along those lines (or other similies) earlier in this thread, though you did delete a couple of your posts last summer early in the thread chain, so there are a couple of posts of me replying to quotes from within your posts where the trackback comments just lead to a dead link. Ah well, no hard feelings.

It's unlikely that my fund pick will be able to produce the same 10-15 year return as yours as it isn't a 100% equity portfolio, but whatever it does achieve is likely to be lower volatility. In my book, 'success' is achieving the objective for Jellydream, rather than going balls-out for the best possible return. I would still stand by my earlier comments that a diversified 'collective investment scheme' is more suitable than stockpicking, especially for an inexperienced investor - a majority of stocks for 2020 year-to-date are in negative territory and some of the market movements seen in the last year would have been a very tough place to try to 'learn' stock selection and research.

For example if Jellydream had gone as suggested for largecap companies with high global non-sterling revenues, they might have settled on something like:

- Coca Cola, probably the best known, profitable and dividend-paying beverage giant;
- AT&T, multinational telecoms conglomerate.
Together, they are worth $420bn today. But each of them are worth 8% fewer dollars than they were worth this time last year even after adding on the dividends received along the way, and dollars themselves are worth 8% fewer pounds.

- Delta Airlines or American Airlines - last summer the largest carriers with dollar revenue. Delta down 49% from this time last year including divs received. American down 49% in share price which would be 48% when including dividends. The stats say the historic yield is 3-4% (last year dividends over current price) but the actual yield this quarter is 0% because they only paid the first 3 quarterly dividends and have stopped paying to try to stay solvent. Again, the 'losing half your starting money' is in dollars, and dollars themselves lost 8% in pounds.

- Exxon Mobil - a monster energy business, worth $180bn - only the Saudis offer public market access to a bigger player in the industry. But including dividends received over the last year, investors have lost a third of their value in dollars (37% share price fall) and of course, more than that in pounds

- How about the tech sector - tech is always the future, so nobody would have been surprised to see gains posted by Microsoft, Google, Tencent, Apple, Samsung, Taiwan Semi etc, although we know any of these can drop huge percentages from time to time. Older tech stalwarts like IBM not so rosy, delivering a similar loss to Coke or AT&T mentioned above. Intel pretty flat.  Nokia lost half its value before the US cracking down on Chinese electronics firms such as Huawei helped European groups like Nokia and Ericsson move sharply upwards in recent months. For a pick in the $20-$40bn size range a year ago, perhaps some would have gone for Tesla (and got a 7x return) while others would have been tempted by Wirecard. Wirecard was worth about €20bn earlier this year. Since then it's lost 99% of its value after a fraud was uncovered that had been running unnoticed for years.

I suspect Jellydream would not have known which ones to pick and which to avoid, and whether to stick or twist with the same highly concentrated share pick for the next year and the next and the next etc. So I think a packaged mixed asset investment vehicle would be fine. The portfolio held by RIT Capital Partners didn't actually do badly compared to the median share or bond investment out there, with its net asset value per share flat from June to June. However, it's now trading at a discount to NAV instead of a premium, meaning a lower share price for anyone looking to exit.

Without especially wishing to blow my own trumpet, I don't think my IT and single company picks did too shabbily, being tech/renewables based 

All ones I hold (didn't see the point otherwise )  and I haven't checked since the past weeks 165% number* but sure both portfolios will be up at least 150%,  so my money was where my mouth is, except there's considerably more money now. 

P.s. And even my "boring" index based global SIPP was up 3.5% which is better Than RIT and their fancy dan algorithms and people in suits and high charges 

* my iMac died after a power cut last week so I'm waiting for the replacement until I can retrieve my spreadsheet from a backup, main consolation is it's been paid for many times over by Apple dividends let alone share growth. 

[Deleted User]

Who wants to stick with the fund option for the next ten years?

The outlook is always uncertain but the consequences of changing horses or inaction regarding these choices over the last ten years are well worth exploring.  

The difference in value is stark - the matter of an extra 0 - but it is interesting to compare the performance of four stocks of two distinct types over a decade; even more illuminating is the cumulative effect of annual "rebalancing" .

(edit) Relevant figures available for anyone slightly too lazy but not too fixed in ideas to consider them.

[Deleted User]

TBC15 said:

darkidoe said:

This reminds me of the Buffet 10 year bet. You guys should keep going!

10yrs with annual updates sounds good.

Fine by me.

For reference,
Y1 dividend income:
ZPZ portfolio £5050 (glaxo ex div for 08/10 not included)
Following a policy of investing in the best performing share (as opposed to traditional "rebalancing") ZPZ to purchase 40 AAPL shares at £100, raising the holding to a tidy 1000 post-split, with £1000 cash c/f to Y2. 

bowlhead portfolio £2686, equivalent to 148 shares in RCP.

TBC15

ZingPowZing said:

TBC15 said:

darkidoe said:

This reminds me of the Buffet 10 year bet. You guys should keep going!

10yrs with annual updates sounds good.

Fine by me.

For reference,
Y1 dividend income:
ZPZ portfolio £5050 (glaxo ex div for 08/10 not included)
Following a policy of investing in the best performing share (as opposed to traditional "rebalancing") ZPZ to purchase 40 AAPL shares at £100, raising the holding to a tidy 1000 post-split, with £1000 cash c/f to Y2. 

bowlhead portfolio £2686, equivalent to 148 shares in RCP.

Great see you in 2021.

DiggerUK

OK, I can make out that ZingPowZing showed a better performance than bowlhead,  because confirmation of the  gentlemen's (or gentlewomens; or gentlexmens) honour is shown with a charitable receipt.
But I still can't find what the original £160,000 for both contestants grew to.......was it greater than £191,245.22..._

Prism

DiggerUK said:

OK, I can make out that ZingPowZing showed a better performance than bowlhead,  because confirmation of the  gentlemen's (or gentlewomens; or gentlexmens) honour is shown with a charitable receipt.
But I still can't find what the original £160,000 for both contestants grew to.......was it greater than £191,245.22..._

ZingPowZing had a total of £225,120 and Bowlhead £149,536