Stocks to Hold for Next Ten Years.

AnotherJoe

OP, is it "cheating" to include ITs ?

Username999

RIO.L         Rio Tinto
BP.L           British Petroleum
PETS.L      Pets at Home
UU.L          United Utilities
USA.L        US Growth Trust

COST           Costco Wholesale Corporation
TSLA            Tesla
NIO              Chinese automobile manufacturer
SHLL           Hyliion Electric Truck Powertrains
TENCENT   Chinese multinational conglomerate

Wildcard: short NKLA - Nikola Corporation

jamei305

I'm sure at one point Enron, Kodak, Woolworths, Thomas Cook, ToysR'Us, WorldCom, PanAm, RBS, Parmalt, Polly Peck and Texaco were all attractive stocks to buy and hold for ten years.

adindas

BrockStoker said:

kinger101 said:

BrockStoker said:

A few people have pointed out that I and others neglected to post their "top ten" (or so) as the OP requested, so here is my current portfolio of stocks, although I'm not sure every stock will be held for the full term, but I hope that most will (and perhaps longer even if necessary):

Arrowhead

Biocryst

10x Genomics

One Medical

Amyris

Evofem

Virgin Galactic

Clovis

Cerus

Agenus

Axsome

Omeros

Amicus

Verastem

Aimmune

Edit to add: I should also point out that the vast majority of my investments are in funds. I see the individual stocks as more of just a "punt" - ie money I can afford to loose, although of course I will do my best for that not to happen.

My thread (with further info on my stocks) can be found here:

https://forums.moneysavingexpert.com/discussion/6083125/investing-in-biotech-stocks-my-experience-so-far

I'd be surprised if you even held two of those stocks in 10 years time.  Most are going to fail before then.  Any they don't might be bought my another company.

You could well be right. I can only hope.

Edit to add:

1. It might not be that far fetched. Many of them have been around for 10 years already, and in some cases for more than 20 years. Granted I would not want to be holding in 10 years if they keep going sideways, but obviously I'm hoping that won't be the case.

2. It will be interesting to come back to this thread in a decade and see what everyone's picks have done over that time - I'm betting that a lot of the big names people are throwing around here may not do much in that time, although obviously it's impossible to say which at this point in time. I'm putting a note in my diary either way. I say "diary", but since I don't have one, I'll make a note in a .txt document.

3. Everyone's reasons (and their objectives) for investing in individual stocks will be different. For me it's a gamble that I can multiply my original investment multiple times over. I think I stand a better chance of doing that by finding small companies that have a good product/products and (hopefully) most of their growth ahead of them, rather than larger companies which may well have most of their growth behind them.

I would argue that it's easier to "find the bottom" with a small company than a successful/long established company, and further to fall if that "successful" messes up, thus there is somewhat of a safety net with smaller companies in that aspect, although of course there are other potential pit falls - ultimately it comes down to how well you have picked your companies. That is another part of the strategy/idea behind my portfolio anyway.

How well this is going to work in a biotech context over a 10 year time-span is unclear, but it seems to be working so far. If I picked well then the companies should grow. Some will likely get bought out as you suggested, but even then I should still turn a profit, as long as there are not too many complete failures. I can only hope..

With exception with Moderna, Most of  Biotech stock are Penny Stocks. Penny Stock are very high risk and quite often subject to Pump and Dumb, Insider trading. The problem hete is that you will need to be extremely lucky to win a trading against the insider traders. But of course it is also very high reward if you are lucky. The problem here is that it is  difficult to find analysts or Robo analyst opinions about them because of lacking of information.

C_Mababejive

coachman12 said:

C_Mababejive said:

My personal advice is that i would never now hold individual stocks. I'd rather buy a diversified low cost tracker

You surely jest. Where is the fun and the ability to study, learn and follow the cry of the chase?

I know,,but i simply dont have time for all of that. I could easily see myself taking my eye off the ball and losing money. Its happened before !. I'm too busy with work and other stuff and anyway i simply dont have the expertise for it. Happy to admit that so im now happy to let the machine do the investing and maybe with some manager input.

adindas

Taking Advantage Stay at home / working from Home stocks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9Hn2nL1VZes&t=17s

I think It makes sense to focus on these stocks and the quality companies (Big Name with good fundamental) producing Vaccine for COVID-19 such as Pfizer, Astra Zeneca, Gilead Science, Moderna (to some extends) to benefit from COVID-19 stock market dip.

It is highly unlikely these Stay at home / working from Home stocks are in your index funds.

If you are taking this opportunity for your advatange you will beats the return of your index fund multiple times.

C_Mababejive

Thrugelmir said:

C_Mababejive said:

My personal advice is that i would never now hold individual stocks. I'd rather buy a diversified low cost tracker

Which index? There are now 70 more indexes than listed stocks..........

Well as some will know, im no expert. I simply dont have the time and expertise to stock pick and more than once, ive taken my eye off the ball and lost. I'm in the process of offloading individual stocks into diversified products.
Ive currently got 
Global tracker ex UK
CTY
SMT
VLS80 which im minded to cash in and dump it all in the global tracker

I know lots of people have great expertise and enjoy stockpicking and probably make good money out of it but im content to just let the market do its magic now. Its less stressful for me.

AnotherJoe

C_Mababejive said:

Thrugelmir said:

C_Mababejive said:

My personal advice is that i would never now hold individual stocks. I'd rather buy a diversified low cost tracker

Which index? There are now 70 more indexes than listed stocks..........

Well as some will know, im no expert. I simply dont have the time and expertise to stock pick and more than once, ive taken my eye off the ball and lost. I'm in the process of offloading individual stocks into diversified products.
Ive currently got 
Global tracker ex UK
CTY
SMT
VLS80 which im minded to cash in and dump it all in the global tracker

I know lots of people have great expertise and enjoy stockpicking and probably make good money out of it but im content to just let the market do its magic now. Its less stressful for me.

Sounds like a plan, awesome selection* and as you said, dump the VLS80 and may i suggest, put not in a general global tracker but in a global smaller companies fund. 

I'm currently planning to put some money in Baillie Gifford Global Discovery (Class B, Acc) Another alternative would be Smithson (SSON). (I've already got that so I'm hedging my bets).

*obvs I have some of these so they must be good !

Thrugelmir

jamei305 said:

I'm sure at one point Enron, Kodak, Woolworths, Thomas Cook, ToysR'Us, WorldCom, PanAm, RBS, Parmalt, Polly Peck and Texaco were all attractive stocks to buy and hold for ten years.

Polly Peck was a Wirecard. Many investors got sucked into the hype. 

RolandFlagg

For anyone interested watch videos of Cathie Wood on Youtube. She is CEO of Arc Invest who have ETFs which are unfortunately not available in this country. She has thoughts about disruptive stocks. Future companies that will put older style companies out of the business (like Netfilx did to Blockbuster). Tesla is her biggest holding (it's also the biggest holding of the highly successive Scottish Mortgage Investment fund). In one way she is the total opposite of Buffett. She believes Value stocks are dead. Growth stocks are the future, but because they are more volatile she does agree with Buffett that holding stocks for as long as possible is the way to go. She thinks a lot of analysis/fund managers are akin to flatearters. They only look at fundamentals, P/E ratios, what is happening next quarter etc...and can not see that a company like Tesla is valued the way it is because it will change the future. She sells Tesla stock but only once it's got the stage where it is more than 10% of the portfolio. She says that most managers are far too passive and trade too often to lock in profits, mainly due to the tech bubble in 2008. She also believes that tech companies have had a huge helping hand due to Covid-19, and the future of these companies has been fast-tracked.