Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.
Hi Bob, as others have mentioned jibs was working on A similar idea. here is his abandoned forum. AIM RE-bal
If your group is looking for trading ideas check out JOB. It's under the radar, low floater, low OS and a solid company. Trading at .165 with a third party target set at .40 short term.
Thanks, K.
I found the website as I was scrolling though his posting history. I wasn't very much attracted to his example , nor to his explanation of the method. The original (as far as I know) article in Stocks & Commodities magazine in 1998, was much more thorough and didn't imply that this was for "cheap" (very low price) stocks, as did Jibes' comments.
I am not trying to criticize Jibes, but just saying that, if I had read his site first, I would not have given the method a second thought. I would not want to AIM a $3-$5 stock.
Bob
Hi Bob,
I think it was the AIM REBAL board, but not sure.
His website has a link(at the top-left) to a free shares document.
Best,K
Bob
AIM ( Toms board) is much more straight forward.
Toofuzzy
Hi lostcowboy, I don't find the other spreadsheets when I click your link.
Karal,
Thanks for that link. I have read quite a few posts by Jibes over several of the AIM boards, but do not remember any reference to Free Shares, so I appreciate that link. It could simply mean that the "Free" shares did not mean anything to me at the time and I just "skimmed" over them. Can you tell me on which IHub site he wrote about this? I will trace it down by his user name, but that info will help narrow down the field.
Bob
Hi Bob,
Jibes was writing about Freeshares on these forums 10 years ago.
He also had the AIM REBAL forum here on IHUB.
http://jibes0.tripod.com/trend/trendseekers.html
Best Regards,K
Thanks for your response, Tom.
That is what I had in mind when I decided to post the idea. I think of TooFuzzy's oft times suggested, "When you are beginning AIM, start with one position and work it for two or three years before starting another position". This ZCA procedure could easily fit into that process. The main difference that I see with ZCA is that this is a deliberate goal, with AIM it is a pleasant side effect.
The trade sizes wouldn't have to be large. The first example required $10,000 and the second would require about $6,600, nor would the process require "round lots" of 100 shares, or multiples, thereof. But it might be a way to "work your way up to" a solid "Core" position that could be AIMed.
Bob
Hi Bob, Re: Zero cost Averaging...................
I don't think we've ever had a direct discussion on this on the AIM boards. However, several have discussed over time the pleasant point in time when essentially all remaining shares of a holding are "free." That's the point when AIM has improved the portfolio value to the point that the initial purchase has been paid for through either capital appreciation or cyclical AIM trading.
It's been referred to as reaching a point when we're playing with the "house's" money. Of course, until one removes one's own money from the AIM program, we're all still playing with a combination of our own and the House's.
There have been times when I've arbitrarily removed $$$ from an AIM holding to start a new one. Usually I've taken out my 'seed money' and started the new AIM and let the remainder run.
I think the Zero Cost Averaging (ZCA) method does similar things, but in far larger trade sizes. It would seem a great way to build diversification in a portfolio by starting up new ZCAs with each completed one. Sort of like saving dried Marigold seeds from one year to start a new batch the next. The first ones cost some $$$ but everything after that comes at a very attractive cost!
Clifford,
Do you know anything about "Zero Cost Averaging"? I have read an article in Stocks & Commodities magazine by Thomas Bulkowski and another (earlier, 1998) article by Terrance Quinn & Kristen Quinn.
They describe two basic techniques to accomplish their goal of investing in a particular stock until it reaches the goal of being able to sell enough shares to return the original purchase costs to the investor, but still retain numerous shares of the stock, where the cost-basis would be $0.00. The idea is to accumulate enough "free" shares to satisfy that portion of a diversified portfolio, and then do the same procedure on another stock, and another, and another.
The first technique is to figure out ahead of time how many shares you must purchase so that when the share price gets to your target, you sell a portion, but keep the "freebies".
Example: Buy 500 share of XYZ at $20 per share. This costs $10,000. When the share price of XYZ reaches $25, the investor sells 400 shares. $400 X $25 = $10,000, with 100 shares left over.
Since not all stocks go directly to their "target" price, the second technique is for stocks that "oscillate". You are wanting to hold a position in ZYX for your portfolio and it is priced at $12. You decide that you will increase the number of shares by 50% when the price falls 25% and you will sell 50% of the original number of shares when the price rises 25% from this initial value. 25% of $12 is $3,so you are looking at $3 increments. You buy 400 shares at $12 and the price falls to $9 (-25%), so you buy another 200 shares. Then the price rises back to $12 and you sell 200 of the 600 shares you hold. You now have 400 shares again.
If the price rises another $3 to $15, you sell 300 shares for $4500 and you have 100 "free" shares plus $300 extra. But if the price falls again to $9, you buy another 200 shares, for a total of 600 shares. When price goes back to $12, you sell 500 shares and have 100 shares at zero cost. This does not include commissions or taxes, but gives an idea of the procedure.
To read what Bulkowski has written on the subject, simply Google "Zero Cost Averaging" and follow the links. He has quite a few articles at the insert-text-here.
I believe this thinking fits most of the investors "mind set" who follow this board and Tom's AIM board. I have not seen this discussed anywhere until I read the articles in "S&C".
Regards,
Bob
Sure,Synchrovest spreadsheet
In the header at the bottom is a link to the rest of the spreadsheets.
Can anyone help me out with a link to the Synchrovest spreadsheet?
Hi Info
This particular plan is ASSET ALLOCATION as opposed to dollar cost averaging.
To keep your allocation where you want it you rebalance once in awhile. You can use additional cash to rebalance with by adding to the total account.
Re dollar cost averaging:
I have thought of figuring out how much you would have to add each year with a 10% return to get 20 times what you need to live on (minus social Security etc)
So you would come up with some $ amount like $5,000 / year compounded at 10%
So first year you should have $5000
next year $ 10,500
third year 16,050
etc
If you have more than you need to be on track then put it in to CASH (don't count the CASH as part of the account)
If you are below what you are supposed to have use some of the CASH account to buy more stock.
Using Twinvest/Syncrovest where there is an actual systematic allocation to stock probably makes even more sence. The point is to figure out the glide path you need to get where you want and to stick to it. This does not address ASSET ALLOCATION which my other post did.
Toofuzzy
Hi tf
That one has been around for while. I do dca. I'm looking to enhance its efficy.
That is why I'm interested in systematic plans. Over lump sums.
Info
Hi Tom
>>>>It sounds like your real time example also includes further contributions. That would complicate matters. It sounds like your method does a good job of anticipating that. <<<
Typically I would use the new contributions to rebalance with
In my friends case I knew new money would be added every year and last year instead of possibly selling some stock I assumed the next IRA contribution was already there. Last month when I looked at it for the annual rebalance it was almost perfect for where I wanted it to be.
I will look at it again in a year.
Eventually I want to put the cash in to TLT (when rates are higher) but I will sit on it for now.
Toofuzzy
Hi Toof, Re: Rebalancing............
With a highly non correlated portfolio in a perfect world rebalancing should almost always work just right. (selling the surplus gains and buying the deepest discounts. Its when there is too much correlation in direction of change in a given year but not in the magnitude of change that inefficiencies can occur.
Maybe the Rebalance idea could include a rule to minimize the effect of "all ships rising."
It sounds like your real time example also includes further contributions. That would complicate matters. It sounds like your method does a good job of anticipating that.
Best regards,
Hi Tom
I suppose that MIGHT happen but a LOT more money will move to fixed income in the example you gave.
You can always not rebalance for a small change in value also. For instance I did not rebalance a friend's account this year because :
1) I accounted for the cash she would be adding this year when I rebalanced last year (I left stocks just a little heavy
2) All the holdings are +- a few % of where I want them
Toofuzzy
Hi Toof, That's a good, simple plan.
My only objection to Rebalance is that it can force buying in a component that's not "down" in price. If we have a portfolio of ETFs for Large Value, Small Value, Foreign, REIT and Bonds and all are "up" for the year, but let's say Foreign is up only 10% while the rest are up between 15% and 25% that year. Rebalancing will trim back the ones that are "up" the most - Good Thing. But Rebalancing will also be increasing the ownership in the "worst performner" which is still 10% higher than a year earlier - Bad Thing.
Even so, simple rebalance is still better than what most individual investors do.
Best regards, Tom
I have something even more simpler >grin<
1) Decide what you want to own (let's say Large Value, Small Value, Foreign, REIT, Bond ) Use ETFs. Funds can not go to zero.
2) Keep a % = to your age in Bonds (short term till rates increase)
3) With the rest of the money put an = % in to the rest of the securities.
4) Go sailing or play golf
5) Rebalance once / year if needed
Toofuzzy
>>>You can also try toofuzzys suggestion on a simple investing system.<<<
Which one?
Toofuzzy
PS By the way I just thought of a ladder system (Might be how they all work!)
1) Decide your ladder trade points (10% steps ? )
2) You trade at each step a set DOLLAR amount
So every buy is 10% more shares than you sold at the one higher rung.
3) You can plan in advance how big a drawdown you want to allow for by the amount of cash you set aside.
Hi lc bb
You can dampen the buy recommendations by taking square root of the greater than 1 multiplier.
Thus 1.2 1 square root would be 1.1. You can even use the cube root if you wanted.You can also prevent cash burn by having a maximum on multipliers over 1.
You can wait for a minimal downward movement before buying as defined by your own evaluation.
such as a 10 percent or 15 percent price movement. That limits also cash burn in not buying as frequently.
In my own playing with synchrovest I found It works best with volatility. But the real world dealing with the movements on a volatile issue can be nerve wrecking.
I know Don Carlson had a ladder system that you might find interesting. It was called easy money or such as well as it was called ladder to success.
You can also try toofuzzys suggestion on a simple investing system. Ill have to look up his post number
infooverload
LC,
I am not the same "style" investor as is Ocroft, so his decision to sell after AIM shows him a 20% gain, while it is good for him (he invests in Stocks). I use market ETFs, so I am more inclined to use the same method for Sells as for Buys, that is, wait until the Sell recommendations end and then sell, but I am not going to wait a month to see that signal.
Hence, my interest in the Multiplier. I am trying to develope a method to use it for timing the market. I have already written about buying only when the Multiplier is above 1.00, and this works fairly well -- it has a lower Avg Cost Per Share, but doesn't buy as many shares, so it shows a larger profit on a smaller position. I also tried Ocroft's idea, by waiting until the Multi dropped back under 1.00, and then purchased all the shares called for -- it didn't make very many purchases, and the gains were lower because the price, when the Multi went down, went up, so the position cost more.
My next experiment, was to see how SynchroVest did on timing "bottoms". I set up another SS, but used DAILY price data, from 1/2/2009 to 5/1/2009. Almost this entire period, the Multi was over 1.00, but it increased dramatically in late Feb thru early March, and the absolute, highest value was 1.244 on March 9, 2009 ( the "bottom"). I highlighted all the values of Multi above 1.10 and noticed that it dropped UNDER 1.10 on March 12th, and then dropped below 1.00 on March 23rd. Either of those date would have been "wonderful" entry points for IWM (it also would have been good for almost any stock). I also want to try this on the Oct '02 and Mar '03 "bottoms", to verify the timing aspect.
I also want to try this technique for the "Highs" of the market (since we are now at an all-time high) and look for Multi to be at some kind of "Low". Right now, the Multi on IWM is at 0.898, on a Daily SS, so I've highlighted those days for being under 0.90. I will also try this on the highs of 2000 and 2007.
Bob
LC,
Sorry to keep pestering you (you don't seem really interested in my project), but you know more about Synchrovest than anyone else I'm aware of, so I'm going at it again.
I've already told you that in my IRA Account, I try to TIME the market moves and enter ALL-IN and ALL-OUT, but that I'm looking for something a little more long-term for my taxable account. This is why I was (and am) interested in Ocroft's Modification of AIM, but I actually prefer SynchroVest (from what I know of it), because it allows for regular contributions (which AIM doesn't like).
My primary gripe about SynchroVest, has been that it puts the largest amounts of money in too soon after a sale. A few years ago, I set up a SynchroVest SS for the ETF "SPY" (S&P 500 ETF), with prices going back to June 1995. SynchroVest did pretty well on that rising market into the high in Sept/Oct of 2000, and then the downturn hit, and hit hard. The Investment Multiplier went over 1.00 early in 2001, and, because there was a large pot of money available from the prior sale in 1999, the multiplier was using copious amounts of cash. Even though the Multiplier continued to get bigger as the market went down, there was a smaller amount of cash for it to use, and by the time the market hit its Lows in Oct '02 and Mar '03, there wasn't much more cash than the monthly contribution. (A Multiplier of 1.095 X $50,000 Cash, uses much more cash than a Multiplier of 1.350 X $2,500). So, the Multiplier grew larger, but the actual dollars, spent on SPY, diminished.
My thinking at the time, was that this would be a "disaster" for anyone who had tried to SynchroVest the ETF "QQQ" (NASDAQ 100 ETF), because it has never come close (and probably never will) to its 2000 peak, so the average cost of any shares purchased, likely wouldn't come down enough to see a profit. So, I gave up on it. Then, Ocroft posted on the AIM Board.
Bob
I haven't done any testing like that, but it does not seem to bad a idea.
LC,
I had an error in my SS. The gain of the Modified SV for the first leg should be 38.25%, not the 60%+ in my previous post. ( I wondered why it was so much higher than the others)?
Bob
LC,
When I Updated my IWM-SYNCHROVEST SS, I also added a few more columns to try an experiment. I named that portion, The Modified SYNCHROVEST. I have columns for # Shares Purchased, Cost of Shares, Total Shares, Total Cost, & GAIN/LOSS.
I ran it parallel to the 30% SS and used that SS info for the decisions. The technique was to Buy ONLY when the Investment Multiplier, for a particular month, was >=1.00. I would then buy all the stock that the 30% SS had purchased up to that point (that is, the total number of shares purchased by the 30% SS). If the next month was also above 1.00, I would buy the number of shares that the 30% SS purchased for that month, etc. This method allowed me to buy all my stock at the lowest prices only, somewhat similar to Ocroft's method with AIM. If there were months in between that were under 1.00, I just collect Cash, and then would buy the amount of shares that the 30% SS had purchased in that interim, when there was another IM above 1.00. The last several months of each of the legs, had no IM above 1.00, because Prices were rising to reach the 30% Sell Point.
In the first leg, which lasted 42 months, I made only 22 purchases -- I only bought 784 shares, compared to 866 shares for the 30% SS, but the Average Cost was $35.80, compared to $43.37. This caused the GAIN to be 62.45% for that leg, compared to 34.08% in the SS. The other legs were similar, but not as great a difference (2003 was very strong). The second leg, from 2/04 to 5/06, only had two purchases, with Avg Cost = $53.25 for 296 shares, while the SS had 562 shares, at an Avg Cost of $59.14 (this was during the continuing Up Trend in the market).
Have you run tests using this method of controlling Buys? What do you think of this modification?
Bob
HI Bob, the calculation is correct for a simple profit. but you can not divide it by the number of years and get the correct interest rate.
LC,
The reason I thought it might be around 9%, was that the individual legs were all above 9%, except the third leg (which was the longest) at about 7%. The SS is set up in the Gain/Loss column, to calculate (((Total Shares*Current Price)-Total Costs)/Total Costs). Is this the proper formula? Then I divided the gain from the Sale by the number of years, in decimal form, ie, 3.5 (for 42 months), 2.25 (for 27 months), 4.5833 (for 55 months), and 2.4166 (for 29 months). But even 6.5%, with this little effort, is nothing to "sneeze" at.
It's true that the 30% Sale was arbitrary -- I don't remember my reasons from a year or two ago for selecting that particular number, probably something I read on your Board. But I do know that IWM is a "general market" ETF (like SPY) and moves slowly, so I was inclined to go for the quicker exit,to ratchet up some excess cash.
My personal inclination toward investing in the stock market is to "TIME" the entries and exits, and go "All-In" and "All-Out". Figuring the Gain/Loss for this type of investing is pretty clear-cut. (This is being done in a Roth IRA trading account, so there are no tax considerations). But stepping-in, over a period of time is a different calculation, and one I do not remember.
But recently, my ability to contribute monthly has improved (I am retired and have learned to live on less than I receive each month), so I am inclined to "look into" an approach like SYNCHROVEST. That is why I updated the SS to current. These savings are going into a "Taxable" account, and I like the idea that some profits will be "long-term capital gains", rather than, only, the "Short-Term" I would be dealing with, following my present "Modus Operandi".
Bob
Hi Bob, not sure you can get 9% gain per year, I have not run the numbers.
Are you sure you want to sell at 30%, why not 50%, just wondering.
About your ARR, in excel you would want to use the IRR function, but I don't know how to set that up.
I ran your numbers on my financial calculator.
I put in a positive $245,188.26 as the FV(future value,) -$1,000.00 as the pmt(payment), 156 as N(number of payments), and calculated for I/Y(interest rate per year).
I got a interest of 6.56% for the 13 years.
Hope that helps.
Clifford,
I think I don't have any idea of how to correctly figure the Profit. If I got a gain of +34.08% on the first leg (3 years, 6 months), and divide that gain by the 42 months, I get about 9.7% per year (that would be ARR, right?), right?
The next leg gained +31.08% (27 months) and gives me about 13.8% per year. The third leg gained 32.33% (4 years, 7 months = 4.5833)and gives me ~7.05% per year. The last completed leg had a gain of 31.58% (2 years, 5 months)and gives a gain of 13.07%.
There is no way those numbers can come out to ~4.4% per year, as per my previous post,so I am using the wrong numbers somewhere.
I would like to see that per year average gain to be, at least, 9%, or so, because my next step is better. I realize that the CASH position does not include Interest or Dividends.
HELP!!!!
Bob
Clifford,
A couple of yeas ago, I made up an Excel SS for SYNCHROVEST, using IWM. I added $1,000 per month (Base Investment = $750) and ran it to a +30% Gain, then sold. The next month, I started a new run. The position used the Closing Price on the first Friday of each month, for entry, and began Aug 2000 and runs up to July 2013. My first sale came on Feb 2004 (+34.08%), the next on May 2006 (+31.08%), the third on Dec 2010 (+32.33%), and the last sale occurred on May 2013 (+31.58%).
As of this month, it has Total Invested as $156,000, with a CASH pile of $243,045.09 and 22 shares worth $2,143.17, for a Current Profit of $89,237.83 for the 13 years. I think that comes out to an ARR of around 4.4% ($89,237.83 /$156,000 = 57.2% / 13). This does not include any interest gained on the Cash portion. I know we haven't received very much interest over the last 4 years, but, before that the interest rates were okay. Please correct my math, if needed. I don't know how to figure the CROR.
In Oct 2002, the G/L was -21.8%, and Mar 2009, was -38.3%, not too bad, since IWM lost nearly 60% in 2008 to Mar 2009.
Bob
Hi Marc,
How or what are the rules for choosing an average twinvest price. HOw or what are the rules for using high low twinvest How do you combine both?
Standard Twinvest uses your starting stock price, Average twinvest uses a moving average that you have to put in. For the high/low you would us the 52 week high/low price
Hi LOstcowboy
I read the foreign website . It is wrong to plagiarize, Even if it is in the public domain.
How or what are the rules for choosing an average twinvest price. HOw or what are the rules for using high low twinvest How do you combine both?
Probably since Lichellos revised edition of super power investing has anything significant came about.
He spent three years exploring a better dollar cost averaging. Likewise I am sure you also spent many of hours trying to perfect twinvest. My hat is off to you.
I purchased his revised paper back edition of Super power investing.In the last chapter he recommends using blue chips as stocks. He uses 1/2 way to the wall to regulate cash reserve spending.
I appreciate his efforts your efforts and toms and conrads efforts .
Yes Neko it is AIM, and I think the spreadsheet is from AIM users web site.
HI lc
I think it is aim.
Neko
Hi Lostcowboy
I followed your reference to the spanish site on twinvest.
They mentioned a GAD system? Is this an aim system or a twinvest system? Or something new? would you know?
Neko
Good morning LC, Re: Greatest Compliments.................
It is said that one of the greatest compliments we can receive is Plagiarism!
About 13 years ago I struggled with this same sort of thing. An investment advisor in Florida liked my AIM web site so well, he copied much of it (including the i-Wave database) and told clients it was his own secret sauce for money management.
I don't know how long he'd been using it before it came to my attention. In handouts to clients he'd not even bothered to notice the AIM-Users.com web address at the bottom of each page he'd printed from my site! That's how I learned about it. Someone contacted me and asked what my relationship was with that fellow in FL.
It's amazing what happens sometimes with stuff we put up in the Public Domain for the benefit of All.
It's interesting to me that the fellow in your case worked on setting up a non-English site and used your stuff. I wonder if there's other advisors in non-English countries that may have "borrowed" from me, too!
Best regards,
I came across this Spanish site talking about AIM,Twinvest, and Synchrovest. twinvest
Here is the translated version. translated version
Turns out the spreadsheets are the ones that I made, with just the labels changed to Spanish. If he had given me credit for my hard work I would not be mad, but he makes it sound like he did all the work,so he wants people to give him donations for the spreadsheets! Note the AIM spreadsheet is the one from AIM user web site
Hi 1Step, sorry about not getting back to you sooner. I have been to that site "moneytology" in 2010 I believe, I did suggest that he check out Synchrovest. I did not see any response.
Here is my opinion of DCA and what can be done to improve it, From post 10.
In her book Practical Formulas for Successful Investing by Lucile Tomlinson, Mrs. Tomlinson has a chart that shows how long it would take for a DCA plan to reach 40% profit, the time period varied from 2 1/2 years to 10 1/2 years long, most were about 5 years long. She seemed to be recommending stopping the plan at that point, as she goes on to say that after reaching 40% the plan tended to just follow with the market. Another thing she said was that If one were to combined a DCA plan with a Constant ratio plan one could get greater profits.
In other words later in a DCA plan it becomes noneffective.
Michael Edleson, In his book Value Averaging also felt that DCA becomes noneffective for long term investing. He came up with two plans in his book, one called growth DCA and the other called Value Averaging.
About Twinvest, Mr Lichello added the chapter on Twinvest in the second edition of his AIM book, why did he not just add a chapter on Synchrovest? I think it had to do with copyright law, book contracts, and the fact that he used two different publishing companies.
It is my feeling that the different investing methods preform in this order, from lest to most.
DCA
Twinvest
DCA plan with a Constant ratio plan
Value Averaging
Synchrovest with selling set at 100% profit, Lichello's original setting.
Synchrovest with selling set at 50% profit, I got the Ideal of reducing the selling setting from Mrs. Tomlinson's 40% sell setting.
When using the AIM data set from the AIM book, 10, 8, 5,4, 5, 8, 10, 8, 5, 4, 8, and repeat. Synchrovest with sell set at 50% quickly pulls away from all other investing methods. this is due to two things Synchrovest always sells all stock, so it has very few stocks at risk during the start of the next bear market. Also Synchrovest has a very aggressive buying policy during the market crashes.
Congratulations on the #700 Post Grub!!!
Hi Tom ,LC
thank you
1step
Hi One_S,
Re: Twinvest.................
1) I always started with the NAV or share price at the time of the startup. The code doesn't really care if the market is over or under priced at the time. It will build up equity and cash over the long run.
2) The way I ended several Twinvest accounts was when they became large enough to become AIM. I stopped funding it monthly and then just flipped the switch to AIM. I used the average cost/share of all the Twinvest buying in one case and that worked okay at the time. In another I just used the "today" price for the date I made the conversion.
I left the Equity/Cash ratio where it was from Twinvest and let AIM take over that work.
So, converting to AIM essentially gets the "selling procedure" under way.
3) I continued to monthly fund a new Twinvest after the latest one had been converted to AIM.
Best regards, Tom
Hi Tom ,Lostcowboy
In your experience what is the most appropiate number or way to set the twinvest code. Is it the high, is it the low , their average or what.
In other words what would you two choose.
Again i know it is a generalization.
The web site said twinvest needs a selling procedure. What would you two use as an effective practical recommendation.
Again this is for discussion only and for future thought only. No one should consider this as a recommendation to be carried out
1step.
Hi Step,
Re: Twinvest, DCA and Value averaging...........
Here's his comparitive spreadsheet:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?key=0AqOc0k5dqWZycmFwUmRJcHpOSWN3X1lvbUk5RFBKaFE#gid=0
His results and my testing concur that Twinvest is quite powerful. It's DCA with a brain.
Best regards,
Hi lost cow boy
google moneytology April 18 2008
discussion and comparison of dca value average twinvest
1step
Hi Karw
Do you still use your cash system. Do you have the spread sheet I know it is many years later That your are always evolving.
I would like to try it. If you still have it.
My email is trainxxx2018.gmail . No xs. I dont want spam.
Merry christmas
1step
Followers
|
63
|
Posters
|
|
Posts (Today)
|
0
|
Posts (Total)
|
796
|
Created
|
02/11/02
|
Type
|
Free
|
Moderator lostcowboy | |||
Assistants |
This is off the topic of investing, but it is important to me so I am adding it here.
I was Raped in 1968 and never got any help for it. Recently I went looking and found a good web site.
MaleSurvivor If you are a male survivor of sexual abuse or know of someone. Please send them to the web site. If you are a wife or companion of a guy who was sexually abused feel free to come also, as there is a section of the site for you also.
Pandora's Aquarium If you are a female survivor of sexual abuse or know of someone. Please send them to the web site.
I need to set the record straight here, I have never invested in a stock or fund in my life. I am disabled and still is debt. If I ever get out of debt, I plan on starting some type of systematic investing plan. The goal of this board is to come up with the best plan. Which is why I have been dissecting every plan I come across. I am Interested In discussing All types of Formula Plans that involve investing new money each time period.
Here are the Formula plans that I currently know about:
Dollar Cost Averaging Please see #msg-271433 & #msg-272299 & #msg-336248
Twinvest by Robert Lichello from his book (How to make a $1,000,000 in the stock market automatically!) Please see #msg-276065
Invest% Please see #msg-276727
Value Averaging by Edleson from his book (Value Averaging) Please read #msg-277237 https://www.amazon.com/Value-Averaging-Strategy-Investment-Returns/dp/0470049774/, you can find the spreadsheets
here https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Value+Averaging%3A+The+Safe+and+Easy+Strategy+for+Higher+Investment+Returns-p-9781118044742
Synchrovest by Robert Lichello from his book (Super Power Investing) Please read #msg-309558 & #msg-277260
CASH karw came up with a plan that he calls CASH (Combined Aim Synchrovest Holding) please read #msg-281442 & #msg-283421
I am also aware of four formula plans that were designed for large amounts of money. They are:
The constant ratio plan
The variable ratio plan
The constant dollar plan
The AIM plan by Robert Lichello from his book (How to make a $1,000,000 in the stock market automatically!)
How to Improve Formula Plan Results! please read #msg-309430
Lostcowboy's Spreadsheets
Volume | |
Day Range: | |
Bid Price | |
Ask Price | |
Last Trade Time: |