2026 investments

Went ahead and shorted $BIRD today. Idk if I can live in a world where people fail at selling shoes and pivot to "AI computing". I am a noted clanker-hater though


lol it reminds me of the 2020-2021 NFT, Crypto craze, every **** company dropping headlines
 
  • Like
Reactions: CascadeClone
Went ahead and shorted $BIRD today. Idk if I can live in a world where people fail at selling shoes and pivot to "AI computing". I am a noted clanker-hater though
Watching this thing all day, figured it would start tumbling down last hour.

Cannot believe there won't be a ton of profit taking. You got in at the start of the market you triple your money

Normal share volume, 116,000. Today 263 million

Nuts
 
  • Wow
Reactions: Tailg8er
Watching this thing all day, figured it would start tumbling down last hour.

Cannot believe there won't be a ton of profit taking. You got in at the start of the market you triple your money

Normal share volume, 116,000. Today 263 million

Nuts
Never looked at it. 5 years ago it launched for 520 area. In a short time collapses. Now today it goes from 2.50 to almost 18. A wild ride.
 
Went ahead and shorted $BIRD today. Idk if I can live in a world where people fail at selling shoes and pivot to "AI computing". I am a noted clanker-hater though
Back in my day if you wanted your stock to explode overnight you just slipped the word "blockchain" into your latest earnings report.
 
One month in and been a pretty good run so far for the general stock market.

What are people looking at and keeping an eye on?
At my age, 75, everyone says I should be heavy in bonds and lower in stocks. Not often do i time it perfectly, but I changed all my investment accounts to 90% stocks and all my money markets to stocks 3 weeks ago and hit the lowest stock market day to make the changes. I plan on staying heavy in stocks this year. My kids inheritance is looking really good.
 
At my age, 75, everyone says I should be heavy in bonds and lower in stocks. Not often do i time it perfectly, but I changed all my investment accounts to 90% stocks and all my money markets to stocks 3 weeks ago and hit the lowest stock market day to make the changes. I plan on staying heavy in stocks this year. My kids inheritance is looking really good.
I have never liked bond funds. If a person is scared of a down market, go higher in higher paying dividends stocks.
 
Looks like the oil move is still moving :oops:

Surprised that equities aren’t declining on oil prices over the last 48 hours

I’m guessing the band snaps and either oil or equities gap down by end of week (but alas I’m not a day trader so I won’t move on that instinct)
 
I have never liked bond funds. If a person is scared of a down market, go higher in higher paying dividends stocks.
Bonds are the worst asset class for diversification from equities, except for all the other options.

I think more people should get directly into real estate, esp commercial. But its tougher to do, can't really do it passively as REITs have their own issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shadow
Looks like the oil move is still moving :oops:

Surprised that equities aren’t declining on oil prices over the last 48 hours

I’m guessing the band snaps and either oil or equities gap down by end of week (but alas I’m not a day trader so I won’t move on that instinct)
Equities are likely still increasing due to inflation projections, also why bonds are getting wrecked until a solution arrives.
 
At my age, 75, everyone says I should be heavy in bonds and lower in stocks....but I changed all my investment accounts to 90% stocks

Conventional wisdom might say that is too risky, but IMO, realistic stock risk becomes irrelevant once you reach a certain age, assuming you retired around 65 with a comfortable nest egg at that time.

The S&P 500 has doubled twice in the last 10 years, assuming dividends were reinvested. Ditto for a total stock market index. If you were 100% stocks that entire time, and the stock market lost half its value this year, your nest egg would rewind to what it was when you were 70. Back when you were also retired and living comfortably. If that sized nest egg supported you then, it can support you now.

If the 3 worst years in the history of the stock market repeated themselves back to back to back, you would rewind to about age 66 (-39%, -30% and -23%). In reality, the worst 5 year period in the history of the S&P 500 produced annualized losses of 6.6%. So when you are 80, you might have to get by like you were 72 or so if the market matches its worst 5 year period in history.

IMO, the real danger period is right after retirement, when your nest egg has grown just enough to retire. Losing half your portfolio at that point would truly suck. I am planning to retire in 2 years or so, and this is something I thinking about quite a bit.

H
 
Last edited:
IMO, the real danger period is right after retirement, when your nest egg has grown just enough to retire. Losing half your portfolio at that point would truly suck. I am planning to retire in 2 years or so, and this is something I thinking about quite a bit.

Yes but it also depends on the absolute size of your portfolio, and how you have structured it.

Say you have $2M total, nice round number.
If you pull out $300k to cash, and plan to spend $60k per year to cover 5 years expenses... then you are 85% equities. That's a lot.
Now if your equities get cut in half, well you have 5 years to recover that. And if it doesn't recover, you only need to sell low $60k and not all of it, and still have time to recover. You are fairly well insulated.

Now, if you only have $750k, its a different story. You NEED what you have invested to keep growing, and if you pull out $300k you really limit how long the money can last.

I guess my point is for retirement, look less at allocation %, and more at the timing and amount of money you will need to access. There's a "buckets" concept you can google which can explain it better than I can.
 
Casey’s keeps rocking. Up $279 for the year. Now at $835. Woo hoo.
 
Conventional wisdom might say that is too risky, but IMO, realistic stock risk becomes irrelevant once you reach a certain age, assuming you retired around 65 with a comfortable nest egg at that time.

The S&P 500 has doubled twice in the last 10 years, assuming dividends were reinvested. Ditto for a total stock market index. If you were 100% stocks that entire time, and the stock market lost half its value this year, your nest egg would rewind to what it was when you were 70. Back when you were also retired and living comfortably. If that sized nest egg supported you then, it can support you now.

If the 3 worst years in the history of the stock market repeated themselves back to back to back, you would rewind to about age 66 (-39%, -30% and -23%). In reality, the worst 5 year period in the history of the S&P 500 produced annualized losses of 6.6%. So when you are 80, you might have to get by like you were 72 or so if the market matches its worst 5 year period in history.

IMO, the real danger period is right after retirement, when your nest egg has grown just enough to retire. Losing half your portfolio at that point would truly suck. I am planning to retire in 2 years or so, and this is something I thinking about quite a bit.

H
With the amount of inflation in that time, I'm not sure winding back to 66 would be as comfortable. Even 70 wouldn't be the same. But you're still probably fine.
 
Casey’s keeps rocking. Up $279 for the year. Now at $835. Woo hoo.
I remember when they almost got bought by 711(?) like 15 years ago when they were trading in the $30 range.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kinch
Yes but it also depends on the absolute size of your portfolio, and how you have structured it.

Say you have $2M total, nice round number.
If you pull out $300k to cash, and plan to spend $60k per year to cover 5 years expenses... then you are 85% equities. That's a lot.
Now if your equities get cut in half, well you have 5 years to recover that. And if it doesn't recover, you only need to sell low $60k and not all of it, and still have time to recover. You are fairly well insulated.

Now, if you only have $750k, its a different story. You NEED what you have invested to keep growing, and if you pull out $300k you really limit how long the money can last.

I guess my point is for retirement, look less at allocation %, and more at the timing and amount of money you will need to access. There's a "buckets" concept you can google which can explain it better than I can.
I agree. The absolute starting point is what is my nest egg amount? Then, what do I want/need to live on. Finally, do u care about growing the nest egg for kids' inheritance, or do u want your last check to bounce?

Each of these questions needs to be answered and there is a separate decision tree for each answer. That is, there is not a single answer.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kinch
I agree. The absolute starting point is what is my nest egg amount? Then, what do I want/need to live on. Finally, do u care about growing the nest egg for kids' inheritance, or do u want your last check to bounce?

Each of these questions needs to be answered and there is a separate decision tree for each answer. That is, there is not a single answer.
The other big thing to think about is do I want my nest egg to fund a couple of years of nursing home expenses? That more than anything will make your last check bounce.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Mr.G.Spot