Texag5324 said:

---

knoxtom said:

---

I haven't read this thread in a while. I am the OP.


I posted in here a while back that I bought back into VOO. Wish I had gone for less traditional pick, but as I said, I am generally risk averse. VOO has been fine but everything else has blown it away.

I bought a lot more Bitcoin and I started a thread about buying a bunch of Soundhound and NVidia. Right now I am not sitting on much cash at all as I put a lot into Sound which is up a cool 63.12%.

My YTD is 43.2%. Lastb year was slightly higher. VOO has been the least profitable since I bought back in, up around 13%. NVIDIA is up 21%.


Overall, selling everything and buying back wasn't much either direction. I ended up with a lot more bitcoin. I have made a ton on Soundhound as I bought a lot at $4, sold at $18, got back in at around $11, and it is now $18 again. I am not going to repeat my Robinhood mistake again and am holding Soundhound for a few more years. I also won't sell the BTC and actually would like more.


AS for my only regret the past year, it was selling the Robinhood. I had a lot of it at $8 to $12 a share. When it rose I sold it all and almost tripled my money. I thought it had risen too fast and I could buy back in cheaper. It is now $125 or so. I f'ed that up... but on the other hand I used that money for BTC, Sound, and VOO. I still did fine, I just didn't hit the grand slam.

---

Knoxtom, you posted on this thread in April that you were 56 years old, and wanted to derisk some of your investments, which makes sense. But then you proceeded to buy a lot of Bitcoin and Soundhound, which is basically the opposite of derisking your investments lol. Im glad you made some money and everything worked out ok, but that couldve gone sideways for you as well.

I hope what newer investors can learn from this thread is to just stay the course, ignore the noise, and keep buying through the ups and the downs.

---

57 now.

Most of my worth is in the house, the business, 401k, and boring investments. I did go all bonds on the 401k but switched that back to boring old funds pretty soon thereafter. I don't consider bitcoin to be risky anymore, over the middle term (3-5 years).

As for Soundhound, you have to take risky investments some times or you will never get far ahead.

I also bought a near mint Walter Payton rookie card. Now that one is risky, but he was always my favorite player so WTH.

Diggity said:

---

whatever your opinion is on the inherent risk of bitcoin, picking one or two individual stocks and adding crypto is not a rational "de-risking" plan. It's the opposite of diversification.

That doesn't mean it can't be profitable, but the risk is very real.

---

Yeah, you're right in that scenario.

I do wish I had more of it though as I continue to de-risk my own portfolio.

Full details https://t.co/vUMMkrIZSy: Nvidia “invests” $100B in OpenAI, which spends it on Nvidia chips. AMD joins with a “$10s of B” deal + $0.01 warrants. Same dollars circle, booked twice—growth on paper, cash in circles.pic.twitter.com/txBgEhnWFE

— The Coastal Journal (@1CoastalJournal) October 6, 2025

wessimo said:

---

Full details https://t.co/vUMMkrIZSy: Nvidia “invests” $100B in OpenAI, which spends it on Nvidia chips. AMD joins with a “$10s of B” deal + $0.01 warrants. Same dollars circle, booked twice—growth on paper, cash in circles.pic.twitter.com/txBgEhnWFE

— The Coastal Journal (@1CoastalJournal) October 6, 2025

---

Such a bubble. Goodness.

YouBet said:

---

Such a bubble. Goodness.

---

One of the guys I watch on YT has been talking about this "round-tripping cash" scam to inflate stock prices for over a year.

NVIDIA, SMCI, Coreweave, Open AI, now AMD...

All we need now is Intel to join.

Not gold

Not sure if this has been posted on this thread, but some of y'all need to hear this again. Going all in/out with sudden moves is a recipe for disaster.



Most of my stuff is diversified and managed by pros. I started a fun account and still have most of my stuff in relatively conservative stuff. The main play is to continue to buy good companies over time - you heard it from Stock Jesus above.

I make tiny little bets on the risky stuff, just for fun. But they are tiny and I won't sweat if they go down to $0.

Bogle, Buffet, Munger - the prophets

Whoa Nellie said:

---

YouBet said:

---

No idea what Soundhound is but I'm not sure we can count BTC as overly risky anymore. It's pretty normalized at this point and most diversified investors have it in their portfolio to some degree.

10 year chart on BTC looks quite alright to me.

---

BTC not risky?

Closing price four months later.......66,418.46

---

I'm still up not that I really care. I never bought it solely to sell for USD.

EliteZags said:

---

impressive to catch the literal top with that post tho

---

I've timed the market twice. That post on the negative and selling my 40-45c PLUG at ATH of ~$70 on the positive.

harge57 said:

---

So the OP is approaching almost exactly 1 year.

SP 500 return since then has been 11.5% basically the average annual return of the last 50 years.

---

Nice data. Its almost a 36% return from the bottom of April-8, 2025.

GeorgiAg said:

---

Quote:

---

A common Boglehead approach is the 3-fund portfolio:
[ol]

U.S. Total Stock Market Index Fund (e.g., VTI)

International Stock Market Index Fund (e.g., VXUS)

Total Bond Market Index Fund (e.g., VB)

[/ol]

---

Yep, boring as hell, but that simple approach is relatively safe.

If someone dollar cost average that approach from age 25 to age 65, you are going to beat the majority of folks trying to "get rich quick" and a lot of the "professionals" charging you management fees.

In fact, I should have set up a separate account with exactly that approach 40-40-20% just to test. I might do that for the next ten years and see how goes. Costs in those funds are what? 0.04%? Almost nothing.

---

There's two guys on YouTube... The Money Guys... They've run the numbers with historical market data...

Take $500 DCA monthly or $6000 annual lump sum
They run them over the same 40 or so year periods for three hypothetical investors...

Average Andy just DCA $250 on the 1st and 15 every month
Bad Luck Bobby lumps in on the wrist day off the year to buy
Market Timing Tom who lump sums in on the best day of the year

I forget off the top of my head their exact inputs, but Average Andy wins the day every time

Kenneth_2003 said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Quote:

---

A common Boglehead approach is the 3-fund portfolio:
[ol]

U.S. Total Stock Market Index Fund (e.g., VTI)

International Stock Market Index Fund (e.g., VXUS)

Total Bond Market Index Fund (e.g., VB)

[/ol]

---

Yep, boring as hell, but that simple approach is relatively safe.

If someone dollar cost average that approach from age 25 to age 65, you are going to beat the majority of folks trying to "get rich quick" and a lot of the "professionals" charging you management fees.

In fact, I should have set up a separate account with exactly that approach 40-40-20% just to test. I might do that for the next ten years and see how goes. Costs in those funds are what? 0.04%? Almost nothing.

---

There's two guys on YouTube... The Money Guys... They've run the numbers with historical market data...

Take $500 DCA monthly or $6000 annual lump sum
They run them over the same 40 or so year periods for three hypothetical investors...

Average Andy just DCA $250 on the 1st and 15 every month
Bad Luck Bobby lumps in on the wrist day off the year to buy
Market Timing Tom who lump sums in on the best day of the year

I forget off the top of my head their exact inputs, but Average Andy wins the day every time

---

Works within the confines of a 40-year period where interest rates routinely moved lower over time.



Average Andy still hasn't noticed that the tailwinds that were the SOLE REASON he was most successful are in the past. Average Andy is going to struggle for the next 10 years.

Brian Earl Spilner said:

---

So we rally to new ATHs by the spring.

Thanks OP!

---

Boy did I get that one wrong.

Granted, OP was proven wrong fairly soon after.

True. Forty years is a very long time. I never bought any bonds (voluntarily) until recently.

From age 25 to 50, I was 100% stocks on anything I was allowed to direct/manage. Just put a little in bonds and international only recently.

I occasionally buy dumb stuff. Bought some of this crazy "bitcoin" stuff back in 2012. Sold it. That was never going to amount to anything. (Did buy some more when it was down at $6k in 2020. Haven't purchased any since.)

EliteZags said:

---

GeorgiAg said:

---

Quote:

---

A common Boglehead approach is the 3-fund portfolio:
[ol]

U.S. Total Stock Market Index Fund (e.g., VTI)

International Stock Market Index Fund (e.g., VXUS)

Total Bond Market Index Fund (e.g., VB)

[/ol]

---

Yep, boring as hell, but that simple approach is relatively safe.

If someone dollar cost average that approach from age 25 to age 65, you are going to beat the majority of folks trying to "get rich quick" and a lot of the "professionals" charging you management fees.

In fact, I should have set up a separate account with exactly that approach 40-40-20% just to test. I might do that for the next ten years and see how goes. Costs in those funds are what? 0.04%? Almost nothing.

---

from 25 to 65 someone that just goes 100% VTI would crush that portfolio in returns

---

My point was just doing that is "safe" and is 99.999% guaranteed to go up. You can lose your ass with market timing and making huge moves like OP did. At 25, you hope you can just leave money in the market for 40 years without having to withdraw it when you don't want to, but that is not guaranteed. Life is what happens while you are busy making other plans...

YouBet said:

---

Tumble Weed said:

---

I posted last week (2/21) on the stock trading thread that I though the top for the year was in for the S&P 500.

I bought GLD, which has also dropped in value since I bought it. I expect gold to perform better than the S&P 500 this year.

---

Bold but maybe this will be the year. History is against you but then past performance does not dictate the future.

Since Jan 2010, the S&P 500 has a total return of 603% while gold has a return of 114%.

Since 1926, on a 1-year time horizon, the S&P has a ~75% chance of beating inflation while gold has a ~45% chance.

And I'm not knocking you...I don't own any gold other than jewelry when I should at least have some allocation towards it.

---

Since we are bumping old posts.

El Gato Charro said:

---

YouBet said:

---

Tumble Weed said:

---

I posted last week (2/21) on the stock trading thread that I though the top for the year was in for the S&P 500.

I bought GLD, which has also dropped in value since I bought it. I expect gold to perform better than the S&P 500 this year.

---

Bold but maybe this will be the year. History is against you but then past performance does not dictate the future.

Since Jan 2010, the S&P 500 has a total return of 603% while gold has a return of 114%.

Since 1926, on a 1-year time horizon, the S&P has a ~75% chance of beating inflation while gold has a ~45% chance.

And I'm not knocking you...I don't own any gold other than jewelry when I should at least have some allocation towards it.

---

Since we are bumping old posts.

---

Not sure why. See the bold.

EliteZags said:

---

JUST IN: Chamath Palihapitiya makes a big claim that Warren Buffett’s insane pre 2000 returns may have benefited from access to information asymmetry not available to the public

Here's what he had to say:

"In 2000, we introduced the law called Reg FD. And what was the point of… pic.twitter.com/8RauZBVVbQ

— Triple Net Investor (@TripleNetInvest) February 14, 2026

Quote:

---

JUST IN: Chamath Palihapitiya makes a big claim...

---

---

EliteZags said:

---

JUST IN: Chamath Palihapitiya makes a big claim that Warren Buffett’s insane pre 2000 returns may have benefited from access to information asymmetry not available to the public

Here's what he had to say:

"In 2000, we introduced the law called Reg FD. And what was the point of… pic.twitter.com/8RauZBVVbQ

— Triple Net Investor (@TripleNetInvest) February 14, 2026

Quote:

---

JUST IN: Chamath Palihapitiya makes a big claim that Warren Buffett's insane pre 2000 returns may have benefited from access to information asymmetry not available to the public

Here's what he had to say:

"In 2000, we introduced the law called Reg FD. And what was the point of Reg FD?

It was basically that if you're a CFO, you cannot talk to an individual stock manager and tell him something that you then don't tell everybody else. Essentially inside information.

That used to be not illegal. I won't say that it was legal. I would just say that used to be not illegal.

You call your CFO buddy, he says, "hey, how you doing?"

He goes, man, "Quarter was a blockbuster."

You would go and buy the stock.

And starting in the 2000s, it became illegal. And there used to be these networks of information arbitrage that took advantage of this.

Now, this is an example of Warren Buffett's returns, pre and post Reg FD. Now, what do you see?

His returns were double the market returns when this kind of information sharing was legal. And the minute that it became illegal and you had to basically act on the same edge as everybody else, his returns went to the market return. He generated zero alpha. In fact, he probably on the margins lost a little bit.

So this is the single best investor in the world. This is what happens when you have information symmetry. So it's just meant to explain that markets when there's asymmetry. Billions and billions of dollars will be made in asymmetry.

The prediction markets today, unless they are regulated out of existence or shut down, will look like the stock market pre-Reg FD."

---

---

Stinks. Now you are going to have to call your congressman to get that kind of info.

wessimo said:

---

wessimo said:

---

I ragged on the OP earlier in this thread, but I'm here with my "top is in" prediction. The AI exuberance has gotten completely ridiculous and I think we see a 25%+ correction within the next 6-12 months.

Unlike the OP, I'm not selling everything and going to cash/bonds, but will be reducing exposure to tech funds and setting aside cash to buy back in at lower valuations.

I've been wrong before (and will be again) so feel free to quote this post in a few months when the market is 20% higher

---

Checking in.

INX 10/6/25 - 6720
INX 12/1/25 - 6812 (+1.4%)

Wrong so far, but the AI bubble looms large

---

INX 3/6/26 - 6737 (+0.25% since 10/6/25)

S&P now negative YTD. The AI bubble still yet to fully pop and now the prospect of an extended war in the ME is a risk to the global economy.