Last quote by Mitch Goldberg
Mitch Goldberg quotes
A 1 percent to 5 percent cash holding probably won't change much in terms of reducing risk. Ten percent to 20 percent will help with that. Over 20 percent cash is quite a nervous reaction but not necessarily overboard. You are responsible for you, so you need to consider the extent to which you could be down in stocks and for how long; that's the essence of risk tolerance.
Investors have lots to be nervous about. But then again, for as long as I've been in this business, there has always been something to be nervous about. ... What we're really talking about is risk tolerance and how one should react to that.
The percentage of cash that should be in someone's investment portfolio is really impossible to give without knowing that person's circumstances.
No one fits the conventional mold perfectly.
The discipline to change your allocations based on your original allocation is more important than the actual allocation itself in many cases. It's called rebalancing. But it's hardest when a holding is performing well; investors hate leaving a good party, but the hangover isn't worth it.
If you're more daring, you could be more concentrated in sectors and just hold them for long stretches of time. But you have to be the kind of investor who is at ease with big swings in your portfolio.
If rates went up a quarter-point, it'll be a non-event.
It is when investors jump ship to another strategy they lag. Many index purists can say'you would've been better off in an index fund that you didn't touch because in a straight-up seven-year-old bull, indexing has worked out incredibly well.
It's not quite as simple as just selling a winner and buying a loser because, as we know, winners and losers could stay that way for some time.
I immediately thought of how Apple has almost all of its cash outside of the U.S. and how it spent about $100 billion on stock buybacks. How'd that massive buyback work out for shareholders? Not too well.
No doubt, corporate profits are higher because of this, and now maybe the reported net income will have to have an additional footnote. And we all could agree that we don't like footnotes, because they indicate that there is something opaque about them, or at the very least, they indicate added complexity to understanding the real bottom line of a company. ... This Apple issue just made overseas cash and tax rates a valuation issue.
There's a lot of competition for the best cases today. This business needs constant funding because both the lawyers and the investors are laying out a lot of cash and potentially waiting a long time for a return.
As the supply of capital increases, competition is going to grow… right now we have an industry that's so wide-open I don't see any significant change over the next three to five years.
This was once only found in the hands of large and sophisticated hedge funds. I doubt too many retail investors are asking how they could bet on a potential credit default.
Some ETFs really are unique, and some seem a little too unique.
When I first entered the securities industry in 1990, investing in assets like Russian stocks, frontier markets, emerging market debt and even junk bonds were considered the purview of the most sophisticated investors. What regular everyday investors can [now] do is nearly limitless.
Does the supply-and-demand equation for coal look bullish long-term? And does the world have ample supplies of it? I think the market has spoken to that already.