Thread: Top 13 Accounts in 2005

Tom, I know that the tracker only has my account postings from the end of March, but if you go back to Fundsurfers monthly tallys early in the year when I was e-mailing my moves to him during my "vacation" and add them to what the tracker has, my return for last year was 11.57%.

This is all documented or I wouldn't bring it up.

Top 25 Allocations for 2005

1. Dakota +14.01%
2. I Fund +13.63%
3. Show-me +13.43%
4. Rolo +11.28%
5. S Fund +10.45%
6. Neirbod +10.16%
7. Total Market* + 9.93%
8. Rokid + 8.12%
9. L2040 + 7.91%
10. Pyriel + 7.89%
11. Skip + 7.69%
12.Systemtrader + 7.62%
13. Rod + 7.56%
14. L2030 + 7.42%
15. 20% each fund + 7.30%
16. L2020 + 7.02%
17. DrD + 6.95%
18. L2010 + 6.41%
19. TSPgo + 6.22%
20. Mike + 5.21%
21. L Income + 5.10%
22. C Fund + 4.96%
23. G Fund + 4.49%
24. Safetyguy + 3.94%
25. F Fund + 2.40%

* Total Market (39% C Fund, 11% S Fund, and 50% I Fund)

Nice layout Rokid.

Very nice. Folks looking at this though maybe should reflect on "survivor bias" - that is, how many folks who fall behind these numbers don't continue to post after a few days/months - or never start posting at all. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see that long term hold allocations along the lines suggested by any asset allocation tool beat 90 percent of the folks engaging in self directed frequent adjustments to their TSP accounts. When the State of Washington looked at day trading accounts there a few years back they found 80% of the accounts lost money, and some of the rest were doomed to failure if they continued their high frequency trading. That's all in a roughly 5 year old North American Securities Administrators Association public report that indirectly led to changes in how day trading accounts were handled by brokerage firms.

I have nothing to back this but I'm not so sure the reason for those losses was due to excessive trading as much as excessive use of margin, shorting, and misuse of options.

Fair enough Tom. I typed to quickly -it wasn't specifically "frequency of trading". I think a more accurate summary of the report is that of the 20% of the day trading accounts that had not lost money, most were trading in a manner that would loose money eventually if they continued to employ the same trading strategies.

There's a recent book out by the guy who managed Yale University's money with much success - he discusses survivorship bias in the context of mutual funds available to the general public. I'm just thinking it's an interesting construct to include in one's analysis of what is, isn't, successful over time. The Washington Post, other newspapers, participate in a program for school classes to compete in a simulated investment contest. They publish the returns of the top schools - all positive figures, but don't bother publishing the returns of the poorest performing schools. Gives a skewed view of what's happening, on average, for these would be investors.

I learn much from looking at the allocation changes posted for the top performing accounts here on TSPtalk. It's also interesting to think about how many accounts start posting but disappear. Humans being competitive and all, I'm thinking the accounts that disappear probably leave with their tails tucked between their legs. But hey, I'm oldschool, fear losses the most. Various levels of experience on this board, some far superior to me, but others brand new.

For the less experienced investors I share what someone told me once trying to get me to appreciate the first order need for capital preservation. You have $100. You lose 50%. You now have $50. You need to make %100 on that $50 to get back to zero.

So maybe consider running a practice account for a year or two before you start playing with your real retirement dollars if you don't have extensive investing experience.

I post my moves, I takes my risks. But real losses are hard to recoup - so I try to understand the odds against outperforming a soundly allocated buy and hold approach.

Originally Posted by oldschool

For the less experienced investors I share what someone told me once trying to get me to appreciate the first order need for capital preservation. You have $100. You lose 50%. You now have $50. You need to make %100 on that $50 to get back to zero.

So maybe consider running a practice account for a year or two before you start playing with your real retirement dollars if you don't have extensive investing experience.

I post my moves, I takes my risks. But real losses are hard to recoup - so I try to understand the odds against outperforming a soundly allocated buy and hold approach.

I have certainly become more conservative since our membership has grown, particularly when my indicators wave a yellow flag. I take a lot of flack for missing the recent rallies but how could I sleep at night recommending an aggressive allocation when my indicators tell me to be patient? There will be times to get a ggressive but I'm with you, preserving capital is the main chore, making money will come eventually.

We are coming off of two relatively flat years. If that's the only damage my indicators were warning about, so be it. I can't wait for the light to turn green myself. I'm tired of being cautious but I've been around long enough to see some serious damage done to the funds. We've been lucky the past couple of years. If anyone had a chunk of money in the TSP during 2000 to 2002 you know what I'm talking about.

Good luck,
Tom

Originally Posted by tsptalk

I have certainly become more conservative since our membership has grown, particularly when my indicators wave a yellow flag.

We've been lucky the past couple of years. If anyone had a chunk of money in the TSP during 2000 to 2002 you know what I'm talking about.

Good luck,
Tom

Tom,
I agree with you with your statements. I am not trying to give you advice (I'm not qualified to do that) but I felt that you became conservative by sitting on the side line. You should not feel that this is your responsibility to lead the growing membership here (may be you do). We all make our own final decision by studying every indicator when possible. Sometimes we do it with our gut feeling too. In your last few daily commentaries, you were tempted to jump back in stocks but did not.

The market indicators are just indicators. If the market goes opposite what it shows, then you may want to do it with your gut feeling. When there is a doubt, do it with half of your holding and half of it in G or F. Risk only half should not be entirely a bad decision. Remeber this, we can change it the very next day if you think the decision is wrong. That's why this TSP transfer system is almost perfect for us as a day/swing/position/long term trader. Almost perfect which I mean if it can be IFT after 4:00 EST then I will give it a perfect 10.

I agree with your 2000 - 2002 period with pain. I let all my TSP holding in C without touching it. At that time we could only transfer fund once a month and I didn't want to jump out of stocks because I was afraid that should stocks go up the following month and I couldn't be there. By leaving in there all these years including 2003 and 2004, I got back all my lost plus some healthy gains. So I believe the market should be fine as a long term investment.

As for short or near term, trust yourself and "Just do it"

Good luck
Ocean

Originally Posted by ocean

When there is a doubt, do it with half of your holding and half of it in G or F. Risk only half should not be entirely a bad decision.

That's some good advice ocean. Thanks.

Where Is Technobucks In That Mix !!!!!!!!, I Know He Made More Than 5 % For The Year !!!!!

Tekno didn't start posting his moves until Jan 20th so he didn't qualify for the year long tracker list.