I was just 'aving a giggle, but I think there may be some Canada weirdness here.
I think most people here would use “in the black” as the default opposite of “in the red”, but I’ve heard green too, just much less frequently.
Yeah, in the black is a more old fashioned accounting framing. But daily stock tickers tend to run red/green.
That makes sense.
Just more evidence that I am, in fact, actually old.
I sold my Cinemark on my GAMBOOOL account, and bought back into UCO (3x oil ETF). It already went up 6% since I bought it. Monday should be fun.
I should have never unloaded the damn thing. But I was like ok gas at $5, this thing can’t keep going up forever. One of my original theses for buying it in the first place was that Putin might start some kind of skirmish to drive up the price of oil. We got that bigly.
GL. Just beware of that slippage (which it sounds like you are).
Is that like anal leakage? Because I’m way ahead of you on that one.
And yes I know about slippage. Right now it’s a hedge for the rest of my portfolio. Even though it’s not nearly enough to make a difference. Psychologically it makes me feel better to see at least one account going up.
Man, if that’s what I have to look forward to, the future is even bleaker than I thought.
Unless your strapped with funds, just jam 3x into a non 3x fund. It’s like 2% a week or something redic you’re bleeding. This feels like the top of oil anyway. That family living room table talk that see the news and think “omg, lets buy that commodity” always end up getting fucked, anyway.
This is my Roth that I’m trying to gambool up. I did some math and it seems better if I can run it up to 10-20x tax free than if I do it in the SEP IRA. I’m already up about 2.75x. It’s less than 2% of my portfolio.
I bought UCO at the bottom of the covid crash. My only mistake was selling it a couple months ago when I thought oil must be close to topped out. If oil tops out right now I won’t be too disappointed. Hence the emotional hedge. I will have a hair trigger for selling it though.
demand keeps increasing that it’ll keep being important even with other stuff
we haven’t hit a supply crunch yet but the longer the war goes eventually somethings gonna crunch, oil or some metal or some commodity or all of them at once I guess only putin knows.
This made me chuckle after seeing that stupid ad a bunch of times while watching hockey.
3 Likes
I own some crypto that makes up a small amount of my investment portfolio. In Canada we now have crypto ETFs. Wondering if it’s nuts to put some of my RRSP (like an American 401k) in this?
It’s the only way to hold crypto in a retirement account but it also means management fees for holding crypto.
I think it’s a lot safer to hold crypto currencies in an ETF because an ETF issued by reputable investment company will be better regulated than individual crypto currencies. Lol securities regulators, sure, but they do a better job than the market at regulation.
1 Like
That is my thinking too.
I don’t invest in crypto so I don’t know the specifics. But if you buy an ETF there is at least an identifiable party, the company that issues the ETF, that is registered with the securities commission and has clear legal obligations to you that the commission will enforce. I dont even know what happens if you directly subscribe to some coin issue and it is fraudulent. What is your recourse? Who do you complain to? Are you supposed to pay $10,000 in legal fees to try to recoup a $5,000 loss? I dont know. I do know what to do if you get screwed by a registered ETF issuer on Ontario though.
Guess we’re just going to bleed 2% a day in perpetuity. Fun.
Thats sort of an oversimplified version of what we did last tech bubble until the Nasdaq fell by ~2/3 to more appropriate valuations. This time could be different, but it is not immediately clear to me why that would be the case.
1 Like
Been waiting until I had time to sit down and dig back into this to reply in more detail. I didn’t do nearly as much diligence as usual before buying this, because I had done it 2-3 times during the last year on this company and they came out looking pretty good and it didn’t appear much of anything had changed. The main thing was that the price relative to the dividend and the balance sheet was never quite into my range, and this time it was.
So I went back in to double check and the key factors here are that they use significantly less leverage than their competitors, they have a very high percentage of senior loans, secured debt, and equity-backed loans, and they almost entirely avoid certain sectors that get smashed in a recession (only 1.6% exposure to energy, hotel, restaurant, leisure, and retail combined). They also have a large percentage of insider ownership, and their track record and investment style seems to be in line with how I would like to see a company like this run. So I think managements incentives are in line, and I agree with their vision on how to run things.
Their lack of leverage and strong finances also secure them better rates on their borrowing, so they’re able to arbitrage the gap between their fixed rate financing and the prevailing rates when they lend out… As a result they’re in a better position in a raising rate environment than companies that are more leveraged.
Sort of, but also just not looking to overpay. Like if they’re already beaten down to bargain value and returning value directly to shareholders through the dividend, then I’m fine with owning them.
This is one major concern I do share, and one of the reasons I was waiting to invest is that they were overexposed to real estate and they admitted it, because they were having trouble exiting commercial real estate holdings during the pandemic. That appears to be rectified now. Obviously their investments in businesses can get marked down, too, but they do regularly have independent audits and my read on it is that they’re pretty conservative and prudent with all of this, so they’re less likely to be as dramatically overvalued on their balance sheet as the same holdings might be on a competitors.
I could be wrong here, but this seems like an example of finding a sector that’s about to get smoked but picking the one that’ll survive it well that’s been unfairly beaten down.
[quote=“commonWealth, post:6044, topic:3997”]
they have a very high percentage of senior loans, secured debt, and equity-backed loans [/quote]
Yeah, they really don’t is the thing. Many of these are secured in name only and it will become readily apparent when the market turns. When you have security but the credit agreement lets Apollo or TPG extract a large portion of the assets for equity holders if they feel like it, are you really secured? This is the part thats going to end up smoked for recoveries, not the real estate piece.
Im highly, highly skeptical an individual investor (or, frankly, anyone) is going to be able to stock pick BDC’s based on value metrics. At the very least you need to go through the portfolio name by name (and even then Im highly skeptical)