≡ Menu

DeFi: down the decentralized finance rabbit hole

A picture of a bunny to illustrate going down the DeFi rabbit hole

Note: DeFi is the Wild West of even the wildest frontiers of investing. Seriously, messing about with DeFi makes punting on GameStop look a hobby for widows and orphans. This piece is for general interest and the (mis)education for those who want to know more about the Byzantine realm of DeFi. It is definitely not advice to do anything.

Like Fight Club, the first rule of crypto is: don’t talk about crypto. Unless you’re a crypto ‘bro’ on the Internet, that is.

In which case the rule seems to be to never discuss anything else.

But back in what we increasingly must call ‘real-life’, mentioning crypto to your friends will probably prompt one of several judgements:

  1. You’re a boring nerd.
  2. You’re an idiot for promoting a pyramid scheme.
  3. You’ve gotten rich out of it but they haven’t, and now they feel inadequate.
  4. They assume you’ve gotten rich out of it – but you haven’t, and now you both feel inadequate.

None of which will do much for your social life.

We’re among a different sort of friends here, however. And let’s face of it – most of us are Type 1s.

So let me tell you a story.

Bank error in my favour

A year or so ago I accidentally made £1 million in a small cap crypto-mining stock, simply because my bank wouldn’t let me send money to Coinbase.

Yes. Really.

Afterwards I rectified the banking situation, just in case I should need to buy any crypto again.

I wasn’t particularly looking to ‘do’ anything in crypto, mind you. I just wanted to make sure the pipes were clear if I got the urge. 

Soon enough that opportunity presented itself.

Pump and dump

So-called pump and dump schemes are rife in the crypto world. Long illegal in the real-world, crypto and social media have given them a new lease of life.

Here’s how it works. An organized group of insiders quietly buy up a lot of some small cap coin. They then promote it to their followers, who in turn buy it up and further ‘pump’ it on social media – until at some point everyone ‘dumps’ it onto whomever was last in.

Apart from the initial insider buying, all this unfolds over a few seconds. It’s an ultra-high-frequency Ponzi scheme. Prices sometimes go up 500% or more in a few seconds after the target coin is announced.

Having been something of a market micro-structure geek in a previous life, I thought all this was quite interesting. Especially if I could identify the coin that the promoters were quietly buying it up, pre-pump. 

Musing on Twitter about the likely identity of the next such coin, I fell in with some other people trying to do the same.

And we sort of did.

Well, once, and only once, the first time, we guessed right.

We made quite a lot of money in about five minutes. It felt great at the time. But it also gave us a great deal of false confidence .

The truth is we’d just got lucky.

And despite many hours of work – and money spent buying the wrong coins – we never repeated the trick.

Also whilst we’d never actively promoted anything, it raised the question of whether we were taking advantage of the same suckers as the promoters?

So we gave up.

Mental accounting

A healthy dollop of mental accounting and house money bias meant I kept this pot in cryptocurrency.

Indeed I’d learnt quite a bit about the crypto ecosystem in my explorations. (Not least that it contained a lot of scammers.)

So I set myself up for the long haul. I got a hardware wallet, bought a few coins I liked the sound of, and then put the rest in stable coins.

The question then turned to how to maximise the yield on these assets.

DeFi lending 

My first introduction to decentralized finance (DeFi) was lending my stable coins on platforms like AAVE.

The concept here is pretty simple. A borrower posts collateral, say Ether. They then then borrow against it, at a loan-to-value (LTV) of say 30%.

If the price of Ether falls such that the LTV rises to 60%, for instance, the Ether gets sold automatically.

But why would people want to borrow stable coins against their crypto?

Two reasons:

  • Tax. Let’s say I have $10m worth of Bitcoin that I bought eons ago for circa $0 (I don’t for the record), and I want to buy a house worth $2m. I can sell $3m worth of Bitcoin, pay capital gains tax of $1m, buy my house, and be left with $7m worth of Bitcoin. Alternatively, I can borrow $2m against my Bitcoin, buy the house, pay no tax, and still have $10m worth of Bitcoin.
  • Leverage. Is 200% annualized volatility not exciting enough? A crypto whale might do the same trick but buy more Bitcoin with the money they’ve borrowed. This is pretty alien to me – I prefer to apply leverage to low volatility assets like property or bonds – but each to their own.

All this is managed through smart contracts, so there’s no need to trust anyone. (Okay – it’s slightly more complicated than that).

These sort of arrangements are one reason why crypto is so volatile – automated liquidation cascades from leveraged platforms.

Anyway, lending on these platforms could net me mid-single-digit yields on the USDC stablecoin.

I don’t like the more popular Tether (aka USDT), because it seems so obviously dodgy. For a while I even tried depositing USDC on the AAVE platform, borrowing USDT, selling it for USDC, and then depositing the USDC back in AAVE.

Effectively that created a position where I got paid to be short USDT. But I suspect we may be waiting a long time for that situation to blow up.

Incidentally, if you’re earning yield in one of the centralised exchanges like Coinbase, they are just doing this sort of thing on your behalf – for a cut.

Much simpler and maybe worthwhile from an admin perspective.

Liquidity provision

Soon enough even this got pretty boring. So I started experimenting with Automated Market Makers (AMMs) and liquidity provision on platforms like Uniswap and SushiSwap.

AMMs are a central DeFi building block. They enable users to swap one token for another in a trust-less fashion.

I’m not going to get into the mechanics (others have). In simple terms, you supply a pair of tokens (ETH and USDC, say) and you’re betting that the fees earned outpace the losses from being arbitraged.

The risks?

The biggest is the deceptively-branded ‘impermanent’ loss (there’s nothing impermanent about it) if one asset moves a lot versus the other asset.

And of course ever-present smart contract risk

Yield farming

The hyper-competitive nature of DeFi means that protocols (coins and tokens) are competing with each other all the time.

Hence they’ll often pay you (in yet another pointless token) for providing liquidity on their platform, as opposed to someone else’s.

You want to sell these ‘reward’ tokens as soon as you can. They aren’t really useful for anything else – they are ‘down-only’ assets.

But why not automate the process, constantly sell the rewards, and invest the proceeds back into the liquidity pool?

Doing it manually is a bore – but there’s an app for that. So-called ‘yield optimizers’ get it done whilst adding another layer of smart contract risk.

And guess what? These all compete with each other too, so they’ll pay you in some other pointless token to use their yield optimizer.

And so on and so on. You can see why people call this stuff ‘Money LEGOs’.

(The lingua franca of crypto is American English, so no, not ‘Money LEGO’.) 

More DeFi hot air gas

The amazing thing about the whole space if you come from a traditional finance background is the rate of innovation.

Teams build platforms that attract billions of dollars of Total Value Locked (TVL) in a few weeks or days. That’s less time than it would take to get your idea on the product committee’s agenda for discussion back in the centralised world. Let alone actually build anything.

There are downsides. Many of these are scams (so-called rug pulls) for a start.

Also, you’ve got to keep moving your money to get the best returns. Every time you do, you pay a bit of ETH, called ‘Gas’. And that can really add up.

In fact you can go to fees.wtf to see how much you’ve spent: 

[Details obscured for privacy.]

Um, $11,000 in transaction fees? Fees.wtf indeed!

I thought this stuff was supposed to cut costs by removing the middleman?

Picking up pennies

Soon enough I was seeking out cheaper blockchains, which, once you’ve ‘bridged’ over to them, open up whole new ways of getting confused. But at least less expensively.

Before you know it you’re:

  • On the Binance Smart Chain staking your Cake-BNB LPs on Pancakeswap to earn CAKE that you then stake in its auto-compounder to earn still more CAKE.
  • Using Solona and the appropriately named tulip.garden to leverage yield-farm some Samoyedcoin-USDC (with obviously the borrow on the $SAMO leg – leaving you net short the ‘shitcoin’).
  • On Terra using the Mirror Protocol to run a delta-neutral long/short farming strategy, but obviously using Spectrum to auto-compound and earn extra $SPEC on the long-leg, to effectively earn 40% or more on UST.

And no I’m never going to say any of those sentences aloud.

Eventually you come across a flowchart like this1:

You think you understand it. You even start to think about putting the trade on.

But then you remember….

Yes, you pay tax on your DeFi gains

It may be news to some of my fellow Guardian readers (“Crypto is burning the planet and is only used by crooks”) but you pay taxes on all of this.

Taxes should be simple. I’ll just give my ETH address to my accountant, and we’re good right?

After all, it’s all publicly on the block chain, isn’t it? My accountant can surely just look it up on Etherscan? In fact I should be able to provide my address to HMRC and it can send me a bill, right?

Sadly that’s not the world we live in. 

Whilst HMRC has published some good guidance, there’s still a lot of reporting stuff on a ‘best guess’ basis.

Some tax tips

Monevator is not able to give tax advice. However here are a few things to be aware of:

  • Do not believe anyone who tells you that tax is only payable once you convert crypto to real money. This is nonsense. Swap ETH for BTC and that’s a sale of the ETH and a purchase of the BTC. There are capital gains tax (CGT) considerations. 
  • The native reporting currency of crypto is USD. There’s always an extra leg on cost / proceeds calculations to turn it into sterling (GBP).
  • There’s a lot of transactions on which both income and capital gains tax are effectively payable. If you receive ‘rewards’, you pay income tax on their value when you receive them. You also form a cost basis, because you will pay CGT on any gain when you sell them. Far more likely though is the opposite problem: their value will fall. When you sell you probably won’t even receive enough proceeds to cover the income tax to pay. Nice!

Tax complexity is a deterrent from engaging in the racier stuff. It’s not the paying that’s the problem. It’s the paperwork.

The lack of any sort of tax wrapper – such as an innovative ISA – or failing that just a simplified reporting regime is frustrating.

Crypto bros get about as much public sympathy as BTL landlord though, so I can’t see this changing any time soon. 

Why is there money to be made in DeFi?

In my experience you can make fairly low risk returns of 10-30% per annum in DeFi, at least at the moment.

Which leads to the obvious question: how come?

If we pop our Efficient Markets Hypothesis (EMH) hats on, there’s a few possible explanations:

  • Reasonable pricing for risk. These yields represent the correct pricing for all the risks: smart contract flaws, bugs, rug pulls, hacks, legal issues, wrench attacks, self-custody risks, tax risk, and so on. Most of these are uncorrelated with the other risks I take in, say, equities. To be clear, I’m not saying crypto prices are uncorrelated with equities. As we’ve been reminded in recent weeks, these are risk assets like any other – and stablecoin pegs will probably not be maintained in extreme risk-off scenarios. What I am saying is that the risk of my MetaMask wallet getting hacked is not correlated with stock prices. Which all suggests, from an efficient frontier perspective, that there’s a place for a small allocation to defi in a wider portfolio.
  • Arbitrage constraints. This theory holds that there’s friction between the crypto and real-money worlds, particularly from an institutional perspective. This constrains arbitrage. Why else would pension funds invest in junk bonds yielding 3% a year, when they could deposit in Anchor Protocol and earn 19.5% a year? I believe these constraints must exist, at least to some degree. But why don’t rich individuals already in crypto bid away these opportunities? Maybe double-digit annualized returns on stablecoins isn’t enough excitement when they believe they can make a 1,000% return on SHIB INU, or whatever. 

I suspect there’s a bit of both going on.

Either:

  • The whole space will blow-up. Yields are currently high because of the demand for stablecoins to speculate on ‘proper’ crypto. In a long bear market for crypto the demand won’t be there. Hence yields will fall. 
  • Alternatively maybe institutional money will eventually find the market. Again, yields will then fall. 

Either way, yields will fall. It’s only natural. Markets always get more efficient as they mature. Hence why I’m making hay while the sun is shining.

WAGMI! But please please read that disclaimer we started with.

You can follow Finumus on Twitter or read his other articles on Monevator.

  1. If anyone knows the source we’d love to link to it. []
{ 30 comments }

Weekend reading: Take a timeout

Weekend reading logo

What caught my eye this week.

I have used more than one of these Friday missives recently to talk about the shakier corners of the market.

But this week saw even the giant US bellwethers take enough of a beating for ardent indexers to notice.

Rather than listen to my pop market psychology again (don’t worry, I’ll be back) I’ve rounded up some other people’s views below.

Please note! If you have a plan and you’re happy with it, you’re welcome to skip all this stuff.

Especially if you think focusing on it might derail your sensible strategy.

Similarly if the volatility is getting to you emotionally, there’s no shame in taking a timeout, either.

Markets will be markets, regardless of whether you and I pay attention.

And whether they crash or soar, what looked terrible on a stomach-churning day like last Monday won’t be visible on an index graph in a year.

Am I bovvered?

Perhaps a good rule-of-thumb is to match the interest you give to these gyrations with the cadence of your investing activity.

If you invest automatically every month, I wouldn’t worry about weekly wobbles. If you rebalance once a year, maybe check out until December.

You needn’t suffer the daily turmoil with us masochists for no reason.

As Taleb stressed in Fooled by Randomness, whether stocks are up or down in a day is very nearly a coin-flip – close to 50/50…

…but losing half the time feels far worse.

You want some more? Here’s a selection of nicely-baked takes:

[continue reading…]

{ 38 comments }

How do zero commission brokers make money?

How do zero commission brokers make money? post image

There’s no free lunch in investing, right? So how do all those zero commission brokers make money?

How do they pay for their staff and equipment? How do they cover the cost of accessing the markets themselves? Not to mention complying with financial regulations?

Well there are many ways an enterprising broker can earn a living from your business.

What matters for us is:

  • How are they doing it?
  • Do you know about it?
  • Are you paying a fair price?

It’s a bit like the magician who pulls money from your ear. The money’s coming from somewhere. Distraction techniques are a trick of the trade.

You just gotta look past the word FREE!!!

So let’s click on those fee links in the smaller, fainter font to find out how zero commission brokers make their money.

Zero commission is freemium

A freemium pricing model gives away a basic service for nothing. Some customers keep the business afloat by paying for extra features.

That’s a reasonable explanation of how free trading platforms work. That, plus the finance industry’s habit of hiding costs in plain sight.

Zero commission brokers are regulated, so they will tell you somewhere how they make their money.

But you might sometimes need the persistence of Columbo to dig it out of information architecture that’d befuddle Escher.

One way to find out how a trading app makes money is to ask them.

Google: How does [insert zero commission broker name] make money?

From there we can follow the breadcrumbs.

Each operator exploits a slightly different niche. When choosing a free trading platform your goal should be to pick a broker that serves your needs but doesn’t harpoon you like a whale.

Swim away from operators who make most of their profits by exploiting your investing habits.

Hooked

Talking of things that are a bit fishy, we need to delve into the bait-and-switch tactics used by some trading platforms.

Or, as it’s more politely phrased in Powerpoint presentations around the world: “cross-sell / upsell”.

The Financial Times wrote a good piece on zero commission brokers. It asserts the free trading part is just bait on a hook.

The argument is that 0% commission stocks are designed to reel you in as surely as the bright lights of a Vegas casino.

But the real profits are made on other financial instruments.

That would explain why some free trading apps dazzle with ‘Bet now!’ opportunities on Contracts For Difference (CFDs), crypto, and foreign exchange.

Higher spreads

Trading 212 for one will happily tell you that its main gig is CFD trading.

Its ‘How does Trading 212 make money?’ page states:

Our platform is making money from its CFD business, where the main revenue comes from the spread and the interest swap.

The spread is the difference between the price you pay for a financial instrument versus the lower price it’s sold for.

As with buying foreign dosh for holidaying abroad (remember that?), the intermediary pockets some of the spread for making the deal happen.

There’s nothing intrinsically dodgy about this. It’s just useful to know:

  • It’s the spread on CFDs and not stock trading that’s the main source of profit here.
  • Zero commission does not mean free.

We’ll come back to the interest rate swap business in a sec.

Same difference?

Elsewhere, the typographically-curious eToro does not publish a ‘How does eToro make money?’ page.

But eToro cites the spread as a charge on the CFD and crypto tabs of its fees page.

eToro’s partners programme also pays affiliate commission on spread revenues generated by customers’ trading (minus eToro’s expenses).

On page seven of its terms and conditions document – in the Conflicts of Interest section – eToro states:

We are responsible for setting the price of instruments and products which can be traded on the eToro platform.

This means that our prices will be different from the prices provided by other brokers and the market price, as well as the current prices on any exchanges or trading platforms.

On page 30 of its T&Cs eToro explains that it controls the spread for CFDs…

…with respect to CFD trading: (a) we set both the sell price and the buy price of CFDs, both of which are quoted on our platform.

…whereas it notes on the 0% Commission Stocks/ETFs section of its fee schedule PDF:

This spread is determined by the market and not by eToro.

eToro doesn’t mention the spread as an explicit charge on the stocks tab of their fee page, but it does for CFDs and crypto.

That might suggest that at least some zero commission brokers aren’t profiting much – if at all – from stock trading spreads.

Spreading the net wider

I read another good piece that tested whether spreads for stocks are wider with commission-free brokers than traditional investing platforms.

The author struggled to pin down exact spreads due to a lack of transparency from some zero commission brokers. But they concluded that stock spreads probably weren’t unusually wide on free trading platforms.

That’s because the price paid per share was similar to other online brokers.

It’s worth mentioning you can’t test this with just a few test trades. Wider spreads show up in aggregate rather than on every transaction.

An individual may barely notice a penny or two spirited away occasionally, just as a mosquito sneakily siphons off a few drops of blood.

This product may damage your wealth

The FCA requires CFD platforms to display warnings about how many retail investors (that’s you and me) lose money trading such instruments.

Trading 212 says 68% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs on its site. (At the time of writing).

And eToro also says 68% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs on its site. (At the time of writing).

Consistent and perhaps disturbing, huh?

Meanwhile, eToro adverts now follow me around the internet trumpeting the platform’s social trading technology.

This feature enables customers to automatically copy the moves of top-performing traders on eToro.

Great idea. What could make more sense to a beginner? Just mimic the experts and you’re golden!

Except we know it’s extremely hard to pick winners in investing.

What’s even less obvious from the ads is:

  • If a large chunk of eToro’s profits are from CFD trading then it could be that many of their investors are also into CFD trading.
  • If I copy their CFD trades then I also pay CFD fees. Automatically.
  • Remember, 68% of retail investors are losing money in CFDs.

Overnight fees

CFDs are a financial derivative that enables you to make a leveraged bet on the price movements of underlying assets such as crypto, currencies, commodities, and stocks.

eToro charges fees to finance your CFD position if you leave it open overnight or at the weekend.

Trading 212 does the same but calls it an interest swap.

You can avoid the charge by closing your position before the platform’s daily deadline or, alternatively, by not trading CFDs.

Currency conversion fees

Some zero commission brokers make money by charging above the spot price for currency conversion.

These fees are triggered when you trade instruments priced in US dollars, for example.

You can avoid excess currency conversion fees by:

  • Trading in GBP-denominated assets.
  • Choosing a broker that charges the spot price for foreign exchange (FX) – or very close to it.
  • Using a broker that enables you to hold multiple currencies in your account.

Freetrade, Trading 212, Revolut, and eToro all charge currency conversion fees in various scenarios.

In the case of eToro and Revolut accounts, you can only trade in US dollars. So you pay currency conversion fees to deposit and withdraw pounds.

Interest rate arbitrage

This next one is a nice little earner that’s easy to overlook in our age of near-zero interest rates.

Customers park cash in their stock brokerage account where it earns nothing. The broker then sweeps the cash to more profitable locations.

It could be temporarily stored with their own banker or popped into a money market fund – anywhere that earns a smidge more interest than the broker pays its customers.

Do that at scale and suddenly interest gets interesting.

I don’t think this one is particularly an issue with commission-free brokers, mind. It’s an age-old industry-wide practice.

But clearly this is an income stream that benefits from scale. That’s typically achieved when your offering achieves mass adoption – say because it’s free, or feels like it is.

Cash withdrawal and deposit charges

Some zero commission brokers explicitly charge to deposit or withdraw money from your account. Maybe with an FX conversion fee tacked on because they only deal in dollars.

It’s an odd charge in the age of electronic money, but I’ve no issue with it because it’s completely transparent and therefore you can manage it.

Premium services

It’s a bit old skool but zero commission brokers may also charge a set price for a given service you might like.

According to Freetrade’s ‘How does Freetrade make money?’ page, this is how it earns most of its corn.

You might pay it a platform fee for an ISA or a SIPP. Or maybe you’ll pay a subscription fee for a better service than the freebie account.

Freetrade Plus lets you play with a wider choice of stocks, ETFs, and order types, for example.

Fine – there’s no more mystery to that than you see with a premium bank or Spotify account.

Sometimes you really do get what you pay for.

Payment for order flow

Payment for Order Flow typically occurs when a broker directs orders from its customers to a favoured market maker who then executes the trades.

The broker does this because it’s handsomely rewarded by the market maker for all that lovely business.

The FCA banned payment for order flow in the UK. The FCA believes such kickbacks create a conflict of interest between brokers and customers – specifically in the form of wider spreads than you’d pay for ‘best execution’ in the open market.

FCA-regulated brokers are obliged to obtain best execution for UK customer’s orders. As opposed to funneling trades to whoever pays the chunkiest backhander.

Infamously, the trailblazing zero commission broker Robinhood makes money in the US from payment for order flow.

It’s worth noting that difficult-to-dupe passive investing champion Larry Swedroe for one believes the payments – combined with low or no commission fees – may indeed reduce costs for ordinary investors.

In any event, the FCA’s 2019 paper on the practice noted some UK brokers outsourced orders to overseas affiliates that still took payment for order flow.

The FCA added that this workaround is still deemed a conflict of interest.

Its report further mentioned that the FCA:

…expect firms to consider the findings of this report and improve their practices.

All very British and understated.

Let’s hope the FCA’s disapproval shames any miscreants into compliance, lest they not be invited to the next Christmas party.

It’s a free country

The good news is zero commission brokers aren’t going to starve because of their 0% fee generosity.

So if you like their services, you needn’t fear they’re unsustainable.

Indeed, they have even more revenue streams to wash their face with. There’s securities lending, rehypothecation, inactivity fees, and hedging against the trades of their own customers.

Not all the free trading platforms tap into all the money-making schemes discussed in this article.

But it’s useful to know what to look out for.

As I said earlier, different trading platforms target different market niches.

The right choice for you may be one that doesn’t profit excessively from your specific investing foibles.

For instance I don’t trade much, so I don’t care about zero commission. But I do need a SIPP.

Together that means I’m probably best off with a broker that’ll provide a SIPP for a low platform fee. I can take the occasional hit on dealing fees.

Costs and consequences

As a group, retail investors lose money the more they trade.

Perhaps zero commission is not an absolute no-brainer then – even if it’s close to free – if it encourages more trading?

That’s something else to think about.

Ultimately, zero commission brokers know what they’re doing. What we care about is that the investing public does, too.

Take it steady,

The Accumulator

P.S. Make sure that your investments and cash are protected by the Financial Services Compensation Scheme. Your broker must be authorised and regulated by the FCA (or PRA) for the specific service or product you use.

{ 14 comments }

Weekend reading: where the wild things are

Weekend reading logo

What caught my eye this week.

The speculative stock sell-off I flagged up at the start of December has started to chip away at the markets more widely.

The US Nasdaq index is more than 10% 14% off its highs.

Several mega-cap tech shares – a big chunk of the US indices, and hence a meaningful stake in global tracker funds – are down about the same, too.

Microsoft and Meta (née Facebook) are 10-20% off their highs. The biggest, Apple, is getting there.

And ‘FANG’ stock Netflix1 plunged more than 20% overnight on earnings suggesting pandemics don’t last forever and growth is slowing hard.

Other former blue-sky high-fliers have already lost more than three-quarters of their value.

Look at price graphs of Peloton or Zoom2 for a taste of what happens to story stocks when the story changes.

The first cut is the cheapest

So far the declines only amount to about a 6% drop in a global tracker fund, from a UK perspective.

Pretty piddling. Could it get worse though?

Who knows – but veteran investor Jeremy Grantham is sure it will.

The founder of GMO and a self-styled witcher when it comes to bubble bursting, Grantham warns:

Today in the U.S. we are in the fourth superbubble of the last hundred years.

Previous equity superbubbles had a series of distinct features that individually are rare and collectively are unique to these events. In each case, these shared characteristics have already occurred in this cycle.

The checklist for a superbubble running through its phases is now complete and the wild rumpus can begin at any time.

Read Grantham’s entertaining note for more, including graphs like these:

As Geralt Grantham sees it, the bottom-right corner is about to get… interesting.

Now, you should know that Grantham has been calling the US overvalued for years. In 2013 Grantham foresaw the market going 20-30% higher before crashing. He’s been using the word ‘bubble’ since at least 2014.

Timing is the perennial curse of those who’d oppose a runaway market – but eight years is still a long time to claim you weren’t wrong but early.

With that said, anyone who lived through the Dotcom bust will recall the pattern of the frothiest stocks falling first.

We’ve seen sufficient crazy madness over the past two years to tick Grantham’s ‘euphoric’ box, too.

Add rising yields (even in Germany), expectations of rate hikes in the US – roiling growth stocks and government bonds alike – and a flattening yield curve, and Grantham might have all the ammo his bubble-bursting needs.

Steady as she goes

Naughty active investors (like me) will act as we see fit, for good or ill.

Wiser passive investors shouldn’t panic. Not least because they’ll probably do better than most active types just by sticking with their plan.

Think how often our Slow & Steady portfolio updates begin with The Accumulator shrugging off some brouhaha, then detailing further gains.

As Aswath Damodaran – dubbed Wall Street’s ‘Dean of Valuation’ – conceded this week even as he calculated stocks were 10% overvalued:

If you look at history, it seems difficult to argue against the notion that market timing is the impossible dream…

The most important thing is to have a well-constructed, diverse portfolio.

You could have owned almost anything up until late 2021 and seen it go up.

Everyone is a genius in a bull market.

In a bear market we all feel like idiots. Crashes come with the territory of investing, but don’t make it harder on your future self than it needs to be.

Put yourself in a position to hold – and ideally buy more – in a slump.

For now: have a great weekend!

[continue reading…]
  1. Disclosure: I hold. []
  2. Disclosure: I also hold Zoom. Alas. []
{ 30 comments }