저자: 미상 · 한국인
요약 보기
개인투자자에게 미국 지수추종 ETF(S&P500, 나스닥100) 장기 적립투자를 권함. 레버리지 ETF(2x/3x)는 일별 리밸런싱으로 횡보·변동성 장세에서 원금이 훼손될 수 있어 주의 필요. 인버스 ETF는 단기 헤지 용도로만 소량 사용 권고. 발화자는 한국 시장이 아닌 미국 주식 투자 방법을 설명하며, 특정 종목이나 시장 방향에 대한 예측은 제시하지 않음.
다듬은 글
Uh 5 Hello, this is the 6-week beauty from Seoul. Actually, unlike before, my stay in Korea has gotten a bit longer, and I'm in the Gangnam area. Unexpectedly, so many people recognized me on the street, so I ended up wearing a messed-up mask like this. Thank you for giving me Arabic perfectly. Ah, I'm happy to have become a temporary Seoul City beauty.
As for today's topic, I actually think the title is a case where I'd burst out laughing, but I wondered why everyone isn't coming to give stock recommendations. I thought, "What can I say to them?" so I decided to give it a try. So, let's go faithfully to the title. For reference, this video is also a tribute video dedicated to my family.
My parents, aunt, uncle, grandmother, the lady next door, the internal representative, the accountant, everyone is persistently excited about me. Ah, really, from now on, since I have to serve those close by, there are many stocks, just one, just one, try recommending one. Ah, ah, ah. For individual investors planning long-term investments, the answer has been too much.
Number 80 itself, recently, security, taking off, Els color, also in this confrontation, passive, and now While discussing Alpha and Beta active strategies, I thought I had explained it sufficiently at the time. However, many people took that literally and asked, "So, does that mean I should just buy the Bing Guard index bonds that Warren Buffett mentioned?" I received so many questions like that.
Therefore, this time, I will explain it directly using tickers as examples. First, let's look at a few key points. The six methods for becoming a stock market millionaire that I am about to explain are premised on these three necessary and sufficient conditions. The first is an investment that does not lose money; this means a structure where it is statistically difficult to incur a loss.
The second is an investment that provides peace of mind; I will explain an investment structure where your mental state is unlikely to be compromised. The third concerns the appropriate use of leverage. Since simply looking at the "make a profit and lose" pattern can be too boring, I will discuss investment methods that allow you to add a "plus alpha" structure to the flow of the market—like "sprinkling water on the shape"—in a game where you can add a little something extra.
For reference, this applies to US stock investment methods and does not apply to the Korean stock market. Not losing money implies a long-term investment period, but it also refers to the entire market as the investment target. So, regarding this market... What does it mean to "follow"? It refers to a strategy that follows the entire US stock market.
There are ETFs that track specific market indices, you know. Representative examples include the SMP 8 Index, which is heavily weighted towards US bull companies, and the NASDAQ 100 Index, which focuses on large-cap technology growth stocks. You just need to find ETFs that track these two indices respectively.
There is a multi-index called SPY released by a 2ch Twitter fund manager, and regarding that, there is Eunmi, and there is also the iPad coming from Asia. And regarding our NASDAQ-tracking ETFs, Cube is quite famous, right? There is a difference in which two types of technology are included, but there is not much personal choice involved.
Instead, there is a huge difference between selecting individual stocks and defining the entire market with a TF. Because it follows the entire market, deep down, peace comes to my heart and family. Yes, actually, regarding the Surface, the work is truly a very simple and naive expression itself. Since it just follows the market, what is this?
There is no reason to worry about the market going up and down every day, or to get stressed out over 1B ERP. You don't have to deal with individual stocks seeing a cut in half and wondering if you should use that method you saw earlier, or even if you see a rise and think, "Should I sell now?" and then get even more stressed the next day after selling.
You do n't necessarily have to know when the market goes up or fall when it goes down; you don't need to figure out "market timing." You can just invest steadily as opportunities arise, allowing for dollar-cost averaging. Therefore, for individual investors and those who want to invest from a long-term perspective, this long-term stock market strategy is actually achievable with a very high probability.
So, why did the topic of leverage come up? There are many things to say about discarding the remnants, but I wanted to clarify it again because it seems there are some incorrect and biased perspectives. Between focusing on high-risk assets with high expected returns and boosting returns through leverage, which is the more effective choice?
To start with the conclusion, the strategy is to utilize leverage. That is more effective because, to maximize returns without leverage... Ultimately, this forces you to concentrate more on assets in the Highway Sky workplace, but doing so reduces diversification, thereby increasing the overall portfolio risk.
That is why utilizing leverage is advantageous. However, if you plan to invest without doing that, you must properly understand the meaning of the results provided by the leverage effect. So, let me give you an example. First, if you buy a 3x leveraged product, looking at it very simply, you might think, "Well, let's say the underlying asset of the product has yielded a 33% return.
So, multiplying by 3 gives a 100% return. Isn't this obviously great? Shouldn't I just do this?" Of course, conversely, in a situation where it drops by 33%, the principal of the leveraged product becomes zero. This is called the "Kris Format," and it applies not only to such extreme cases but also to the results of leverage; even in an upward-trending market, the outcome varies significantly depending on how high the volatility is.
For example, here, the relative small value of the Near East is extremely Let's assume that in a normal, upward-trending market, investing $100 yields a 7.3% return. However, if you invest in a 3x leveraged product, the performance is bound to suffer in such a market. Consequently, the final return in this case is 16.4%.
But if the upward trend is blocked but the volatility becomes too high, the worker is ineffective. The underlying asset or index of the product generated a 3.3% return, but the leveraged product dropped by -7.6%—something like that. Naturally, in the case of a much more extreme bear market, a picture like this emerges.
You might say, "What? Surely this can't happen," but yes, it does. Of course it does. If you look at the case of the yellow stocks that are being painted in the USA, the final return through last November was -98%. Since last year saw ultra-lows of 6, yes, the important thing is that at the point of -98%, my money had almost vanished.
You will surely remember this, but this historical... Event - I wonder if you remember April 2020 when this happened. It has only been a year and a half since then. Although Nice Queen is very large, if utilized properly, there is no other strategy to enhance returns as effective as this. Let me give you an example of a leverage ETF product, which is the most easily accessible option when you think about leverage.
As I mentioned earlier, there is a product that is supposed to be brought in from the SMP-based fund index, which is not a foreign investor's main track. However, here, there is a product called SSO, which aims for twice the market return, and the Mavericks, which originally has a slightly odd multiplier.
They track the same index. And this is a product that uses 3x leverage. As you can see, naturally, the more leverage you use, the higher the management costs and the higher the risk. Up to this point, we are linking it to SMP, and then controlling it again—that QQQ from earlier. Here, the 2x leverage product is behind the air, and the 3x leverage product is behind the QQQ.
In the US, actually, wealthy individuals Leveraged products, which are very popular among investors and heavily incorporated into my portfolio, are difficult to interpret, so if you look at the graph, you can tell. While it is true that during a major downturn like this, you are naturally exposed to the risk of falling sharply with two or three times the intensity, it is a very attractive product because if you make additional purchases using an ad-by strategy at that timing, or if you establish a new entry point, you can aim for a larger recovery or compression rate during a rebound.
Also, what you can see here is that if you invest in a standard ETF without leverage, there is no sudden surge at 4 o'clock, and you can save money by continuously accumulating it little by little over the long term. However, the more leverage there is, the more active and frequent trading is required due to the rebalancing effect.
Now, regarding investing in a leveraged ETF, the shock of a magnitude similar to the one I mentioned earlier—like watching Friends and downloading—occurs when the underlying asset, SMP 8, and the index itself plummet by more than 33%. In fact, historically speaking, a major crash of that magnitude...
It is truly difficult to find and return, and it is not that such things never happen, but rather that the probability of it happening is statistically very, very low. You can see why long-term PC investment solely through index-tracking funds is inevitably the most common and advantageous strategy for individual investors by looking at the demand for this product.
However, since the most optimal strategy is to invest without leverage, if you carefully adjust the ratio between leveraged products and your overall portfolio risk to fit your investment structure, it is the most stable strategy. The point here is that you do not need to unconditionally avoid leverage just because of its negative connotations.
At this point, questions always arise: "By what principle can this leveraged ETF product estimate 200% or 300% of the index return? How does it guarantee two or three times the index's return?" Let's compare this with the example of TQ, which utilizes 2x or 3x leverage, and the representative Nasdaq ETF.
In the case of GQ, compared to the 2-week closing level of the Nasdaq return... It is true that it is managed to ride a 300% return, but that absolutely does not mean they are buying EQ regret stocks with a 3x weighting. If you ask what the principle is, it means that by utilizing leverage, if you assume the fund holds a certain amount, then to make an additional investment, you are taking an ex-post of that scale.
That is how it works. If the index rises by 1% and I make a profit moving forward, since the environment I added has become transparent, I should use the index post, which is double that amount, to become Songlim. And originally, tracking a 3x return like this is a result, and naturally, due to the leverage rights I explained earlier, there is no guarantee.
These ETFs are rebalanced every day. They call taking off something like this a complete victory, but since I rode a 3x win rate today, I close the market today, adjust the portfolio, close the market tomorrow, and do it again tomorrow. Rebalancing involves moving the portfolio in this way, but what does it mean to rebalance every day according to market movements?
You might say it's all the same, but because we rebalance daily, if you look at a specific investment period, it means that the return will not necessarily be 3 times that of the index for a week. This is particularly evident in a bear market. There is no way to avoid the losses caused by this rebalancing effect.
The advantage is that the index spoiler automatically reduces the losses, allowing for some protection against them, but you have no choice but to carry the loss rate up to that point. Also, the fund and asset management stocks are bound to shrink accordingly. Since it is difficult to explain this in words, I created an example of a "Big Market" (Figure 2) to help you understand.
In the case of Wong, if the market drops by 1% (like Apple), it would be at Jonggak Entrance. On the same day, the 2x leverage fund dropped by 2%, so it would be 98. In the case of Day Two, another 1% is withdrawn from there, so it would be 98.0. Since then, in the case of Answer WF, the -IF dropped again, so it ended up at 96.0.
In the same way, it kept dropping by 1% increments until it reached 2%, then caught the rebound of the I-Pipe and rose by 1%. In that case, the base index—the market— returns to 100. It followed a single path back to the starting point and properly profited from the rebound. However, in the same situation, these two leveraged funds fell by -2%, and even though they rose by 8.2%—twice the market's gains—at the very end, the final closing price is 99.8, not 100.
This isn't some rounding error; this is the actual number. The reason is the leverage mechanism I explained earlier. When the market crashes, the rate of recovery must be higher than the recovery of our principal; it must increase at a larger rate. In this example, the 2x leveraged fund returns to 100...
To return, it needs to rise by exactly 8.4%. Here, since it is now filled to 99.8%, there isn't much difference, but if the volatility increases or the fluctuation period becomes longer, the torpedo-like product will take a much worse hit in terms of return. And also, regarding the frequently asked question 2, " Then why do you answer so DDF satisfaction work?" people ask, "Isn't a product that goes against the market— this Sure Level creation—good?" Of course, there are many products that are smirking and saying that going against the market is good.
The most representative examples that many people probably use are SQ, SSP, and also Spa SPX. However, regarding these, a strategy of taking a very small portion of Expo to prepare for the predicted first movement during a very short, specific period is often used. That is actually good. If you believe you can finish a 2nd downtrend perfectly, it is good to have a lecture on that.
And when it rebounds again, Super and Web You should switch to GDP, but since that isn't realistic, it's better to stick to that. Also, to begin with, these kinds of " sure-wide" products didn't have high trading volume, and since AOM's managed capital is n't large, there are liquidity issues. Therefore, you need to be careful.
For individual investors aiming for "fog trading," I don't recommend a reverse bet strategy that goes against the whole trend. I intended to explain it simply, but it ended up being quite long again. Anyway, that's all for today's tribute video.
Comments 0