저자: 부자오빠 · 한국인
요약 보기
계좌 인증 후 TQQQ 등 3배 레버리지 분할매수 전략을 옹호. 3개월 단순 비교에서 QQQ 0.7%, TQQQ -3.38%였고, 5년 비교에선 TQQQ 192% vs QQQ 117%, TQQQ 상장 후 장기 일시매수가 압도적이라 주장. 결론으로 레버리지 올인이 무조건 실패는 아니며 분할매수가 더 안정적이라고 정리.
다듬은 글
Hello, this is Rich Oppa. Yesterday, the stock market rose slightly and closed higher. To be honest, even though people say it has been rising for a week straight, the gains have been so minimal that it's not very exciting. It is true that it is a bit boring. We haven't seen the explosive surge we've been hoping for yet.
I checked my account during this boring period; Q is at 83% and Soksui is at 80%. Still, it has recovered quite a bit, little by little. However, sometimes when I post screenshots, some people suspect that it might be manipulated. No, it isn't. Whether you believe it or not is up to you. And even if it were manipulated, it should n't affect you in the slightest.
So, basically, please don't trust anyone. The important thing is whether I make money from stocks or not; someone else's account doesn't boost my return rate. Sometimes when I watch the news, I see that there are still a lot of scams. "I'll give you special information," "I'll make your money grow," "Just trust me and follow me." I mean, does that make sense?
If I had special information, why would I give it to others? I should keep it all for myself. The reason I'm disclosing my account is to create another content topic, and since there's so much talk about how triple leverage leads to ruin, I just... If you manage your investments properly using a split strategy, you won't hit rock bottom even with long-term investing.
This is because you can dramatically lower your average purchase price at the bottom, and since the market trends upward over the long term, you can expect huge profits if you invest long-term with a proper split strategy. I am verifying my account to show you these things. So, don't attach too much significance to it; just think of it as, "Wow, it did n't fail as badly as I thought." There is no need to argue about whether this is real or fake.
Even if it turns out to be rigged, you shouldn't be affected in the slightest. Your own account is what matters most. I want to make it clear once again: whether it's a YouTuber or an expert, basically, do not trust anyone. It is best for your mental health to invest with the mindset that the only person you can trust is yourself.
Okay, I'll skip the market overview because it's a hassle. The Nasdaq rose 0.08%, and the SMP 500 rose 0.1%—it really went up slightly. However, the overall sentiment isn't bad right now, is it? As far as I remember, the Nasdaq has been rising for 8 consecutive trading days. I was curious, so I brought up the 3-month chart.
Now, many of you... Let's compare the 1x multiplier QQQQ and the 3x multiplier TQQQQ. Let's see what kind of returns were generated over three months based on a lump-sum investment, and what would have happened if I had used dollar-cost averaging. First, if I had invested lump sum for three months, the QQQ yielded 0.7%—well, that's a small profit.
However, the TQQQ suffered a 3.38% loss. It's not exactly a complete disaster, but it seems the account has melted a bit due to volatility drag and the pressure from high interest rates. Now, if you look closely, the difference in returns is n't that big, around 3-4%. If I had used dollar-cost averaging, I could have bought the TQQQ at a very low price.
Even if the QQQQ dropped significantly, it didn't go above 8, whereas the TQQQ fell by -24 %. If I had entered a buy position at the -16% mark, the return on the TQQQ would likely have been better. So, to conclude, if I had invested lump sum for three months, the QQQQ would have definitely won. However, if I had responded with dollar-cost averaging, the QQQQ could have been a winner depending on the circumstances.
TQQQ could have won. In other words, the outcome could have differed depending on the price range at which you bought. If you had bought a significant amount during the -24% drop, the returns on both TQQQ and QQQQ would likely have been better. Now, let's look at the long term, over five years. If you had invested in TQQQ as a lump sum for five years, the result was 192% for P2QQ; if you had invested in QQQQ, the result was 117%.
In fact, TQQQ won. However, what would have happened if you had bought in installments? You might have lost. Because, as you can see, TQQQ rose insanely from the mid-2000s to the end of 2021. So, if you had bought during that time, you would have purchased at a very high price. Furthermore, it is currently more than halved from its peak.
If the time you concentrated your buying happened to be near the peak, you might actually be suffering significant losses right now. On the other hand, because QQQQ flowed relatively calmly, you did not suffer such large losses even if you bought at a high price. Conversely, if you bought at such a low point...
Since they couldn't do it, the rate of return couldn't have been dramatically high, right? As you can see, because the results can vary completely depending on the timeframe or the timing at which you enter the split buy strategy, you cannot simply conclude that split buying is always better or that going all-in is always better.
In some cases, going all-in with triple leverage can lead to a huge hit, while in other cases, split buying actually eats away at the return. Looking at just the 5-year period, going all-in 5 years ago actually yielded better returns on TQ. Shall we look at the peak this time? Let's look at it starting from 2010, when TQ was listed.
You will be truly surprised. If you had invested a lump sum ( 8318 QQQN 733), contrary to the prejudices of many people, holding onto the triple leveraged Origin TQL for 13 years—that is, investing a lump sum—resulted in truly overwhelming performance. If you had continued split buying during this period, the return would never have exceeded 8,000%.
This is because you keep buying at high prices. It would have been better to buy a single [stock] when it was less than $1, which would have been the best [stock]. I probably wrote it. Hmm, that's strange. People said that 3x leverage guarantees failure if you invest long-term, but that's not the case.
Of course, it might be true in some instances, but you can't generalize it unconditionally. So, let's do a final summary. Saying that 3x leverage guarantees failure if you go all-in or invest long-term is wrong. You cannot make a definitive statement; it depends on the situation. Now, imagine you went all-in from the initial listing date until now and held on, men.
You hit the jackpot. In other words, going all-in at the bottom can lead to a huge success, while going all-in at the top can lead to a massive crash. Then you might think, "Then just go all-in at the bottom. Why tell me to split the purchase? You always tell me to split the purchase. Why do you tell me to split it when I can just go all-in at the bottom?
You say the results could actually be bad." Well, of course, it's because you don't know the bottom. You went all-in thinking it was the bottom, but what happens if it plummets by 90%? You just lose. Now, if you want to recover your principal just by holding on without averaging down, you need to make a 1% profit.
Making a 1000% profit is really not easy. So, if you really go in on the wrong thing and it drops by 90%, well, essentially, just It is no different from going bankrupt. You absolutely must not let this situation happen. That is why I recommend dollar-cost averaging. Even if you are really unlucky and enter at the peak, using dollar-cost averaging to defend against a 90% loss—even if it is just a 50% drop— can drastically shorten the recovery period.
If the price is cut in half, you actually only need it to double. Your principal is recovered even if you only make a 100% profit. Of course, achieving 100% is difficult, but compared to a 1000% loss, it is much easier, isn't it? Okay, I get it. I understand that dollar-cost averaging protects your returns to some extent.
But you can't make much profit in a bull market, right? That is exactly the downside. There can't be only advantages. However, there is no need to feel so disappointed, because after all, we are investing in stocks to make money. Even if you keep buying at high prices through dollar-cost averaging, if the stock price trends upward, you are guaranteed to make a profit.
You are making money regardless. You are just making a little less profit; you definitely make a profit in a bull market. And in a bear market, it acts as a risk hatcher to prevent you from going bankrupt. In other words, from the perspective of dollar-cost averaging, it is always good if the stock price rises, and you wo n't go bankrupt even if it crashes.
However, from the perspective of someone who goes all-in... If you're lucky, you can hit the jackpot, but if you're unlucky, you can completely crash. So, logically speaking, what is the most stable way to invest? Of course, split buying is the stable method. If a sideways bear market drags on while you are in a loss state, the effect of split buying is maximized because you keep buying large quantities at low prices.
However, for someone who has gone all-in, it must be incredibly painful. They have already invested everything, so there is nothing they can do, yet their account keeps shrinking. And the longer that period lasts, the more exponentially the recovery period will inevitably lengthen. Of course, 3x leverage like TQ carries much greater risk.
It drops much more in a bear market and makes much more profit in a bull market, but the probability of going bankrupt if you go all-in is that much higher. Therefore, you must respond by using split buying. Simply put, the reason for split buying is the mindset of investing while mitigating risk, even if it means making less profit in a bull market.
Now, going all-in means thinking, " What's life without a break? It's definitely the bottom, so I'll just dump it all in." But if you are unlucky enough to enter at the peak, you can completely crash. Is there any guarantee that the US stock market is currently at a bottom? Absolutely none. Is there any guarantee that it wo n't be cut in half from here?
No. There is no guarantee that it won't drop by 90%. Is there a guarantee? No. Is there a guarantee that a bubble-level crash won't happen? Of course not. No one knows when or what will happen. And we could face the biggest crash in history that we have never seen before. In that case, for those using split buying, it could be the greatest opportunity of a lifetime, but for those going all-in, it could lead to a complete and irrecoverable loss.
So, assuming such extreme situations, split buying is much more stable than going all-in. Of course, if the biggest bull market in history comes, you won't make much profit because you'll have to keep buying at high prices. But that is okay. At least you will make a much larger profit than with a single purchase.
The reason I invest in TQQQ, which uses 3x leverage, is that I have the underlying expectation that no matter the situation—whether a crash or a bull market—if I respond wisely with split buying, I can generate a higher return than with a single purchase. It doesn't hit rock bottom even in the worst-case scenario, and in the best-case scenario, it becomes a massive jackpot.
So, I believe it is definitely worth investing in. It is very attractive. As I was talking, it seems like I went off on a tangent, so I ask for your understanding regarding that. Okay, that's all for today's video. Thank you.
Comments 0