[HN Gopher] Ted Weschler Turned $70k into $264M in a Retirement ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       Ted Weschler Turned $70k into $264M in a Retirement Account
        
       Author : chollida1
       Score  : 14 points
       Date   : 2024-09-27 12:24 UTC (10 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (blog.umd.edu)
 (TXT) w3m dump (blog.umd.edu)
        
       | immibis wrote:
       | It's called gambling. Sometimes by doing this your money
       | increases 1000000% but most of the time it decreases 100%.
        
         | charlie0 wrote:
         | It can go beyond the 100% loss if you leverage.
        
           | icedchai wrote:
           | Generally, you can't get that leverage in a retirement
           | account. They don't let you trade on margin there.
        
           | willcipriano wrote:
           | Only if you pay it back.
        
         | datavirtue wrote:
         | Gambling? The odds are always in favor of the gambling house.
         | You can't do anything about their odds which ensure that you
         | lose nearly 100% of the time.
         | 
         | There is a lot that you can do in the market where the odds are
         | technically in your favor AND you can adjust the number with
         | your own behavior to manage risk, further bettering your odds.
         | 
         | All of this is well known and provable. Spreading FUD about the
         | market is a great way to keep people poor, indignant and
         | suffering a lack of freedom.
        
           | woooooo wrote:
           | If you're making a play with a small chance of huge upside,
           | but a big chance of losing, most people colloquially call
           | that "gambling".
        
           | superb_dev wrote:
           | The stock market requires someone to fail for someone else to
           | win, the moneys gotta come from somewhere. People who are
           | poor, indignant, and suffering will just be more fodder for
           | those who've already won.
        
       | phendrenad2 wrote:
       | Hmm time to adjust the old IRA investments.
        
       | bdjsiqoocwk wrote:
       | I wish this would shut up the disciples from the church of
       | Efficient Market, but I know that it won't.
        
         | whywhywhydude wrote:
         | How does this discount efficient market hypothesis? You can
         | find plenty of examples of people buying 2$ lottery tickets and
         | becoming millionaires.
        
           | bdjsiqoocwk wrote:
           | If you believe the EMH you shouldn't compare stocks to
           | lottery tickets. It sounds like you just don't want to look
           | too closely.
           | 
           | Let's try differently. What evidence would you require to
           | conclude "EMH is false"?
           | 
           | Edit: I have to make this edit because someone will point it
           | out. YES I realize I didn't actually answer your question but
           | the thing is this has been discussed ao thoroughly that I
           | don't think i have anything new to add.
        
             | echoangle wrote:
             | The only thing I can think of that would disprove EMH would
             | be an arbitrage opportunity that doesn't go away by using
             | it. If you can arbitrage continuously and without limit and
             | the difference you're arbitraging isn't decreasing, that
             | would contradict EMH. Since that's pretty much the only
             | claim of EMH, multiplying your money by taking high risks
             | doesn't really contradict it.
        
               | bdjsiqoocwk wrote:
               | In HFT there are loads of arbitrage opportunities that
               | don't go away by using it if you're the fastest.
               | 
               | EMH disproven guys.
        
               | echoangle wrote:
               | They do go away, that's why you have to be the fastest.
               | They also are limited, you can't arbitrage them with an
               | arbitrary amount at once because this makes the
               | difference disappear.
        
       | bdjsiqoocwk wrote:
       | > Weschler says that he used to buy beaten-down bonds of
       | companies that were in less dire straits than they seemed to be
       | 
       | Anyone knows how to see and buy publicly traded bonds?
        
         | mikestew wrote:
         | https://fixedincome.fidelity.com/ftgw/fi/FILanding?bar=p#tbi...
        
       | silexia wrote:
       | I still don't get how he multiplied $70k to $264m... And this
       | reporter seems to just take all of Weschler's claims at face
       | value... BUT Warren Buffett is famous for great due diligence and
       | high levels of ethics... So I guess it probably is legit?
        
       | 486sx33 wrote:
       | The more I read about the stock market the more I start to think
       | about the negatives of EFTs and index funds. They're like taking
       | an antidepressant, the lows aren't as low but the highs aren't
       | nearly as high. The market was more volatile when more "retail"
       | investors purchased individual stocks.
       | 
       | Lots of people lose big, personally my biggest loss was $WISH wow
       | I got hammered there. Had it been an index fund that incorporated
       | WISH I would have been more protected... then again my direct
       | purchase of NVDA more than paid that back
       | 
       | Obviously 70k into 264M is insane and either is like one in a
       | billion luck or the result of insider information
        
         | kjellsbells wrote:
         | Weschler makes essentially the same point: if you dont have the
         | time or desire to spend 24x7x365 thinking about money, index
         | funds are for you. sed s/money/life problems/g.
         | 
         | I think that people forget that these homely-sounding guys like
         | Buffett and Weschler have serious, serious time and mental
         | investments in thinking about money. Theyre not serious like
         | you or I, maybe, who watch a few hours of Bloomberg each week.
         | They eat, sleep, and dream about investing. Theyre basically
         | money monks. Theyre also (and I think they would admit it too)
         | lucky. You can make some of your own luck in investing, by
         | studying businesses like these guys do, but you still need to
         | be lucky. I observe that many of their investments eschew
         | fashionable sectors like tech. I wonder if that is, again,
         | making their own luck. I think Buffett would have choice words
         | to say about investing in Nvidia for example.
        
       | 486sx33 wrote:
       | Further - just remember Jeffrey Epstein got all his wealth
       | investing for rich people... how? We still don't know those
       | details
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-09-27 23:02 UTC)