Stocks

Surviving the Continuous Chain of Disappointments

I thought I would repost an article written last week by Morgan Housel talking about one of the greatest investors, Ed Thorp. For those of you who may not have heard about him, Ed Thorp was the first person to systematically beat casinos at blackjack. He made piles of money, and wrote a book laying out a formula showing how you could do it too.

But not many people did.

Card counting is simple on paper and maddeningly hard in practice. That’s partly because casinos are good at catching card counters. But it’s mostly because even successful card-counting means long, tiring stretches of losing money, which most people can’t stomach.

The casino usually has a 0.5% edge over blackjack players. Thorp’s system titled the stakes, giving players about a 2% edge over the house.

A 2% edge is enough to secure a fortune in the long run. But it also promises hell in the short run, since Thorp was still likely to lose about half his hands. His road to success was paved with agony, as he writes:

I lost steadily, and after four hours I was behind $1,700 and discouraged. Of course, I knew that just as the house can lose in the short run even though it has the advantage in a game, so a card counter can fall behind and this can last for hours or, sometimes, even days. Persisting, I waited for the deck to become favorable just one more time.

The key to Thorp’s system was the ability to survive losing long enough for the 2% edge to materialize. It meant constantly absorbing manageable damage. Many people can’t, or refuse to, do that. Thorp once enlisted a partner, Manny, who was fascinated by the counting system but couldn’t stand the long bouts of losing. “Manny became in turns frantic, disgusted, excited, and finally close to giving up on me as his secret weapon.” As did most who attempted Thorp’s system.

It’s ironic that the secret to winning was learning how to put up with losing, but there it was. “Having an edge and surviving are two different things,” Nassim Taleb once wrote.

This is a great analogy for most business and investing endeavors.

Capitalism doesn’t like edges. It unleashes competition to bang them back toward zero. When edges do arise they’re usually small. A system that gives you a 55%, or 65% chance of success is phenomenal, but it still means you’ll spend close to half your life getting beat up. Since 100% odds of success are either not lucrative, illegal, or ephemeral, the ability to survive losing is a prerequisite to any shot at eventually winning. The business world is a continuous chain of disappointments – recessions, bear markets, brutal competition, employees quitting, supply chain breakdowns, whatever – so every chance at success has to be framed as a net reward down the road amid a constant state of battle and hassle. Thorp understood this. Most of his disciples did not. Most people don’t in general.

Two things come from viewing success as the ability to absorb loss:

It’s easier to be an optimist. Optimism is usually defined as a belief that things will go well. But it’s not. It’s a belief that the odds are in your favor, and over time things will balance out to a favorable outcome even if what happens in between is filled with misery. I’m optimistic about the economy because the odds of success are in its favor. But I still expect a chain of recessions, panics, pullbacks and upheavals. Same for businesses. There are companies whose future I am extremely optimistic about but whose quarterly investor updates I expect to be peppered with setbacks. The two are not mutually exclusive.

You value the margin of safety. Many bets fail not because they were wrong, but because they were mostly right in a situation that required things to be exactly right. Room for error – often called margin of safety – is one of the most underappreciated forces in business. It comes in many forms: A frugal budget, flexible thinking, and a loose timeline – anything that lets you live happily with a range of outcomes. It’s different from being conservative. Conservative is avoiding a certain level of risk. Margin of safety is raising the odds of success at a given level of risk by increasing your chances of survival. Its magic is that the higher your margin of safety, the smaller your edge needs to be to have a favorable outcome. And small edges are where big payoffs tend to live, since most people don’t have the patience to wait around for them.

The point is that short-term loss is usually the cost of admission of long-term gain. It’s a price worth paying, but takes time for the product to be delivered.

Some may be wondering how this all relates to my investing blog. Besides his casino beating system, his Princeton Newport Partners fund, which was set up in 1969, is recognized as the first quant hedge fund (one that uses algorithms). Over 18 years it turned $1.4m into $273m, compounding at more than double the rate of the S&P 500 without suffering so much as one quarter with a loss. Thorp’s then revolutionary use of mathematics, options-pricing and computers gave him a huge advantage. Ed’s moneymaking abilities have made him the “godfather” of many of today’s greatest investors.  The takeaway here is that to be successful at Investing, gambling or any endeavor that puts capital to work in an attempt to profit requires both patience and also an “edge”.

Are Metals and Mining Stocks Losing their Luster?

The metals and mining sector ETF, XME, had been in a severe downtrend losing more than 70% from Sept 2014 to Jan 2016, where it found a bottom. It quickly reversed not giving those waiting for a pullback a chance to enter and completely miss the train. It rose more than 100% before it took even the slightest breather. That’s how strong bull markets work, once the train leaves the station and the bears are forced to cover their shorts and if you want to participate you are forced to hold your nose and Buy, Buy, Buy.  

As you can see in the chart below, XME rose more than 150% before the negative momentum divergences and bearish rising wedge pattern took hold. The pattern if it were to play out, projected to a correction of some 30% lower.  That could have created significant pain to position holders depending upon their entry price. But at least they were warned of the pullback probability allowing them a chance to insure they had an exit plan.

Bay area leading independent certified financial planning advisor in San Ramon.- 3-8-17-XME

From that point and as you can see in the follow on chart below, price broke down from the wedge pattern and horizontal support, but only fell 18% before finding support and then consolidating sideways for 3 months. 18% is much more palatable of a pullback to live through than the 30% target. This is a great example of how “projected” targets (whether they are to the upside or down) are just that, “projected”. Price does not have to ever meet the projected level and even if it does, does not have to stop. As such targets are best used to help manage position risk.

San Ramon fee only CFP indpendent certified investment advisor - 3-8-17 - XME2

With that background we fast forward to chart that includes data through today.  We see XME broke to the upside out of that 3-month consolidation and extended its gains. Maxing out at a healthy 210% total rise from the Jan 2016 bottom. In spite of that excellent performance, all is not well with XME. Once again it has formed a second and much larger (outlined in red) bearish rising wedge during a time when divergence is prominent in the upper pane of price momentum. I emphasize the importance of patter recognition for this exact reason, they repeat. But results out of similar patterns don’t always repeat, XME holders are currently sitting at a crossroads. Having broken down through the bottom side of the wedge, a breakdown below the horizontal support is warning of a much bigger pullback. What I am wondering is if it will be muted like what occurred in the prior (blue wedge) example above or will this one meet (or possibly exceed) its “projected” $24-$24.5 target, some 30+% below its February top?

Bay areas best indpedent financial advisor and retirement planning expert CFP - 3-8-17 -XME3

February 2016 Charts on the Move Video

A February follow through pushed stocks higher. Stocks are overbought and overstretched while sentiment is at an extreme. Add to that the potential (now sitting at 80% probability) the FED raises rates, stocks are facing some headwinds.  Sounds like a perfect recipe for a short to intermediate term pullback.

My latest market video can be viewed at the link below

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZfT8VOGBYJ8

Dumpster Diving

The human brain is an amazing thing, especially when it comes to investing. We seem to be wired to want to buy investments that are falling, catching the proverbial knife and shunning those going up. Why is that? I am don’t know but what I consistently hear for investments going up is “It’s at all-time highs. It can’t go higher. When falling, the rationale is “the falling will have to end sometime and the upside when it eventually ends will be huge.” We apparently seem to think we are capable of picking tops (and bottoms). After more than 15 years, being trained by some of the most successful traders/investors, I can confidently say it rarely happens. Sure, a stopped clock is right 2x a day but getting those instances right does not mean it can be done successfully and consistently over the long haul.

Trying to find the bottom in a stock, because of the potential upside is a great lure and one that appeals to me too. These types of trades/investments I affectionately call dumpster diving. To have any chance of success with dumpster diving, I have found they call for a completely different approach than an investment that is in an uptrend. I thought for this post I would actually walk you through a dumpster dive “trade” that I have made in my own account. In the weekly chart of Fitbit (FIT) below you can see it has done nothing but decline once its IPO hangover begun back in August of 2015, losing almost 90% of its value (peak to trough). We see momentum in the upper pane is currently in the oversold zone but is flattening while price has closed higher (albeit slightly) over the past two weeks.  This week we closed with another hammer candlestick which, in a decline, can be indications of a POTENTIAL, short term bottom. Notice the other hammer that occurred back of the end of June last year and marked a tradeable bottom. During those next 12 weeks after the hammer, the price of FIT rose 40%.  40% in 3 months is nothing to sneeze at. But following price further, we see it turned out to only be a temporary bottom (why dumpster diving must be a trade and not a buy and held) and the decline once again continued in earnest. Going into this trade with price well below the (red) 200 day moving average I fully realize the odds this trade will not be “the bottom” so I will be looking to take profits rather than hold this long term.

San Ramons best independent, fee-only CFP financial advisor - FIT weekly - 2-27-17

To optimize entries into any investment, whether it be a dumpster dive or not it is imperative you view the investment on a shorter term time frame and look for triggers and entry setups. For dumpster dives, in an ideal world what I want to see are

1.      A bottoming pattern

2.      An oversold divergent low in momentum

3.      An increase in volume more than 25% greater than the moving average on its breakout from the pattern

Bay Areas best fee only CFP retirement planning independent investment advisor

Since all of these were present (as you can see in the daily chart of FIT above) I entered the position on Friday of last week.  My first target will be the first gap fill where I will likely take at least ½ the position off the table. If the stock wants to run higher after the fill, the upper gap fill would be my final target where I would be closing out the balance of the position. If I am wrong in my interpretation and the market pushes FIT immediately lower (without filling the initial gap), I will be exiting on a close below the prior low (in this case the “head” of inverse head and shoulders pattern).

Because dumpster dives are not high probability of success (price is below the falling 200 day moving average which suggests you stay away), they should be viewed as only a reversion to the mean trade and managed accordingly.  I will circle back at the point some point in the future when my position has been closed out to see what can be learned from its outcome. 

Wish me luck.