proposed TR - total returns - strategies board

[tjh290633]

And that's great. I don't have any issue with that. Most don't measure and they really should (me included). But just because you measure it doesn't mean you are following a TR strategy.

Just like HYP is more than High Yield Portfolio. Each of the three words mean something, and even for most people outside this forum the three in combination mean something. But here HYP means something specific, and different. Total Return, as a concept and a strategy, are different from measuring and knowing one's total return.

I feel somewhat uncomfortable saying it, but just like proponents of HYP on a particular board resort to statements such as "if you don't get it you shouldn't be here (or at least read about it and start to "get it")", I urge you to either start to "get it" or at least resist the urge to dismiss it.

I'm afraid it is you that does not get it. Total Return is Total Return, full stop. Only by measuring it do you get an indication of whether you are achieving it. It is quite possible for an HYP strategy to achieve higher TR than a strategy aimed at achieving it. The HIX and LIX indices are a good indication of how that applied for a good number of years. Both started at the same value on the same day.

If you consult http://markets.ft.com/Research/Markets/ ... &Type=GWSM you will see that at the close last night the respective values were:

FTSE350 HY - 5267.67
FTSE350 LY - 4325.92

The differential has narrowed over the last year or so, but they didn't get that way by accident. If the link doesn't work, Google "World Markets at a Glance" and the lastest page will appear.

TJH

[dealtn]

And that's great. I don't have any issue with that. Most don't measure and they really should (me included). But just because you measure it doesn't mean you are following a TR strategy.

Just like HYP is more than High Yield Portfolio. Each of the three words mean something, and even for most people outside this forum the three in combination mean something. But here HYP means something specific, and different. Total Return, as a concept and a strategy, are different from measuring and knowing one's total return.

I feel somewhat uncomfortable saying it, but just like proponents of HYP on a particular board resort to statements such as "if you don't get it you shouldn't be here (or at least read about it and start to "get it")", I urge you to either start to "get it" or at least resist the urge to dismiss it.

I'm afraid it is you that does not get it. Total Return is Total Return, full stop. Only by measuring it do you get an indication of whether you are achieving it. It is quite possible for an HYP strategy to achieve higher TR than a strategy aimed at achieving it. The HIX and LIX indices are a good indication of how that applied for a good number of years. Both started at the same value on the same day.

If you consult http://markets.ft.com/Research/Markets/ ... &Type=GWSM you will see that at the close last night the respective values were:

FTSE350 HY - 5267.67
FTSE350 LY - 4325.92

The differential has narrowed over the last year or so, but they didn't get that way by accident. If the link doesn't work, Google "World Markets at a Glance" and the lastest page will appear.

TJH

Please note I am (deliberately) not making any comparison between HYP, and any other strategy. I am making no claims about how good HYP is, whether it is worse or better than ANY alternative, let alone what is known as Total Return as a strategy. I am extremely happy for those that follow HYP to continue to do so, and for them to enjoy measuring whatever metric they want to from it, be that income alone, or their total return,

But please just because you measure something and call it its total return doesn't make it the same thing as a Total Return strategy. If by happy accident what is more generally known as a Total Strategy was called something else would you really be making the claims that you do? If it was somewhat bizarrely called "length of investment strategy", would you be claiming that because you are able to know exactly when you bought the first share in your HYP that would mean HYP's were also a "length of investment strategy"?

Just like Fixed Income investing is different to HYP, or Foreign Equity investing is different to HYP, so is Total Return investing. The fact that the first 2 are "forbidden" and the 3rd isn't doesn't make it any less of a different strategy.

[tjh290633]

Just like Fixed Income investing is different to HYP, or Foreign Equity investing is different to HYP, so is Total Return investing. The fact that the first 2 are "forbidden" and the 3rd isn't doesn't make it any less of a different strategy.

Will you at least agree that a High Yield Strategy has in the past given a better Total Return than many a so-called Total Return Strategy?

TJH

[csearle]

Guys, this thread is supposed to be about whether a TR - Strategies board should be created or not rather than on the relative merits of HYP v. TR,

Chirs

[CryptoPlankton]

Guys, this thread is supposed to be about whether a TR - Strategies board should be created or not rather than on the relative merits of HYP v. TR,

Chirs

Judging by this thread, we might be better served by a new board called "Argument Clinic". I think perhaps I'll start with a five minute one and see how it goes...

[1nvest]

A total return investment strategy could go into the investment strategies section. Seems to me as though it might be light on traffic/interest for it to have a dedicated section. Measuring/reporting total returns are best left in their own relevant section - such as HYP section having total return/accumulation posts/reports. If drawing strategy is being considered - such as spending dividends or Safe Withdrawal Rate ...etc. then again that is limited and global (SWR can for instance be applied to HYP accumulation).

Perhaps leave things as-is, and those interested in a total return strategy start a thread under Investment Strategies and if the interest is large enough that might subsequently be moved over to its own dedicated section. I don't however see that being the case.

Total Return measures are a reasonable method to compare different investment strategies/allocations, but are by no means definitive. For instance a Talmud asset allocation (home, stock, reserves) total return could be measured on a accumulation basis (reinvestment of 'income')

... but in that example its including imputed rent benefit of owning your own home (not having to find/pay rent to others), which in practice isn't actually reinvested/accumulated, but is in effect spent. However similarly another who didn't own their own home and had to actually find/pay rent to live in a similar sized/location home would need their investments total return to compare to that Talmud total return figure in order to live a comparable lifestyle.

Proposing a new section such as a "Total Returns" board isn't clearly defined enough to vote upon, needs more clarity as to the intended content.

[fca2019]

Joke suggestion, 3 strategies boards to cover the 3 types of investor:

Total return portfolio
The strategy formerly known as High Yield Portfolio
Put it all in red, Tesla, Netflix, Two stock portfolio

[1nvest]

Just like Fixed Income investing is different to HYP, or Foreign Equity investing is different to HYP, so is Total Return investing. The fact that the first 2 are "forbidden" and the 3rd isn't doesn't make it any less of a different strategy.

Will you at least agree that a High Yield Strategy has in the past given a better Total Return than many a so-called Total Return Strategy?

TJH

Year to date cash total return has gained something like 30% more HYP stock purchase power. Selective time points can be used to compare total returns of strategy A with strategy B to most likely tilt the outcome to however you might prefer. A common measure is to use the longest period for which data is available and compare both total return along with volatility (Sharpe Ratio). Two investments might achieve the same broad total return, but if one is twice as volatile as the other then it will tend to zigzag around the low volatility alternative, such that selective time points might suggest the higher volatility choice was the better (or counter argument that it was worse).

High net worth investors often look to minimise taxable events such as dividends. They don't want forced returns of capital (such as dividends) and would rather just sell enough shares/assets to generate their own 'dividend' out of total return. If that is the intent of a Total Return board/section then again that will be limited in traffic IMO as many of such investors will have relatively low levels of stock exposure anyway. Direct (or indirect via Indexes) stock ownership by both large funds and high net worth investors has been in relative decline for years/decades now to instead utilise derivatives and other such alternatives.

Stocks used to be a way to dilute down the risk of ownership of a enterprise, share the high capital risk across many. In the new era many of the largest firms have relatively low levels of need for capital - much of the value is in intangible value.

Again without greater clarity as to the intended content of a Total Return section the proposal is mute.

[PinkDalek]

Again without greater clarity as to the intended content of a Total Return section the proposal is mute.

Love it and might well be the best solution as to the question of a possible new board.

[Padders72]

Just like Fixed Income investing is different to HYP, or Foreign Equity investing is different to HYP, so is Total Return investing. The fact that the first 2 are "forbidden" and the 3rd isn't doesn't make it any less of a different strategy.

Will you at least agree that a High Yield Strategy has in the past given a better Total Return than many a so-called Total Return Strategy?

TJH

Again without greater clarity as to the intended content of a Total Return section the proposal is mute.

Moot.

[PinkDalek]

Moot.

Guess you missed my reply immediately preceding yours. I prefer the original uncorrected version.

[Padders72]

Moot.

Guess you missed my reply immediately preceding yours. I prefer the original uncorrected version.

Indeed so!

[dspp]

Moot not mute

[PinkDalek]

Moot not mute

Do keep up!

[Itsallaguess]

High net worth investors often look to minimise taxable events such as dividends.

They don't want forced returns of capital (such as dividends) and would rather just sell enough shares/assets to generate their own 'dividend' out of total return.

I've seen you write that sentence so often in recent times that I would like to discuss it on a separate thread if possible, so as not to further spoil this one -

The potential influence of 'taxable events' on how we might draw income -

https://www.lemonfool.co.uk/viewtopic.php?f=8&t=23465

Cheers,

Itsallaguess

[GoSeigen]

a more flexible open and free TR board would help yourself and others perhaps.

We don't need any help thank you. There are already about 80 boards where TR discussion is welcomed.


GS

[jackdaww]

a more flexible open and free TR board would help yourself and others perhaps.

We don't need any help thank you. There are already about 80 boards where TR discussion is welcomed.


GS

=========================

whose "WE" ?

[AsleepInYorkshire]

a more flexible open and free TR board would help yourself and others perhaps.

We don't need any help thank you. There are already about 80 boards where TR discussion is welcomed.

GS

I wonder if it's worth considering having one focal point where all those discussions can be in one place?

On a totally different note I'm not sure that exploring the motives and thoughts behind a request for a new board is particularly engaging (and of course I am speaking for myself). I think the important issues are how much work is involved in setting it up and what happens if the board becomes a posting desert after any [potential] surge in initial interest.

AiYn'U

[dealtn]

Just like Fixed Income investing is different to HYP, or Foreign Equity investing is different to HYP, so is Total Return investing. The fact that the first 2 are "forbidden" and the 3rd isn't doesn't make it any less of a different strategy.

Will you at least agree that a High Yield Strategy has in the past given a better Total Return than many a so-called Total Return Strategy?

TJH

I genuinely haven't studied it, not ever having participated in HYP, or been attracted to its narrow approach. And to be honest that's irrelevant to the discussion.

But if it makes you happy I would be amazed if there weren't instances where HYP didn't beat some Total Return strategies in the past over all kinds of time frames. Similarly there will be some that haven't.

Given the almost limitless combinations of portfolios under all kinds of strategies the spread of success/failure will be wide across both approaches.

I'm not sure why this is so controversial to some here, each has its place, and there isn't a general desire to prove points about which is best, at least from me.

[gryffron]

I don't really understand what you mean by Total Return in this respect, or why it needs a new board. Imo, ALL investing is ultimately Total Return, even HYP. So all the financial boards apply, regardless of whether they mention the term or not?

But I would say...

Will you at least agree that a High Yield Strategy has in the past given a better Total Return than many a so-called Total Return Strategy?

That question doesn't matter here. It's irrelevant. Whether any particular strategy gives better or worse returns than any other is a discussion for the Investment Strategies board. It is not a reason to give anything its own board nor to suppress it. You're not arguing against TR, your post simply implies that HYP is your chosen TR strategy.

Oh, and yes, there is a general resistance to spawning loads of new boards. Unless they genuinely cover something that cannot be expressed elsewhere. I don't see that is the case here. TR-Strategy = Investment strategies. TR-Practical = Share Ideas.

Gryff