2011, horrible year for stocks?

Question

I thought stocks were on the rebound back at the end of 2010, so I loaded up on financials, energy, technology--hell I even threw in to renewable energy. WOW. All sectors plunged straight south almost to the gates of hell themselves. I dare say that 2011 was like a fool's paradise for investing, don't you?

Answer 1

not all sectors plunged and certainly not all stocks...in fact many companies are at pre-2008 crash highs.



If your investments plunged 60% or more...then you are not either paying attention to your investments or have no skills to do so.



Personally I doubt things are going to get better in at least the first part of 2012...especially for your financial sector stocks.



2011 started great until about March with that Japanese nuclear power disaster. It certainly has been a salting out of the good versus the bad companies...sounds like you elected the bad side of the coin.



Difficult to make money in this market, but it has not been as bad as the 2008 crash....yet anyway.

Answer 2

Nope, I'm up in the mid teens, YTD.



All sectors didn't plunge and, perhaps, more importantly, the price you pay matters most.



I'm going to guess that you got hit with the triple whammy:



(1) Bought pieces rather than the whole (perhaps based on a flawed premise). The SPY is positive YTD, just. And up just a bit more over the last 52 weeks.



(2) Paid too much. Buying on upswings or near 52 week highs is never a good idea for short term plays (one year is a short term trade). If you can't capture at least a 10-20% discount in a volatile market, you are better off waiting to buy.



(3) Buying the wrong sectors. Why financial and technology for heavens sake? No one thinks those sectors are working. For a "rebound" catch you would normally buy stuff that is temporarily down, not stuff that is dead. "All sectors" and, more importantly, all stocks at any price are not down this year.



I bought big slugs of PM, MO, XOM, and VIG at lows in the last 52 weeks. They account for the majority of my trading gain in my "buy and hold" trading portfolio.



(Most of my portfolio is not traded)



My speculative port is currently down in the 10% range, but that isn't shocking, rare, or based on trades from last year at this time (it was largely in cash into the spring).



My oil trade there is down 3.73% as of close today. A little surprising given the current price of oil -- but since I tend to buy the kind of "odd" things (this is not XOM, btw) that get undervalued and since I don't expect a full payday for at least another 3 months, I'm not feeling like a fool.



My speculative gold trade is only 50% established. It's down 0.73% right now. It needs to go red by a good bit more for me to buy more.



My "biggest losers" at the moment are big bets (fully placed now) in the value category. Extremely high dividend payers with exposure to horrible sectors: mortgages, Euroland, and volatility exposure. The very definition of "risk on." I would rather be buying now (at lower prices), but I can't say I didn't know I might be buying too soon. I still think I am right...at least I am being paid 10% (weighted average) to wait.

Answer 3

Renewable energy, huh? Welcome to Ouch City, population you.



I stayed away from renewable energy, but I cashed out (seriously I did this) a week before the big increase in October - I went from 70% equities to about 30%. The train left without me. Now I'm waiting for a pullback to get back in. I hate rooting against the market but a pullback is inevitable.



If 2011 proved anything, it is that this is a range bound market. It is vitally important to buy on dips and sell on good days. Also, I'm staying away from growth stocks for the most part and sticking with dividend payers.

Answer 4

As you say 2011 has been a terrible year for investing or trading. I have recently changed my whole strategy. I am sitting on defensive stocks suggested by the "experts" in 2010 oil, agriculture, consumables, pharmacies, ALL down. My friend bought dividend paying stocks....all down. I have just recently gone to short term and day trading strategy. I have spoke against day trading for years. I am somewhat saavy in technical analysis, and this seems to be my latest strategy for this evoironment, and it seems to be working. If you don't know technical analysis, don't try it.

Answer 5

You must be pretty young. The stock market is about flat for the year. That's your definition of the "gates of hell"?



Edit: All your stocks are down 60% or more on the year and yet you own INTC. INTC is up like 20% on the year. Anyway, if you are down 60% on each of your stocks you are an absolutely terrible stock picker and should just buy index ETF's.

Answer 6

I won't call you a poor stock picker. But I would say your shares are distributed differently. You own more shares in the losers and less shares in winners. In terms of dollar distribution, they maybe very even. Stock prices differ from one to another. Of course if you own IBM & WMT also, you'd have far less problem.



Watch out for your portfolios, if you are a long term investor, the technology stocks are inappropriate.

Answer 7

The most sensible 3 QBs are evidently Andrew Luck, Ryan Mallet and Jake Locker, regardless that Locker has fallen again a gigantic bit. As some distance as Luck and Mallet is going, a group cannot move fallacious both manner and it'll come all the way down to the offense they run and whether or not they are watching for the top ceiling or the top flooring. First off the Ryan Mallet-JaMarcus Russell assessment is ridiculous. Outside in their dimension, arm force and the convention they are from they've no similarities. Mallet is not essentially the most athletic man on the earth however he is some distance from the statue that Russell used to be and is honestly beautiful respectable at relocating across the pocket and walking the bootleg. His accuracy is extra regular than Russell's used to be, and he is been in a position to make colossal strides in the course of his profession and refine his knowledge, at the same time Russell used to be completely satisfied simply depending on his absurd common knowledge. He's been some distance larger than Russell ever used to be in tuition and so much importantly has that fireplace and aggressive nature that saved Russell from being a pleasant QB. If some thing he is bought Russell's proficiency with Phillip Rivers' angle, that's a horny excellent mixture. But if I needed to take one QB, it might be Luck. His bodily equipment are slightly above typical, however he's surgically correct and simply appears so constructive, poised and mature at the area. In many approaches he jogs my memory of Matt Ryan, and if he can maintain to run with this Stanford group on his shoulders down the stretch that assessment can be extra apt. Locker has pleasant bodily equipment, but when some thing he is regressed on the grounds that final 12 months. He will get zero support from his aiding forged however all of the portions of a pleasant QB are without doubt there. He will get so much of his awareness for his walking capability, however men and women confuse that with him being a run first QB. He evidently is a pocket QB that appears to go first. He has a powerful arm and a speedy free up, regardless that his accuracy is fairly inconsistent. If he can step it up down the stretch it'll exhibit plenty and he can transfer again as much as the primary part of the primary circular. After the ones 3 it will get beautiful hazy. I'd mostly say that the following nice ones are Nate Enderle, Christian Ponder, Nick Foles and Ricky Stanzi. Enderle and Foles are beautiful uncooked however have pleasant frames and really powerful hands. Enderle additionally runs a quite professional type offense, which would possibly move far in easing his transition into the NFL. Stanzi I like for his seize capability final 12 months and his benefit to functioning at a top stage for a entire sport as an alternative of simply the tip. He's now not essentially the most bodily gifted man, but it surely appears like he could make a number of the NFL throws and he's deceptively cellphone. Ponder is beautiful forged throughout however does not do some thing that fairly impresses. Every time I seem out for him he suggests me a few flashes of pleasant play, however continually has a couple of matters that preserve me from getting too wild approximately him. His arm force is not dangerous but it surely without doubt drops off later in video games and he has a tough time shaking off dangerous performs. I have not watched Devlin in any respect so I cannot fairly remark on him, however I've heard wildly various reviews, a few of which say that his arm force is puffed up. Either manner he's going to ought to fairly gentle it up down the stretch to get anyplace close the awareness that Flacco bought. Kellen Moore as an NFL QB virtually makes me giggle. Even except the truth that he is brief, thin and performs in a variety offense in a midmajor convention, he simply does not have the knowledge or bodily equipment that make an NFL QB. Like so much small unfold QBs he floats his deep ball, however he does not also have the pace at the brief and intermediate ones that men like Colt McCoy did/does. He is beautiful correct and does a pleasant process of placing contact on his passes, however plenty goes to ought to holiday the proper manner for him to have a lot luck within the NFL. If a QB "struggles within the passing sport" (your phrases) like Kaepernick he has no industry being in any person's most sensible five. C'mon... I do not see Newton or Terrelle Pryor pointing out this 12 months, and in the event that they do nor is anyplace close competent to be taken very top, regardless that I would see Pryor blowing up in a bowl sport and feature his draft inventory skyrocket. John Brantley hasn't inspired me in any respect. He has well dimension and a are living arm, however even since the deficient offensive line play he simply has been highly underwhelming and inconsistent.

Answer 8

Not really. I bought Gold.