News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by hogFeast on Saturday April 10, 2021 @06:53PM (#26766008)
Without being totally dismissive of every person who has contributed to the platforms you mention...99.99% of the stuff on YouTube is terrible, and most of the stuff written about GME was total nonsense.

It is difficult to convey this because, in the end, you have no idea either so you don't know whether there is useful stuff on YouTube or if I am just talking nonsense too...but it is so bad, and it gives the misleading impression that picking stocks is very easy. It isn't, people do CFAs (allegedly, a hard exam), MBAs, and work in fund management every day for decades...and will never come close to being profitable (indeed, what is amazing is how many people have no knowledge but end up doing okay...it is remarkable...the post is a perfect example, no content, no apparent understanding of investing...somehow the guy is a billionaire from investing, like Chamath...amazing).

It is gambling (the distinction between gambling and investing is information), what most VCs are doing in the space is financial terrorism (stuff like WealthFront is an unbelievable scam, it is 1980s-style financial advice), and most people should take your approach (although it is still very easy to go wrong with 3 ETFs...most people will get there though).

Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by voces on Sunday April 11, 2021 @02:37AM (#26767979)
In a sense, you both are correct. The stuff on YouTube is terrible, but it is also used by many (some made a lot of money and so are very vocal about it). A 1000 YouTube videos promoting a terrible coin. The price is going up. Even the one who went to YouTube to consume the drivel and act on it made some money. 5 videos were top-notch production quality, measuring itself against the top paid analysis.

A crazy thing went on early with ETH bot trading. Of course, if you are going to download a bot from Github which works on a few trends and technical indicators, you should not expect to make a lot of money. But many did -- It is easy to predict whether a rocket is going up. The features the bot used are still indicative (at other timeframes), because so many were running them, influencing the price in future timeframes.

> misleading impression that picking stocks is very easy

At least picking a stock yourself is easier than predicting what stock someone else will pick.

> MBAs, and work in fund management every day for decades...and will never come close to being profitable

That seems like a cosy lifestyle not worth bragging about, good job security. Rooting for the night janitor at a small hotel though, who put a 1000$ on doge coin when first reading about the rememe potential.

But I agree with the gambling and financial terrorism for kicks. More as a warning against financial irresponsibility, less as in "stay of my turf!".

Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by ec109685 on Saturday April 10, 2021 @07:30PM (#26766271)
Why is Wealthfront so bad? Their fees don’t make them cheap, is that it?
Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by hogFeast on Saturday April 10, 2021 @07:40PM (#26766329)
Correct. What they are selling you is an asset allocation, this turns on it's head all the innovation since the early 90s...and the performance you likely get will be indistinguishable from what most people could achieve on their own.

One of the big advantages that savers have today are open platforms (there was a time when fund managers ran their own platforms), low dealing costs, low spreads, and ETFs. All that investors need to do is just work out the asset allocation themselves and they will save huge amounts. And I would guess 95% of people reading this are able to do it.

Just to be clear, we are looking for a least bad situation. Asset allocation is very complex, there is no way most investors can get an amazing result themselves but what most investors don't know is that WealthFront have zero chance too. So the aim is to equal what they do without their mad fees (I have no idea how they charge so much, marketing? I don't know, I know small advisers that were profitable charging lower fees...it makes no sense).

Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by skybrian on Saturday April 10, 2021 @10:24PM (#26767032)
They make claims of better tax efficiency via tax-loss harvesting [1]. I don't know or care enough to evaluate it, but maybe it's better for some people, even if the allocation is no better than an ETF? Even if it worked, I wouldn't bother to do it manually.

This doesn't matter for a retirement account, though.

[1] https://support.wealthfront.com/hc/en-us/articles/209348486-...

Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by hogFeast on Saturday April 10, 2021 @11:12PM (#26767207)
That is going to depend on what the rules are, and what rates you pay. But is tax-loss harvesting beyond the wit of everyone but WealthFront? No. If you aren't bothered to do it manually then it can't be a big benefit for you...it is always amazes me that companies manage to base their products around utterly pointless/marginal features that no-one uses, like why do you care? It is like people choosing an advisor because of their charts...yep, they got the charts from a third-party charting provider for $10/month, and you are going to pay tens of thousands (or more) over a lifetime. Smh.
Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by Thorrez on Sunday April 11, 2021 @12:52AM (#26767563)
>If you aren't bothered to do it manually then it can't be a big benefit for you...

Wealthfront has economies of scale to write a program to perform tax loss harvesting automatically. Just because it's not worthwhile for me to do it manually myself doesn't make it not worthwhile for a program to do it automatically. Wealthfront does daily tax loss harvesting on individual stocks. That would be a tremendous amount of work for me to do manually.

That said, I don't know whether Wealthfront's benefit outweighs their 0.25% fee.

I guess what we really need is a well-regarded open source program that hooks into brokerage's API and does this advanced tax loss harvesting.

Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by freetime2 on Sunday April 11, 2021 @06:57PM (#26774328)
> Wealthfront does daily tax loss harvesting on individual stocks

Does WealthFront do anything at the individual stock level? My understanding from looking at their landing page [1] is that they basically just allocate your money across a number of publicly traded ETFs:

> How do you choose my investments?

> We choose exchange-traded funds (ETFs) that track an index, such as the S&P 500 or emerging markets. Wealthfront chooses the ETFs with the lowest costs and proper tracking of their index.

Also, you pay the expense ratios of those ETFs in addition to the fees that WealthFront charges:

> What are the costs to invest?

> We’re glad you asked. Our annual advisory fee is 0.25%. On average, you’ll also pay a low 0.06%–0.13% expense ratio. Companies who run investment funds charge this fee, and it comes straight out of that fund’s performance (you aren’t billed directly). Everyone who invests in ETFs pays this fee.

I think would be fairly easy for any ETF investor to approximate WealthFront's tax-loss harvesting strategy in their own brokerage accounts. E.g. simply go in once a quarter and sell any lots of VOO for a loss where possible, and replace with an equivalent like SPY.

[1] https://www.wealthfront.com/investing

Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by erik_seaberg on Sunday April 11, 2021 @07:04PM (#26774361)
Above $100K, Wealthfront mixes individual stocks and ETFs.

https://support.wealthfront.com/hc/en-us/articles/211005023-...

(I am a customer.)

Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by MR4D on Tuesday April 13, 2021 @02:37AM (#26788824)
In order to avoid wash-sale rules, you’d want them to be similar, but slightly different; such as VOO and VTI.
Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by freetime2 on Tuesday April 13, 2021 @05:01PM (#26799255)
According to Investopedia at least [1], VOO and SPY are not considered substantially identical by the IRS:

> For example, if an investor sells the SPDR S&P 500 ETF (SPY) at a loss, they can immediately turn around and purchase the Vanguard S&P 500 ETF.

> The rationale is that the two S&P 500 ETFs have different fund managers, different expense ratios, may replicate the underlying index using a different methodology, and may have different levels of liquidity in the market. Presently, the IRS does not deem this type of transaction as involving substantially identical securities and so it is allowed, although this may be subject to change in the future as the practice becomes more widespread.

[1] https://www.investopedia.com/terms/s/substantiallyidenticals...

Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by Thorrez on Wednesday April 14, 2021 @12:56AM (#26803078)
I wonder where that page gets its information. Its own quote links to an IRS document that doesn't seem to mention this case. Other places online recommend against it.

>There has been no IRS ruling on whether ETFs from two different companies that track the same index are considered substantially identical.

https://www.fidelity.com/learning-center/investment-products...

>Investment advisors and tax planners recommend against selling an index mutual fund from one fund company and buying another index fund tracking the same stock index from another mutual fund company.

https://finance.zacks.com/substantially-identical-mutual-fun...

>And while arguably swapping from index funds like SPY to IVV are almost certainly a wash sale abuse (or at least, a transaction that should trigger the wash sale rules)

https://www.kitces.com/blog/the-wash-sale-problem-when-tax-l...

If you look at Wealthfront's own documentation, when they do tax loss harvesting with ETFs, they find ETFs that track similar but not identical indexes:

https://research.wealthfront.com/whitepapers/tax-loss-harves...

Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by freetime2 on Wednesday April 14, 2021 @05:13PM (#26813171)
Yup it sounds like a bit of a gray area for now. I think for most people it probably comes down to the way your broker reports the transaction on your 1099. I.e. if my broker reports it to the IRS as a "covered" loss, that's probably what I would use when filing my taxes.
Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by skybrian on Sunday April 11, 2021 @12:44AM (#26767528)
I don't personally care. I'm just saying that it's not crazy to want to do this sort of thing without figuring it out yourself. Maybe it pays for itself in some cases?
Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by akor on Sunday April 11, 2021 @09:10AM (#26770106)
> ...but what most investors don't know is that WealthFront have zero chance too. So the aim is to equal what they do without their mad fees...

Can someone help me understand this comment as to my knowledge WeathFront (WF) fees were the lowest in the industry. For example people talk about Vanguard fees as also being low but they're between 0.25% and 1% [1]. If it makes a difference I'm specifically coming at it from the lens of IRA retirement contributions.

Is the parent post saying the alternative is to figure out what specific stocks/ETF/index WF is purchasing and then purchase those with something like eTrade?

TIA

[1] https://investor.vanguard.com/mutual-funds/fees

Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by freetime2 on Sunday April 11, 2021 @05:26PM (#26773595)
Those vanguard fees that you reference aren't really applicable in a comparison with WealthFront. Those are one-time fees when you buy and sell shares, and only apply to a very small number of mutual funds (emerging markets bonds, international real estate, etc). Most vanguard investors don't invest in these funds or pay those fees, and I believe WealthFront doesn't even offer equivalent investments.

On the other hand, you pay that 0.25% fee that WealthFront charges every year, regardless of the performance of your portfolio, and it can pretty quickly amount to thousands of dollars per year.

Most brokerages (Vanguard, Schwab, Robinhood, etc) don't charge any sort of equivalent fee - they are free to open and maintain. And yes it is fairly easy to construct an equivalent portfolio made up of ETFs in a standard brokerage account. You would be losing out on the convenience of WealthFront's automated rebalancing and tax-lost harvesting, though.

Is the convenience of automated investment, rebalancing, and tax-lost harvesting worth paying 0.25% of your total account balance every year? For me, no. But I know some people who are really happy with services like WealthFront and Betterment. Especially for someone just getting started with investing, I would have no issues recommending those services.

Edit: also just noticed you are referring to a retirement account. In that case, WF's tax-loss harvesting feature would not be applicable (since retirement accounts are tax-free), so even less of an incentive to go with WF vs. DIY.

Re:“Buy and Hold” No More: The Resurgence of Active Trading by martinflack on Sunday April 11, 2021 @10:46AM (#26770677)
> this turns on it's head all the innovation since the early 90s...

Would you mind just mentioning what that is?