/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>58076425
Going leverage long a tech bubble did not work out so great for Japs in the 80s.

>>57722676
100% SSO by not even checking the balance.

If the S&P drops enough to wipe it, you've got bigger problems to stress about. Like where to get food.

>>57651177
Just remember: if you wouldn't prefer 50% cash/50% VOO to 100% VOO, you shouldn't prefer 100% VOO to 100% SSO

>>57598910
SSO. We die like men.

>>57534450
They say that for every leveraged ETF. Go to TradingView and see the long term performance and drawdown of that vs something like BOIL or UVXY (which is what those warnings *really* apply to).

Then realize that there's nothing magic about 1x leverage (100% SPY) vs. 0.5x leverage (50% SPY, 50% cash) vs. 2x leverage (100% SSO) except time to recover from drawdowns. The S&P 500 can't go to 0* and circuit breakers keep it from dropping 50% overnight.

*OK, it could. But at that point we have bigger problems than our portfolios.

>>57526663
Yes, https://etfdb.com/etf/SSO/#etf-ticker-profile

Just remember the "hold" part of "buy and hold" or else the magic is broken.

>>57477164
SSO, DCA for 20 years without checking the balance, win.

>>57431747
If you're disciplined and plan to hold for 10+ years? SSO. But careful, leverage fucks you if we Nikkei-mode or you bitch out during a crash.

>>57404856
You hit the nail on the head: it's boring. Anons will either fixate on maximizing degeneracy (see: XXXX) or predict we are about to enter Nikkei Crab 2.0. 3x or 0.5x, no in between.

>>57284856
Generally unless there's a big and obvious crisis (think 2008, or COVID which we knew about for months before the market crashed) you can get away with being a slightly levered Boomer DCAing into SSO or QLD

>>57280238
>>57280308
Compound decay doesn't turn a 2x into 0.9x.

No, what kills "buy and hold SPY/SSO/UPRO" is that the next 30 years of America are not going to be like the last 70.

>>57162974
Mid-21st century America is not mid-20th century America. We could very well be in Nikkei mode. In which case your leverage heems you with fees and decay during a multi-decade gigacrab.

>>57022928
I wonder if there's anything for which 5x actually makes sense. Can't be TLT because even bonds got heemed.

>>56969556
>>56969634
I know we meme about it a lot, gentlemen. But you cannot just buy and hold XXXX. UPRO maybe. But not XXXX.

>>56906290
Make it UPRO and yes.

I mean, unless America stagnates or collapses some time within that time frame.

>>56878291
If you can handle the volatility and lower yield, yeah, SSO or UPRO or whatever is the way to go. Assuming you believe in America.

>>56878263
Everything is a pyramid scheme relative to its "real" value. Gold is a pyramid scheme on top of a couple industrial uses. 99% of dollar usage is a pyramid scheme on top of paying the IRS. Every company paying less than 100% of its market cap in dividends is a pyramid scheme.

An uncensorable medium of exchange and unit of account with a predefined inflation schedule *is* underlying value.

>>56674934
>all right ill look into LETFs but i remember hearing theyre worse in europe
I think you guys lean more towards CFDs, and you don't have the SEC capping you at 3x leverage. That said, absolutely do not load up on 4x or 10x SPY trying to take a shortcut. 2-3x is the sweet spot (depending on the index and starting year).

>>56468500
We all know it depends which LETF. Jew out about pennies in SPXL decay and you'll Jew yourself out of dollars in gains.

>>56380426
Yes, we might end up with Euro or New Zealand tier stagflation.

>>56335403
Depending on the future, you may not want SPY or QQQ. You may want TQQQ or SSO. Or even physical cash (secured by your mattress).

>>55098675
They're not if you buy an ETF tracking an index that has circuit breakers protection, be it S&P500, NDX-100, whatever. That way you guarantee that your ETF won't ever be terminated. Don't ever buy a 3x leverage ETN on some commodities, that's the worst shit you could do.
2x leverage is the sweet spot for me and considering the possible drawdown, though honestly 3x can work as well considering the drawdown will be as shit as 2x anyway. Holding 2x going as low as -60% or 3x going as low as -75% in a market downturn won't change much psychologically, really.

>>53738703
2x until I die

>>53554128
People will point out pic related and this article (+ the paper that is linked to this article) to tell you it's a non issue for long periods of holding : http://www.ddnum.com/articles/leveragedETFs.php

I tend to think so as well, but who knows. I think 3x is probably too much for my heart, and a crab market going on for years could fuck you quite a lot. I think 2x is more reasonable, with, of course, less potential gains.

>>53062848
Remember to find out if he's a pussy or not. I know SPXL brought my retirement forward by *years* relative to SPY.