Portfolio updated thoughts please...



  • @BenniiP I saw he came off last night with a thigh injury, so I'm hoping there may be a drop as a reaction then I'll jump on board. Waiting to see the severity of the injury before I do anything though



  • @Pagey74 Could I ask which 5 you narrowed it down to?



  • @Pagey74 You are seeing things from the point of view of a stock split which fueled a huge increase over the last 6 months - this is not a common thing in markets. You are exposing yourself to very large fluctuations which can go either side: but if you are accepting it as gambling this is totally fine ✅



  • @gball1975 Sure mate. TAA, Messi,Goretzka,Neymar & Pogba. I hold 4 more but with hardly any shares but will be topping up on them. They are Poulsen,Alcacer,Moreno and Ben Yedder.

    I think a lot strikers have gone unnoticed since the dividend increase and due to several reasons including the Euro's and the growth of the index I believe they will soon get noticed once they start banging in the goals.

    Thanks for allowing me to pump my port 😁😁



  • @Pagey74 No worries pal. That is actually my thinking with holding Malen and Edouard, hope for a lot of transfer spec if not before certainly for the summer. Malen should rocket around March / April I reckon.



  • @NewUser455434 I understand your point and wouldn't argue with a lot of things you say. However I see the index as gambling like I do the stock market and I am willing to gamble on having a lot smaller port than most to increase my returns. On the flip side my losses are going to be greater when they are not performing.



  • @NewUser455434 How many players you hold is about your risk/reward appetite.
    Portfolios with a smaller number of players always have the opportunity to make larger gains but with that comes greater exposure to risk through an injury or change in market sentiment.
    A larger portfolio will likely make smaller gains but with less risk to a sudden drop.
    Both are viable strategies depending on the individual's risk levels - but in a booming market like this where there is a fairly narrow field of players flying I would suggest a smaller portfolio is significantly more profitable.



  • @janner73 That's what I was trying to say!! Thanks pal.



  • @janner73 .. is significantly more riskier, hence more profitable if things go well.

    But again, I don’t see how a 10-players portfolio is more profitable than a 25 players portfolio in the long-run, unless you are starting from the pow of a booming market (as you have had in the last 6 months).

    I don’t know if you noticed, but there are more and more threads of people losing money or break-even.



  • @NewUser455434 thing is though, a lot of the port/threads that are being posted about losing money is because people are investing in the wrong players (for now). FI have drastically increased dividends for PB, yet people are wondering why their players who have little chance of winning PB or aren't playing regular football as they're youth players are dropping in price. It's a bit like if Tesco said they were offering double club card points on every purchase made of beer, and then people kept buying wine and wondered why everyone who's been buying beer has ended up with double their clubcard points.



  • @ChazFI123 Brilliant analogy!! Football index in terms of alcohol? Hmmmm...interesting!!



  • @NewUser455434 you are talking jassss

    Number of players in port on its own has very little bearing on risk or profitability.

    As someone who frequently moves shrinks and bloats my port, having considered market variables, I can say both strategies have a place and are equally risky/profitable in the right circumstance.

    Stacking high on one player you see has potential quick growth i. E. A transfer rumour can make in minutes/hours what that same money would make in a year diversified across longer holds. Only having one player, if you have the time and skill to apply, means you can monitor information and the market and react far quicker to good/bad news than if you hold hundreds.

    When divs were less meaningful I stacked high on trend (youth, goalscorers etc) but these were inherently risky as they had little real value so you have to keep an eye on their price 24/7 to time the exit correctly. This, for me, meant holding fewer shares so i could keep track and concentrate.

    Now divs are valuable again, I can diversify and give myself a better chance of winning. And whilst the players will have weekly peaks and troughs, it's an inherently less risky strategy as the players have genuine value and 'should' grow with the market. So I'm happy with 50 players as I don't really care or need to monitor their price movements weekly let alone 24/7.



  • @Vespasian32 The voice of reason has spoken again (hahaha)



  • @NewUser455434
    As others have pointed out people aren't losing money cos of the amount of players they have, it's because they have the wrong players.
    It doesnt matter if you have 1 player or 25 players if they're youth players and not PB players you'll be losing.



  • @Vespasian32 said in Portfolio updated thoughts please...:

    @NewUser455434 you are talking jassss

    Number of players in port on its own has very little bearing on risk or profitability.

    As someone who frequently moves shrinks and bloats my port, having considered market variables, I can say both strategies have a place and are equally risky/profitable in the right circumstance.

    Stacking high on one player you see has potential quick growth i. E. A transfer rumour can make in minutes/hours what that same money would make in a year diversified across longer holds. Only having one player, if you have the time and skill to apply, means you can monitor information and the market and react far quicker to good/bad news than if you hold hundreds.

    When divs were less meaningful I stacked high on trend (youth, goalscorers etc) but these were inherently risky as they had little real value so you have to keep an eye on their price 24/7 to time the exit correctly. This, for me, meant holding fewer shares so i could keep track and concentrate.

    Now divs are valuable again, I can diversify and give myself a better chance of winning. And whilst the players will have weekly peaks and troughs, it's an inherently less risky strategy as the players have genuine value and 'should' grow with the market. So I'm happy with 50 players as I don't really care or need to monitor their price movements weekly let alone 24/7.

    I play the game much the same as @Vespasian32 but never realised it until recently. Ive spoke of the benefits of big and small ports and changed my tactics so many times but the truth is my port shrinks and expands as and when i need to de risk or capitalise or trends or the current market sentiment. Its worth remembering that football knowledge will only take you so far. Understanding and predicting how other traders will act and react is key if you want to remain successful on here



  • So basically...sell CHO, buy Kimmick yeah??



  • @janner73 this statement was not valid before 18th Oct. This market is also very illiquid (I couldn’t sell 10 Lewandowski shares in last 24 hours, 10 not 1000) and to sell a youth player like Greenwood (which people considered a god just 60 days ago) it would cost you 10%+. If you have only 10 players, this would be 1% of your portfolio.

    But again, I just want to make sure that people understand the risk.



  • @NewUser455434
    It is illiquid if you are holding players in the wrong part of the market.
    Nobody wants Greenwood therefore the only way out is to IS. If you were trying to sell Alexander-Arnold he would sell in minutes.
    If you're selling when everybody else is selling then of course it's difficult - again nothing to do with amount of players held but everything to do with understanding the market and the trends at any given time.
    You mentioned gambling earlier and it's probably wise to remember this IS a gambling platform so we are all gambling whether you think so or not.



  • @NewUser455434 said in Portfolio updated thoughts please...:

    @janner73 this statement was not valid before 18th Oct. This market is also very illiquid (I couldn’t sell 10 Lewandowski shares in last 24 hours, 10 not 1000) and to sell a youth player like Greenwood (which people considered a god just 60 days ago) it would cost you 10%+. If you have only 10 players, this would be 1% of your portfolio.

    But again, I just want to make sure that people understand the risk.

    Losing 1% through IS is no issue tho. You have to factor this into any purchase you make as a risk factor. I've openly said before, on many occasion its beneficial to ride the wave and then IS when the market signals tell you to do so... Rather than sell to market when the going is good and perhaps miss further rise.

    Its irrelevant to how many players you hold... More relevant again on a player by player basis on the size of the spread and likely margin you can make and be able to IS.

    Take my new 50 player port built in a safe foundation of solid pb returners. If FI send out a survey tomorrow with leading questions like "should points for crosses be reduced?"
    "should incomplete crosses result in minus points?"
    "should the points for saves be increased?"

    That would mean I'd have to react pretty quickly and maybe IS half my port (Cross heavy wingers/fbs/set piece takers) and buy goalkeepers etc.



  • @NewUser455434 if the players you hold are dividend earners i can guarantee you that you will be able to market sell you just have to sell at the right time for example on a matchday, off the back of a goal or during a media spell. You just have to sell when others are buying and this is why the youth, hype and non PB league players are so dangerous as you have no idea if or when you will get a chance to sell.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Forum was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.