After the Zaniolo injury yesterday, it's made me look at the percentages I hold in each player as a proportion of the overall portfolio.
My portfolio was about 15% in Zaniolo so not ideal, but interested to see whats the maximum people try and keep in 1 player? I have a few players on 10% of my portfolio, but this injury has made me think about 5% is more where I should be especially as we're seeing more players break down with injuries after a short pre-season.
Geronimo159387 last edited by Geronimo159387
My rule is 2% maximum, often far less, the only exceptions being opportunities that I judge as "certainties" & those that account for more due to price growth. An example was Bruno last Jan when it was almost certain he would end up at Man Utd I topped up my holding to around 3.5% at cost price, his subsequent price growth means he's around 6% now but only 2% at cost price & represents my largest hold during that whole period, as well as my highest dividend earner.
Diversity is my watchword so whilst I might miss big transformational rises (like those who went all in on Sancho) but I will also miss large hits as almost any player even being totally written off will have negligible effect. All depends on your attitude to risk; small numbers of players is high risk/reward & vica versa, you just need to find the right balance to suit your own risk profile.
Black-Wolf last edited by
My biggest hold is 6.61% and my smallest is 0.43%
I have went as high as 25% per player in the past which was with Bruno and Rashford at the start of the year but i only do that kind of thing if i feel its a no brainer.
5% is probably more where I'd want to be on average - currently I got a huge spread so feeling imbalanced.
Geronimo159387 last edited by Geronimo159387
I like risk but in all honesty I'm not sure how Zaniolo came to be 15% of my portfolio,
I review my portfolio regularly, usually every 2/3/4 months, to check that the players I hold are still performing & the reasons I bought them are still valid. I tend to buy & hold as a general rule but actively take profits or cut under performers at these regular reviews.
Obviously I also take advantage of opportunities between these reviews & like to do a few short term &/or IPD trades but having a regular routine to assess your entire portfolio a few times a year is a very good discipline to adopt & should prevent you becoming "accidentally" over exposed.
Previously I put around 5% in most of my holds. Post matching engine and in the knowledge OB's were imminent I now put 2% or less (most under 1%) into a much larger selection of holds. That section of my port is med/long div and CA generating holds. I have separated a pot approx 10% of total port value that I am using for short term trades, and this part of the port is no holds barred and more of a gambling pot. I put about 40% of this pot into Depay recently and that could be tied up for a while now 😂
Harford is God last edited by
8% is the highest, top 5 holdings cover 35%, consciously never wanted more than 10% at risk with one player even though was close to doing that with Bruno earlier in the year.
Comfortable with that.
2.5% max for me. This protects me against major injuries.
Martyn B last edited by
My "perfect" portfolio setup is 30 players.
5 big hitters with 10% in each.
25 small fry with 2% in each.
Currently my portfolio is a little disorganised, with 57 players and only 2 at 10%, mostly due to value everywhere and topping up across the board. Will streamline once the seasons resume, generating cash and IPD opportunities.
johnboywalker last edited by
Just use it as a lesson learned mate.
Overexposure in one area can lead to significant losses should the rules be altered, goalposts be moved, wind changes direction or your 'next big thing' pick up a substantial injury.
Spreading risk across the platform is the most sensible option.
Personally, I wouldn't be happy with over 10% in any one player.
As for Zaniolo, you still have a choice and you have not lost anything yet. He is one of the brightest prospects in Italian and world football. At only 20 years of age and with the best sporting and medical facilities at his disposal, it is only a matter of time before he returns to first team football with Roma and the national team.
Don't be surprised to find that his price ends up being higher than his pre injury price, by the time he gets back to action. I've seen it happen several times previously with guys like Asensio and Sane.
@Harford-is-God This is similar to how I've ended up; nothing wrong with it - was functioning well and was happy. This injury has just made me re-look.
I've always wondered what the theory is behind this. Do you guys weight it by shares or total cost/investment? Say you have 100 x £10 player = £1000 and 100 x £1 player = £100. Both of these can rise/fall 50p giving you the same profit/loss. And the more expensive player is more likely to rise most of the time given they're better. Is it just a case of if they retire/die then you have more money that becomes worthless?