TSP percentages

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most feds I know who sold out and put into the G fund, never timed the market correctly to get back in. This is starting from 2008-2010 Financial Crisis. I know it's scary. We lost around 40% in market value during that time, but spouse and I kept it in mostly equities b/c we knew our investment horizon was more than 20 plus years at that point. I used to have more G and F, but in the last 5 years or more, they've really sucked. As PPs point out, owning G is losing money. F has been even worse. I have 90% in C,S and I. I am 51 soon to be 52 and have $1.6M in TSP. I am not selling equities to move to G fund and realizing the loss of Trump/Musk's craziness these last 7 weeks. Since we won't access the TSP all at once, there is still time to recover it over time. I'm old enough to realize that last 10 years is not normal for market returns anyway. If we average 7% over the lifetime of the account, I would rather do that then lose it all to G. Besides with everything they're doing US dollars will become worth even less (e.g., huge tax cuts for billionaires/wealthy, firing tons of fed workers, tariffs).

Maybe this is a dumb question but if the C/S/I funds lost 40% wouldn't someone who sold C/S/I and bought G/F at any point during that 40% slide still be better off than someone who stayed in?

Sure it's practically impossible to time it exactly and reap that entire 40% but even if you didn't sell until 20% down and then bought back in while 30% down and it lost another 10%, you're still 10% up on someone who held the whole time, right?

No because the person who sold at some point during the slide (statistically) did not buy back in at the bottom and experience the recovery. The person who stayed in C/S/I lost 40% but then recovered their losses plus much more over the next couple of years. The person who sold out earned much less in the G fund.

I’m the pp who went into the G fund. I did this in the Great Recession as well. Did I sell at the top and buy at the bottom? No. I sold after the market was down 10% and bought back in at the 8000’s only to watch it fall to the 6000’s before recovering. I made more money than if I had just rode it all the way down and back up.

If I buy it right now, I get more shares than I sold when I went into G. You don’t have to be perfect, you just have to be willing to buy back in and lose some. Considering the market hasn’t even hit bear territory yet I’m not too worried about missing gains.

So that is your win. The internet is full of people who only win. In reality for every story you hear on the internet of someone bragging about selling high and buying low, there is someone who does not want to talk about buying low and selling high.

I’m sure there are plenty of people that don’t do well like this but the fact remains if you had sold two weeks ago and bought today, you would buy more shares than you sold. Sure it will likely go down more but when it recovers to the price two weeks ago you’ll have more money. The problem comes with people trying to get the very bottom or top. It was clear the tariffs would cause a recession. It wasn’t clear where the top was going to be and I didn’t hit it. I don’t know where the bottom is going to be but I’m not aiming for it either. I do believe it’s got a ways to go. The market has had a lot of bad days but I haven’t seen any kind of capitulation happen yet. It was after the initial capitulation that I bought back on last time.

This is still market timing and the odds of you coming out on top are very slim.

So I buy back in now and I’m ahead right? Or I keep waiting. You’re making a weird assumption that market timing has to be perfect. We are headed for recession. It’s easy to buy more shares than in that environment. This isn’t some mystery, our government is purposely crashing the economy.

You have convinced yourself that you know the future, and that is the problem with your strategy. Your intelligence is irrelevant. Your education is irrelevant. Your vast knowledge from obsessing about current events is irrelevant as well. You are wasting your time/energy, and the end result is that Joe 6 pack sitting on his but will beat you.

They already sold their stocks, they don't have to know the future at this point, only the present.

If at present the stocks they sold are at a lower price than when they sold them, they will make more money buying them back than someone with identical stocks who never sold them. It's simple math.

If they buy back today. But something like half of all market gains occur on 10 trading days so if you miss one or two of those and you are worse off then someone who stayed in.

We both have $100 in stock and I sell mine for cash.

Your $100 in stock goes down and is worth $40 then goes up to $80. It doesn't matter if that 100% gain from 40 up to 80 is all at once, over the course of ten days of trading, or over several years. Your stock that you spent $100 for is now worth $80. I may have missed out on that $100% gain from $40 to $80 but I still have $100 cash still and you have $80 in stock. I can come in at any point where the stock is worth less than $100 and buy more shares and when the stock goes back to $100 and you're made whole I've made money.

The problem comes when someone thinks they can be perfect. I don't claim to time perfectly or to have some kind of crystal ball. I just want to buy back in for a lower price than I sold for. I could do that now and have more shares but I don't think this is the right time. I'd rather wait for the market to stabilize. The volatility says a lot about what we're likely headed for. These swings are not normal. If I wanted to go back in right now I could do 1/3 or 1/2 and leave the other 2/3 or 1/2 in the bond fund. That would guarantee buying in at a lower price for some of the money while allowing me to move more back in later at an even lower price but I just don't see the market bottoming soon. We are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs. Reports I'm seeing is that folks being laid off can't really find work either. Private industry isn't hiring. Belt tightening is happening everywhere and we'll probably see private companies start doing layoffs later this year too (that last bit is speculation based on nothing other than the assumption that tariffs and lowered spending from former feds will hurt the bottom line of corporations).

[Anonymous]

"we are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs"

My friend, the market has already priced this in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"we are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs"

My friend, the market has already priced this in.

I am going to wait out April 2 is not here yet. More plays from Trump, Canada & euro ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Most feds I know who sold out and put into the G fund, never timed the market correctly to get back in. This is starting from 2008-2010 Financial Crisis. I know it's scary. We lost around 40% in market value during that time, but spouse and I kept it in mostly equities b/c we knew our investment horizon was more than 20 plus years at that point. I used to have more G and F, but in the last 5 years or more, they've really sucked. As PPs point out, owning G is losing money. F has been even worse. I have 90% in C,S and I. I am 51 soon to be 52 and have $1.6M in TSP. I am not selling equities to move to G fund and realizing the loss of Trump/Musk's craziness these last 7 weeks. Since we won't access the TSP all at once, there is still time to recover it over time. I'm old enough to realize that last 10 years is not normal for market returns anyway. If we average 7% over the lifetime of the account, I would rather do that then lose it all to G. Besides with everything they're doing US dollars will become worth even less (e.g., huge tax cuts for billionaires/wealthy, firing tons of fed workers, tariffs).

Maybe this is a dumb question but if the C/S/I funds lost 40% wouldn't someone who sold C/S/I and bought G/F at any point during that 40% slide still be better off than someone who stayed in?

Sure it's practically impossible to time it exactly and reap that entire 40% but even if you didn't sell until 20% down and then bought back in while 30% down and it lost another 10%, you're still 10% up on someone who held the whole time, right?

No because the person who sold at some point during the slide (statistically) did not buy back in at the bottom and experience the recovery. The person who stayed in C/S/I lost 40% but then recovered their losses plus much more over the next couple of years. The person who sold out earned much less in the G fund.

I’m the pp who went into the G fund. I did this in the Great Recession as well. Did I sell at the top and buy at the bottom? No. I sold after the market was down 10% and bought back in at the 8000’s only to watch it fall to the 6000’s before recovering. I made more money than if I had just rode it all the way down and back up.

If I buy it right now, I get more shares than I sold when I went into G. You don’t have to be perfect, you just have to be willing to buy back in and lose some. Considering the market hasn’t even hit bear territory yet I’m not too worried about missing gains.

So that is your win. The internet is full of people who only win. In reality for every story you hear on the internet of someone bragging about selling high and buying low, there is someone who does not want to talk about buying low and selling high.

I still think G fund this time around was good. I’ve noticed people stopped telling me I was wrong over the last month.

It’s not too late to go bonds either. We haven’t seen capitulations yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"we are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs"

My friend, the market has already priced this in.

Uh, guess you were wrong about that? My friend.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"we are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs"

My friend, the market has already priced this in.

Uh, guess you were wrong about that? My friend.

That is funny, coming from a person who guessed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"we are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs"

My friend, the market has already priced this in.

What's that you were saying?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"we are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs"

My friend, the market has already priced this in.

What's that you were saying?

Market timers can't time the market so they settle for winning ?? arguments on dcum

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"we are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs"

My friend, the market has already priced this in.

What's that you were saying?

Market timers can't time the market so they settle for winning ?? arguments on dcum

I’m the op “market timer” that did well during the Great Recession and mentioned on page 1 that I went 100% G fund. They’re literally arguing no one should try to time the market because you aren’t perfect and can never hit the top or the bottom.

I mentioned earlier in the thread, that’s not even my goal. I don’t mind if I sell when it’s already down some as long as I’m back into stocks when it’s lower than the price I sold at. It didn’t take a genius to see that massive tariffs would tank the stock market. I didn’t hit the top and I’m not expecting to buy at the bottom but it’s going to be hard to buy at a lower price than I sold for. But their response is basically yeah but other people didn’t do that or implying I’m lying because the internet is full of people that always win or whatever. I don’t always win but this was OBVIOUS.

[Anonymous]

It’s going to be hard to not buy at a lower price than I sold for. Typed that backwards

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"we are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs"

My friend, the market has already priced this in.

What's that you were saying?

Market timers can't time the market so they settle for winning ?? arguments on dcum

I’m the op “market timer” that did well during the Great Recession and mentioned on page 1 that I went 100% G fund. They’re literally arguing no one should try to time the market because you aren’t perfect and can never hit the top or the bottom.

I mentioned earlier in the thread, that’s not even my goal. I don’t mind if I sell when it’s already down some as long as I’m back into stocks when it’s lower than the price I sold at. It didn’t take a genius to see that massive tariffs would tank the stock market. I didn’t hit the top and I’m not expecting to buy at the bottom but it’s going to be hard to buy at a lower price than I sold for. But their response is basically yeah but other people didn’t do that or implying I’m lying because the internet is full of people that always win or whatever. I don’t always win but this was OBVIOUS.

Ok ok it's not luck. You are really smart and skilled at predicting the future and will continue to beat the market because it's not luck.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"we are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs"

My friend, the market has already priced this in.

What's that you were saying?

Market timers can't time the market so they settle for winning ?? arguments on dcum

I’m the op “market timer” that did well during the Great Recession and mentioned on page 1 that I went 100% G fund. They’re literally arguing no one should try to time the market because you aren’t perfect and can never hit the top or the bottom.

I mentioned earlier in the thread, that’s not even my goal. I don’t mind if I sell when it’s already down some as long as I’m back into stocks when it’s lower than the price I sold at. It didn’t take a genius to see that massive tariffs would tank the stock market. I didn’t hit the top and I’m not expecting to buy at the bottom but it’s going to be hard to buy at a lower price than I sold for. But their response is basically yeah but other people didn’t do that or implying I’m lying because the internet is full of people that always win or whatever. I don’t always win but this was OBVIOUS.

Honest question: don’t you screw up your dollar cost averaging over however many years you’ve been in to move it to G? Then you have to re-enter and it’s not like stock prices are going to be what they were 20 years ago….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"we are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs"

My friend, the market has already priced this in.

What's that you were saying?

Market timers can't time the market so they settle for winning ?? arguments on dcum

I’m the op “market timer” that did well during the Great Recession and mentioned on page 1 that I went 100% G fund. They’re literally arguing no one should try to time the market because you aren’t perfect and can never hit the top or the bottom.

I mentioned earlier in the thread, that’s not even my goal. I don’t mind if I sell when it’s already down some as long as I’m back into stocks when it’s lower than the price I sold at. It didn’t take a genius to see that massive tariffs would tank the stock market. I didn’t hit the top and I’m not expecting to buy at the bottom but it’s going to be hard to buy at a lower price than I sold for. But their response is basically yeah but other people didn’t do that or implying I’m lying because the internet is full of people that always win or whatever. I don’t always win but this was OBVIOUS.

Honest question: don’t you screw up your dollar cost averaging over however many years you’ve been in to move it to G? Then you have to re-enter and it’s not like stock prices are going to be what they were 20 years ago….

Huh? The price is the price when you sell. If you buy C fund at $1, $2, $20, when you sell you get the price it is when you sell for all your shares no matter what they cost when you bought them.

If I have 3 shares of C I bought at $1, $2, and $20 and I move them to G when C is at $100 I get $300 in G fund. If I rebuy when C is at $80 I now have 3.75 shares of C which are worth $300. If C goes back up to $100 I now have 3 shares of C worth $375, a profit. The price when I bought the original C shares is irrelevant. As long as you rebuy C at a lower price than you sold C you always make money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"we are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs"

My friend, the market has already priced this in.

What's that you were saying?

Market timers can't time the market so they settle for winning ?? arguments on dcum

I’m the op “market timer” that did well during the Great Recession and mentioned on page 1 that I went 100% G fund. They’re literally arguing no one should try to time the market because you aren’t perfect and can never hit the top or the bottom.

I mentioned earlier in the thread, that’s not even my goal. I don’t mind if I sell when it’s already down some as long as I’m back into stocks when it’s lower than the price I sold at. It didn’t take a genius to see that massive tariffs would tank the stock market. I didn’t hit the top and I’m not expecting to buy at the bottom but it’s going to be hard to buy at a lower price than I sold for. But their response is basically yeah but other people didn’t do that or implying I’m lying because the internet is full of people that always win or whatever. I don’t always win but this was OBVIOUS.

Ok ok it's not luck. You are really smart and skilled at predicting the future and will continue to beat the market because it's not luck.

I didn't even say that. I'm not perfect. I'm not the smartest person in the room. I am lucky. I rode out the COVID drop in stocks for example.

You're implying me saying the stock market drop was OBVIOUS was me claiming to be "really smart". No, that's not it at all. It was obvious to the point many many people were saying this would happen. I think what wasn't so obvious was that people thought that Trump didn't actually mean it. That's the mistake a lot of people are making. When he says something that seems outlandish, he absolutely means it. High tariffs? Not a negotiating point, he means he actually wants them. Invade Canada or buy Greenland? He means it. Run for a third term? He means it. When Donald Trump says something, take him at his word.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"we are nowhere near the worst of it because a market crash seems to be almost guaranteed with the policy decision and layoffs"

My friend, the market has already priced this in.

What's that you were saying?

Market timers can't time the market so they settle for winning ?? arguments on dcum

I’m the op “market timer” that did well during the Great Recession and mentioned on page 1 that I went 100% G fund. They’re literally arguing no one should try to time the market because you aren’t perfect and can never hit the top or the bottom.

I mentioned earlier in the thread, that’s not even my goal. I don’t mind if I sell when it’s already down some as long as I’m back into stocks when it’s lower than the price I sold at. It didn’t take a genius to see that massive tariffs would tank the stock market. I didn’t hit the top and I’m not expecting to buy at the bottom but it’s going to be hard to buy at a lower price than I sold for. But their response is basically yeah but other people didn’t do that or implying I’m lying because the internet is full of people that always win or whatever. I don’t always win but this was OBVIOUS.

Honest question: don’t you screw up your dollar cost averaging over however many years you’ve been in to move it to G? Then you have to re-enter and it’s not like stock prices are going to be what they were 20 years ago….

Huh? The price is the price when you sell. If you buy C fund at $1, $2, $20, when you sell you get the price it is when you sell for all your shares no matter what they cost when you bought them.

If I have 3 shares of C I bought at $1, $2, and $20 and I move them to G when C is at $100 I get $300 in G fund. If I rebuy when C is at $80 I now have 3.75 shares of C which are worth $300. If C goes back up to $100 I now have 3 shares of C worth $375, a profit. The price when I bought the original C shares is irrelevant. As long as you rebuy C at a lower price than you sold C you always make money.

G fund pp here, thank you so much for replying for me! This is it exactly. People really don't seem to understand this. And to address the, "It will never be where it was 20 years ago" comment....do we actually know that? We don't know the ramification of tariffs this high. The last time this happened we had the Great Depression. Will that happen again? I sure hope not but I could buy in right now and get more shares than I sold for but I won't because I don't think we are anywhere near the bottom. To make matters worse, Trump is saying that The Great Depression was caused by LOW tariffs which is literally the opposite. He's also not exactly known for admitting mistakes (has this ever happened???). I think these tariffs are here for at least the near to medium term if not for his whole four years.

It's clear that Congress needs to remove or at least modify this power to control tariffs.