Member Info for Svend

Let’s keep this at an adult, professional level.

Performance claims based on isolated trades or short time windows don’t establish investment skill — they establish timing on specific entries and exits. Sustainable investing is measured across full cycles, risk-adjusted, and net of costs and tax.

I have never stated that holding Aviva, Marks & Spencer, or Legal & General is inherently wrong. They are established businesses serving different portfolio roles. That is basic asset allocation, not opinion.

Equally, long-term conviction in Rolls-Royce is based on fundamentals, order visibility, balance sheet repair, and structural market positioning — not short-term price movement.

No one here is directed by me, and I do not “run” anything. People are capable of reading multiple viewpoints and making independent capital allocation decisions. Suggesting otherwise underestimates everyone involved.

If you want to have a performance discussion, we can do that using full-period data and comparable risk metrics.

If not, then this is just noise — and markets have enough of that already.

That still doesn’t stack up.

If people were “sheep,” they’d copy trades tick-for-tick — and they don’t. Most investors take multiple views, do their own research, and make their own calls. That’s normal market behaviour.

Short-term wins in high-volatility sectors don’t prove a strategy, just like short-term dips don’t disprove one. Markets rotate — always have.

Suppose your trades are working, great. But insults aren’t analysis.

Numerous strategies can generate income in the same market.

Oscardog, well spotted, zoom further out and look at the bigger tealeaf picture, i.e. the quarterly Rycey is firmly on its 14th consecutive quarter of higher highs after making the classic double bottom during 2020/2022 aka W 🙌🚀IV

Retirment,

Easy there, deck gunner — a few green candles don’t make a new empire.

Short-term surges in miners and uranium are what they’ve always done: spike hard, drop hard, repeat. Great if you catch the wave. Less great if you’re the last one climbing aboard when the tide turns.

Different ships, different missions. Some hunt fast loot in storm seas. Others build tonnage that sails for years.

No one’s forced onto any deck here. No one’s steering anyone else’s wheel. Everyone chooses their own cargo and their own risk. If someone follows another captain blindly, that’s on them — not the captain.

Calling people sheep because they don’t trade like you isn’t market insight — it’s just noise on the radio.

If uranium, mining and retail are paying you — good. Bank it. That’s the game.

But markets aren’t a four-week scoreboard. They’re a multi-year campaign. Plenty of ships that looked slow in one month ended up owning the sea over the voyage.

As for the “dinghy” comment — funny thing about dinghies…

They keep you alive when the flashy speedboats run out of fuel.

Fair winds, profitable trades, and may your next entry not be at the exact top of a hype candle.

As the sun set on today’s trading, the Dow hoisted its colours higher, up near +1.98% for January. If she keeps her course for two more trading days—and there’s fair wind for it—the Dow will notch nine green months in a row. Rare seas, that. Since 1901, only six other voyages have sailed such a streak.

And history, that old sea dog, has left us a chart to read:

After those six prior runs, five of the next months stayed green, with an average gain of +3.17%. Sail on two months further, and every single one of them was in profit—100% hit rate, with an average haul of +5.34%.

No promises, no prophecy—just the logbook speaking. The tide, for now, still runs with the ship. 🏴‍☠️📈

Good to hear from you, Nettles — and fair play on the dinghy run, 68% in five months will keep anyone well fed at the Captain’s table. 🥧⛏️

The HMS RR is still afloat, the crew remains intact, and even former sailors are always welcome back aboard — holdings or no holdings. The ship’s cat plays a vital role anyway; morale, rodents, and market sentiment all need managing. 🐈‍⬛

February results will tell us whether the engines keep humming or we hit rougher seas, but until then, it’s charts, patience, and strong tea. If the pudding proves you wrong, we’ll call it a successful voyage for all — and if not, at least the mining dinghy returned laden with treasure.

Good luck either way, and always room on deck for a steady hand and a sharp eye on the horizon.

Ye be measuring from the crow’s nest, not the deck.

Day: ~-2%

Week: ~-4–5%

Month: still sailing green

“-8% down” only if ye pick the very top o’ the wave. Choose yer tide, matey.

A17 > The happy fiver crew member from the toilet cleaning team is once again challenging the Captain to review the course. To be clear, it's just a slight wind drift of 2.5%, as mentioned many times before. Movement within 5% in magnitude is literally just noise and normal market fluctuations.

The Bingo man is full of numbers; 8 and 30 are crazy, mindless predictions😜

Jds15,

That’s a cracking result — well played 👍

Locking in a strong gain, CGT-free no less, is exactly the sort of outcome most people aim for in retirement planning. Different assets, different routes, same end goal: peace of mind and flexibility.

Always good to see a plan working as intended.

Retirment, Fair point — you’re right that you’ve never told me what to do with my money, and that wasn’t my intention either.

I’m not trying to change your plan or suggest it’s wrong — it’s clearly been thought through, and it works for you. My comments are about discussing approaches, not issuing instructions.

I share your scepticism about parts of the advice industry; too much box-ticking, too many incentives misaligned with the client. That doesn’t mean every alternative framework is invalid — just that people need to understand what they’re choosing and why.

Different routes, different constraints, different priorities. As long as the plan matches the life you want — including family considerations — that’s the part that actually matters.

No one’s disputing that your approach has worked for you — and fair play for executing it well. Results matter.

Where I’d push back is the leap from “this worked for me” to “everyone else is useless or clueless.” Markets reward many paths: recovery investing, compounding growth, income strategies — timing and temperament decide which suits whom.

Being sceptical of advisers and YouTube gurus is healthy. Writing off every framework, fund, or alternative approach as nonsense isn’t scepticism — it’s just overconfidence dressed up as experience.

You’ve done well investing in recoveries. Others have done well compounding quality businesses. Neither invalidates the other. The mistake is assuming only one route produces wealth — the evidence says otherwise.

Retirment, I don’t disagree with the principle of balance — income, growth and risk all have a place, and different stages of life tilt the mix differently.

Where we part company is the assumption that dividends are inherently “safer” or superior over long horizons. In a prolonged downturn, high-yield shares are not immune: dividends get cut, capital still falls, and recovery can be just as slow. The comfort is psychological, not structural.

(Aviva SP has been nose-diving from above 15 to crashing below 7, hardly a win-losing over 50% in capital appreciation versus 6.8%)

Selling a small portion of a growing asset to fund spending isn’t automatically a “lose-lose” — it’s simply another form of cash flow, provided the underlying business continues to compound. That’s no more destructive than relying on dividends from a company whose capital base struggles to grow meaningfully.

Mining stocks being up 30% is great — but sector cycles cut both ways, as history repeatedly shows. Short-term outperformance doesn’t invalidate long-term business value any more than a weak year defines failure.

Your objective — running capital down by 85 — is entirely valid. My approach is different: prioritise businesses that can grow intrinsic value and keep optionality open. Different routes, same destination.

Retirment,

Dividends paying wages is great — as long as the capital is actually working for you.

Aviva’s issue isn’t income, it’s opportunity cost. Over the long run, it has lost well over 50% of its capital appreciation compared to the market, even before inflation does its quiet damage. Nice yield, yes — but largely recycling your own money while the share price goes sideways.

RR isn’t about clipping coupons today; it’s about value creation. You don’t “pay yourself” from growth unless you choose to — and selling a small slice of a compounding asset isn’t the same as relying on a high-yield share that struggles to grow.

Compounding absolutely wins long term — but only if the underlying capital is compounding, not just the dividend stream.

Einstein's 8th Wonder: Compound Interest and the Rule of 72

Divide 72 by your annual rate of return, and that will tell you the number of years it will take your portfolio to double.

Put in mathematical terms, it looks something like this:

72 ÷ by rate of interest/return = number of years.

Let’s say you have a 5% annual rate of return. 72 divided by 5 is 14.4, so that’s how long it will take for your money to double: 14 years, five months, give or take.

At 10%, you will double your money every seven years. (The rule of 72 does not take inflation into account.

At the suppressed interest rates of the 2008 to 2021 period, it’s a very different story. Savings left in cash at 0.1% would take 720 years to double.

January storms nearing SP500@7K, including some light turbulence originating from the Orange Office blasting over Canada and Greenland 🤣

😂 Close… but that version’s been sharpened a bit too much.

I always heard it as:

You can lead a horse to water, but if it’s holding a pencil, it’s already over-qualified for the job. ✏️🐎

Either way—someone’s definitely mixing up wisdom with stationery.

Retirment,

Over 25 years, even after reinvesting Aviva’s chunky dividends, RR still wins hands-down on total return — Aviva paid you to wait, Rolls-Royce made you earn it.

@Investerintheknow,

As the saying goes, 'You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make him drink'

On the weekly timeframe, Rycey remains in a strong, institutionally supported uptrend; current price action represents consolidation near highs, not a top, with the medium-term bias still firmly skewed to higher levels once digestion completes.

Rycey is consolidating above key trend support after a powerful impulse move; unless price loses ~1220 decisively, the path of least resistance over the coming weeks remains sideways-to-higher, with a renewed test of the 1300 highs the most likely outcome.