3D·

📊 Why ETFs such as the FTSE All-World are often better in the long term than supposed "bargain" stocks such as Novo Nordisk or UnitedHealth

The same thing happens again and again: Stocks like Novo Nordisk
$NOVO B (-3.43%) or UnitedHealth $UNH (+4.26%) lose a lot of value and suddenly everyone senses a great opportunity to get in. "Now the share is cheap!", they say. But be careful: a falling share price does not automatically make a share attractive.


There are almost always reasons for share price falls. In the case of UnitedHealth, for example, political risks and growing competition in the healthcare sector are causing uncertainty. At Novo Nordisk, the hype surrounding weight-loss drugs is being held back by real supply problems and high valuations.


Many investors are buying into the falling knife because it looks like a "bargain" but price does not equal value! A company that costs 30-60% less today can still be too expensive if the prospects are poor.


👉 Instead of betting on individual stocks, broadly diversified ETFs such as the FTSE All-World $VWRL (-0.64%)
$FWRG (-0.76%) provide a better balance of risk and return:

- More than 3000 companies

- Cross-sector - tech, pharma, industrials, consumer, financials, etc.

- No cluster risk: if one company stumbles, others pick it up

- Proven Long-term return of 6-8 % p.a. over decades


Additional tips from the Lord:

If you are still looking for excess returns or additional diversification, get 2-3 more satellites such as Bitcoin $BTC (+0.14%) , gold $ZGLD or a Nasdaq Etf $XNAS (-1.14%).


Conclusion:

Buying cheap is good, but only if you know what you are actually buying and not because the price was there once and has now fallen by a few percent. This is not the way to strong returns in the long term, but only entertaining gambling fantasies. Better go to the casino for that! Individual stocks can dazzle in the short term, but disappoint in the long term. An all-world ETF is boring but exactly the opposite in terms of returns.


Thanks for reading your Sith Lord Vader!

attachment



#etfs
#crypto
#growth
#personalstrategy
#ETF
#Investieren
#FTSEAllWorld
#Finanzbildung
#LangfristigInvestieren
#Vermögensaufbau

#FinanzielleFreiheit
#BuyAndHold
#Diversifikation

#Geldanlage

54
27 Comments

I think ETFs are better for savings plans. Individual shares only for individual purchases. (But I only have direct holdings in 3 companies myself)
Bitcoin and ETF per savings plan 👍
13
profile image
@le_Wurst Sounds great. I'm with you on the savings plan for etfs, but I see lump sum in the four-year cycle as the higher-return alternative💪
1
profile image
A nice, helpful Darth Vader!

Something's not right here... 🤔
5
profile image
@Epi I couldn't stand the casino atmosphere here anymore and had to speak a word of power!
1
profile image
@TheRealDarthVader Darth Vader can do that in his usual, slightly stricter manner, can't he? 😬
profile image
@Epi All right, have it your way! Force Choke' May the force be only with the wise investors!
profile image
Solid basis, nothing to shake about. ✅

For investors for whom this is "too broad" and who would like to exclude the "sediment" of such maximally broad ETFs, there are also more specialized ETFs that take into account certain factors such as momentum or quality or pursue a focused approach such as $IQSA or $216361.

May the power of ETFs be with us. ✌️✊🏻

Greetings
🥪
5
profile image
Why "buy the dip" doesn't always work (according to many pros):
Macroeconomic environment matters:
When central banks tighten (e.g. rate hikes, balance sheet reduction), a dip can signal a real trend break - not a buying opportunity.
Experts often warn against blindly buying dips in a bear market such as in 2022.
Structural breaks and paradigm shifts:
A "dip" following disappointing corporate figures, new regulations or geopolitical risks can be the start of a new downtrend.
Example: Tech Crash 2000 - every dip was initially bought ... with fatal consequences.
Only sensible in uptrends:
Experts emphasize that "buy the dip" works best in intact bull markets - that is, when the overall trend is positive.
Liquidity illusion:
Many retail investors believe they are taking advantage of opportunities, but they often buy in illiquid phases (e.g. when there are sharp falls) without checking whether the sell-off is fundamentally justified.
4
profile image
@schlimmschlimm Exciting extension to the topic!
1
profile image
@schlimmschlimm I honor your words.
But with the community, it's like shouting into the wind.
Dips are bought here until the cash runs out or depression takes over. 🤷
2
profile image
@Epi Well, I can understand it, it's tempting to get into a stock at a good price, but you have to understand that "buy the dip" is not a panacea, the environmental variables also have to be right. I've already done it and I keep checking back, sometimes I've only held stocks for 3 days and taken 15% with me. But the value and the conditions were right. Then it works. But I'm not telling you anything new ;-) You've been at it for a long time.
1
profile image
Hope a few convert to the good side 🤩
3
profile image
I just joined and was quite surprised by the prevalence of buying the dips and FOMO following $NOVO B drop. I think it is psichologically more exciting to own individual shares, although theories on personal finance say exactly the opposite: take the systemic risk (ETFs) and don't add to it specifica risks (individual stocks).
2
It's also simply a question of philosophy... Do you want to give all your money to companies that invest broadly for you or do you want to own shares yourself and thus be a company owner with all the associated opportunities and risks?
2
profile image
@Maxmannheim And with considerably more time and the risk of missing out on tomorrow's winners. Whereas with an etf based on market capitalization, they automatically end up in it. but of course you understand your point too💪
profile image
Very good and 100% accurate contribution. 👏
1
profile image
@Kai_ Thank you!
1
profile image
99.9% agree and probably makes sense as a large core in most deposits;

the only thing that bothers me about passive ETFs is the buying (with inflows into the ETF) at any time and the fact that in almost every ETF $NVDA is in the top 5 of the largest positions
1
profile image
@CaYaRo Thank you. Yes currently Nvidia can also be another one in 10 years, the great thing is that it goes by market cap. You have the winners of tomorrow and the losers will be pushed out!
profile image
@TheRealDarthVader but by and large I agree in favor of ETFs;
The big exception is thematic ETFs: these always come onto the market when the hype is at its greatest 📉
profile image
@CaYaRo You're right, I also steer clear of themed ETFs, the TER is usually outrageous and you've already missed the hype😂
1
profile image
You also need to decide if you are investing for the long term or short term. I think day / short term stocks are like betting on a horse race or football game. It’s giving the user a hit of endorphins.
Personally, I no longer see it as investing but gambling.
profile image
profile image
Novo has outperformed the msci over the last few decades 😭. By around double since 2010, and that WITH the current correction. UNH even triple the return, MSCI 200% Novo 400% and UNH 600% rounded
profile image
@Investingyoung Great, just because it happened in the past doesn't mean it will happen again in the future.
profile image
@TheRealDarthVader i see no reason why this should not be the case in the long term
profile image
stopped reading at "crypto" and "gold"
Join the conversation