Unfortunately, I have to agree with @SAUgut777 that your contribution stands in stark contrast to your portfolio... Target weightings or not, you need volume for these theses.
With positions in the range of up to €100 on so many positions, you need a lot of patience.
Or a lot of capital for re-buttering.
With positions in the range of up to €100 on so many positions, you need a lot of patience.
Or a lot of capital for re-buttering.
•
11
•
@Metis An absolutely valid point if you're just taking a snapshot. But I'm not building a portfolio for this afternoon, I'm building it for the next 30 years.
Here is my logic:
1. the foundation is poured first: You don't build a house by first finishing one room and then pouring the next foundation. I have opted for architecture. Now every available mark is pumped into this framework.
2. scaling beats timing: Yes, 15 positions currently look 'tattered' with this portfolio size. But the problem will solve itself with consistent additions. I need to set the structure now so that I know where the capital needs to go when crypto profits or salary bonuses come in.
3rd learning effect: I'd rather learn the behavior of LMT, O or MAIN now with small sums than only start when I'm moving six-figure sums. This is training under real conditions.
4. fee check: Thanks to modern brokers with zero fee savings plans, the number of positions hardly plays a role in terms of costs. The 'fees eat up returns' argument is a relic from the 90s.
Conclusion: I am growing into this structure. I'd rather have a perfect structure with little capital than a lot of capital in a structure that doesn't match my goals. The snowman gets bigger layer by layer! ⛄📈
Here is my logic:
1. the foundation is poured first: You don't build a house by first finishing one room and then pouring the next foundation. I have opted for architecture. Now every available mark is pumped into this framework.
2. scaling beats timing: Yes, 15 positions currently look 'tattered' with this portfolio size. But the problem will solve itself with consistent additions. I need to set the structure now so that I know where the capital needs to go when crypto profits or salary bonuses come in.
3rd learning effect: I'd rather learn the behavior of LMT, O or MAIN now with small sums than only start when I'm moving six-figure sums. This is training under real conditions.
4. fee check: Thanks to modern brokers with zero fee savings plans, the number of positions hardly plays a role in terms of costs. The 'fees eat up returns' argument is a relic from the 90s.
Conclusion: I am growing into this structure. I'd rather have a perfect structure with little capital than a lot of capital in a structure that doesn't match my goals. The snowman gets bigger layer by layer! ⛄📈
••
@OlafTheSnowman Yes, well. I mean, you need a lot of time or capital to build up this amount of positions to reasonable volumes.
I don't know whether it wouldn't have been smarter in perspective to buy from large to small positions according to desired size. First the ETFs and then gradually add the individual stocks.
I don't know whether it wouldn't have been smarter in perspective to buy from large to small positions according to desired size. First the ETFs and then gradually add the individual stocks.
•
22
•@Metis yes that's also a good point but I thought the other way around myself it will take more time to scale from one ETF to several individual stocks and since I work according to the ray dalio principle I find it not so time intensive in my opinion.
••