Comment on Robinhood admits it’s just a gambling app.

Sam_Bass@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

• UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  Long term market rate of return is positive (extremely positive of late), where as casino gambling is EV negative.

  But options and futures exist as a short term hedge on equity investment. Combine that with the vig Robinhood takes on the front end in the form of higher asset prices, and you end up with an EV negative return - more consistent with high stakes gambling than equity investing.

  source

  • Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    The way I explain it is it’s like a casino, where the market makers play and also take the rake/odds.

    Stock trading is like playing blackjack, it’s hard to win or lose money quickly. Options are like slot machines or roulette, you can win or lose very quickly. But at the end of the day the people who control the casino will come out ahead of you.

    source
• Blackmist@feddit.uk ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

  I class market trackers as investing rather than gambling.

  Sure they can still go down (and by a lot), but it tends to be big events like COVID that do that, and it soon bounced back up again.

  If you’re investing more than a few percent of your portfolio in any one company, you’re probably gambling though. And sure, nVidia look a safe bet today, but if Sam Altman comes out tomorrow and goes “sorry guys, this ain’t going anywhere” then you’ll lose over half your money before you can blink.

  I wouldn’t invest on a timeframe of less than a few years either. It’s not for boosting your rent money. It’s just better than leaving your spare money in cash. If the concept of “spare money” is alien, then it’s probably not for you.

  source

  • dan@upvote.au ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

    If you’re investing more than a few percent of your portfolio in any one company, you’re probably gambling though.

    I read a forum post many years ago about people that put all their retirement money into some company that was going to be the sole supplier for some components to Apple for the iPhone. Apple didn’t end up going with them, the company went bankrupt, and the people lost all their money.

    In the end, why invest in a small number of companies when you can invest in practically all of them? Bogleheads three fund portfolio (total US stock + total world stock + bonds) is very simple yet will beat most actively-managed portfolios over the long run.

    source

    • btaf45@lemmy.world ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

      Bogleheads three fund portfolio (total US stock + total world stock + bonds) is very simple yet will beat most actively-managed portfolios over the long run.

      This is right. But you don’t really need the ‘total world stock’. I reduced my allocation of that to 2% because it was dragging down my returns.

      source

      • dan@upvote.au ⁨2⁩ ⁨weeks⁩ ago

        The point of the worldwide stock is to reduce risk in case the US has a recession, as not all other countries will be affected by that. The aim of the Bogleheads three-fund portfolio is to be reasonably balanced in terms of risk vs reward, which is why it includes bonds too.

        If you’re not risk-averse then 100% US stock is fine.

        source

        • -> View More Comments