frommi

SRG. Currently undervalued on 2018 numbers and high returns on capital for a long time. Don`t know any other stock where these two attributes come together.

SHOS

SGX:BTG, http://www.cornerofberkshireandfairfax.ca/forum/investment-ideas/sgxbtg-hg-metal

SRG and more puts on IRWD,RGEN,AMZN,NFLX

more SRG and SHOS

I don`t think that i have that much knowledge, but i would go with Randgold at the moment. GOLD and RGLD are the only blue chip gold stocks i know that handle outside investors well and that outperformed the goldprice over the long run.

That sounds rational to me. Could get interesting tonight.

More puts on HCSG. I still think they fake earnings and that it is unreasonable to assume that they don`t have the same problems with healthcare operators like OHI or other REITs have with them.

=GoogleFinance("NOKUSD") works for me.

WPP PLC CVS

I don`t know if this is a fraud but HCSG is manipulating net income by a lot. They are not able to collect receivables and at some point have to write them off. Their clients are mainly SNF and other healthcare facility operators. But the market is ignoring this fact and values the company on net income and past growth (which is unreasonable to be repeated and probably only fictious, because the growth comes from near-bankrupt clients.) I except it to fall hard in the next bear market, its maybe worth 20-30% of the current marketcap.

Long term ITM puts on TSLA and SCHW.

PBSV

Puts on HCSG and RGEN. In both cases operating cashflow is shrinking since several quarters while net income is growing and both trade at absurd valuations based on net income. Additionally RGEN will lose >30% of its revenue in 2021. (source: https://www.biocentury.com/bc-extra/financial-news/2017-09-26/repligen-precarious-waters-after-ge-launches-house-resin)

Bielefeld, Germany

Based on what i have seen in the past 3 years of international netnet investing is that drawdowns/volatility are smaller than the overall market. Especially if you have a lot of dividend paying japanese stocks with low betas in the portfolio. And hopefully not every netnet is losing money. I also have netnets with P/E`s of 3-10 in the portfolio. Its just that those are not available in the US.

Just to have some fun: the FOMC statement today! ;D

Which one where you able to buy? I bought polish stocks with degiro. :)

I ran the screen frommi described above against the Portfolio123 data today and it is only returning 2 current symbols. GIGM GigaMedia LTD MktCap ~33m and NCAV ~57m MSN Emerson Radio Corp MktCap ~35m and NCAV ~52m Yes, there is no way around international markets if you want to build a diversified netnet portfolio at the moment. The most stocks in my portfolio are currently from Japan, Singapur, Hongkong and Poland.

Exact rules: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzQbS-AUNeo9UHpjZm1aaks3a00 exclude china and sharecount 5% allowed difference instead of 20% may be the drivers.

Since it is a portfolio simulation, that is the frequency the engine uses to evaluate if it has to execute a buy or sell-rule. Stocks are only bought or sold if the rules are met. Yearly or monthly rebalancing is worse, because the simulation can`t take advantage of price drops/surges in between that timespan. I checked the transaction log after the simulation and it was the way i expected this to work.

Yes, i am running 50% of my money that way but only since 12 months.

Here are the results of my tests: 10 stocks: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzQbS-AUNeo9OUt2NEZHcHpaM1U 20 stocks: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0BzQbS-AUNeo9ZDRPaGJQeXJISWs buy rules: ncav/mktcap > 1.4 price > 0.1 avg. volume10day > 0.1 mktcap < 150 million stable sharecount ncav burnrate < 25% YoY and QoQ no biotech,financials,o&g stocks. ranked by tangible book sell rule: ncav < mktcap

I looked at my account statements and you are right, trading japanese stocks was pretty cheap, but trading otc stocks with very low prices and buying australian stocks was expensive for me. (around 0.5% per trade, so i took that as a reference.) And when you don`t cross the ask its sometimes hard to build meaningful positions, thats the reason i think that 0.5% slippage in a backtest is reasonable. I missed the point of not rebalancing the whole portfolio so you are probably right that it doesn`t lower the returns so much. But a part of whats going on with monthly rebalancing might be that you are capturing the bid-ask spreads when the closing prices bounce between them. @stahlehyp you can start a portfolio123.com trial to get lists of netnets.

Does the bloomberg backtest use realistic transaction costs and slippage? With netnets slippage can be the deciding factor if more or less rebalancing is better. Also the tax consequences of monthly rebalancing can ruin your backtest. 1% per month easily eats the excess return of a monthly rebalance. (And maybe you can do this with a tiny amount of money, but i don`t think you will be able to monthly rebalance a netnet portfolio with more than 500k in it.) The best i was able to get in a backtest with portfolio123 was a CAGR of 51%, but the drawdown was 68%. It was an equal weight simulation of the 10 netnets with the highest discount to tangible book. With 20 stocks it looked more "useable", since it was still a CAGR of 44% with market like drawdowns. I used 0.5% as commission and 0.5% as slippage which is still very optimistic for a netnet-system in my view. That system used a rule to sell at NCAV, so no fixed holding period. (either NCAV deterioated very fast or the stocks go up to NCAV, i don`t think there was a stock longer than 3 years in the portfolio.)