Community Discussions
Explore the latest discussions and community conversations related to this domain.
Funds not reflected in meta mask but show in etherscan
Main Post:
Hey everyone,
Crypto newb here.
A while back I used meta mask to help me stake my BNT. I am at the end of my stake and attempted to claim my rewards.
Obviously, needed some eth to process the transaction and sent some from my account. After adding eth I clicked claim rewards on Bancor and I believe o accidentally hit it 3 times.
The funds never made it to my metamask. Instead there are 3 “claim rewards” transactions within the eth section of my metamask with one saying pending.
The BNT section of my metamask says “metamask having trouble displaying your balance, click here to see” - which takes me to etherscan.
When I go to etherscan, I can see that all rewards claims have been processed and my initial stake is there as well but I can’t do anything with it.
Worse yet, the BNT I initially staked (and haven’t removed) is no longer showing up on the Bancor network.
I reached out to metamask support but haven’t received a helpful reply.
I would really appreciate any help here.
Top Comment:
i have an issue from 24H ago, first timer here
i sent 0.04eth to my metamask mainnet from my binance, etherscan is fine but it doesnt show up on my metamask assets but the transaction shows up on my activity. it does show in orange letters that my balance is outdated.
if someone finds something please let me know.
Guys in 🎵finance, trust fund, 6’5, blue eyes🎵 show yourself! : tall
Main Post: Guys in 🎵finance, trust fund, 6’5, blue eyes🎵 show yourself! : tall
Let me show you how to use the F (Yes, the F fund) and S fund to improve your return and reduce risk at the same time. Also, why your portfolio is probably based on faulty logic.
Main Post:
This post here was popular yesterday. And it really hit home something I already pretty much knew. People are generally misunderstanding or are unaware completely of Modern Portfolio Theory. And that's perfectly fine and normal, most people don't have degrees or obsessive interest in finance. But I want to break it down for you and show you some different options that are probably better than what you are currently implementing. I'll try my best to explain why everything works the way it does as painlessly as possible. Let's start with the thread from yesterday. I'm going to count each upvote as a concurrence from another person. Excluding L fund investors, you can see the results here. (I just realized in the second row I put the 50 under I instead of C, the second row should represent 50/50 C/S)
Not a single damn person utilizing the F fund. My heart breaks.
40% of people utilizing a 60/20/20 C/S/I approach or something very close to it.
Next biggest crowd was 50/50 C/S.
There is some silliness to these portfolios and I'll show it to you. To do so I'll need to briefly cover the 1) the small cap premium, 2) what diversification actually means and why it's good, and 3) benefits from a yearly rebalance.
Most of you probably already know about the small cap premium. Most people know the S fund to be the fund that's a little more risky but can provide more growth or something like that. Let me quantify it for you. In his book, Your Complete Guide to Factor Based Investing Larry Swedroe shows the small cap premium. The premium is calculated by taking the annual average return of small cap stocks and subtracting the annual average return of large cap stocks. Small minus Big. From 1927 to 2015, the size of this premium was 3.3%. In any 5 year period, the odds of the small beating big was 70%; in a 20 year period, those odds went up to 86%. We see this to be true looking at TSP. Looking at the past 10 years we see that the S fund has 9.37% return and the C fund has 8.55% return. And that's pretty representative of a full market cycle. There are some debates about whether or not this factor is dwindling, but for now, it seems this risk premium still exists.
But like I said, most people had an idea of this. They also knew that they didn't want to much risk, and the C fund still has really good returns. So people think, "I'll diversify my holdings and do put half in the C fund and half in the S fund!" Nononononono. The C fund does not diversify your portfolio. Diversification is the combination of assets with positive return and low correlation. We measure correlation on a scale from -1 (exact opposites in movement) to 1 ( move in perfect harmony). For diversification, we would ideally want something closer to -1, but most of the times we will only find things around 0 if we also want them to have positive return. The C fund and S fund have a correlation of ~.90. They aren't just siblings, they're twins dammit. It provides you basically no diversification. And the I fund has about a .85 correlation with U.S. equity so not geeat diversification either. So when you want to hedge your bets by using the C fund, you're using bad logic.
BUT. Do you know what does have positive returns and a near zero correlation with domestic equity? Aww yeah. The mother fucking F fund. The least appreciated and underutilized fund in the world. The rest of this post is going to be like magic for most of you I have a feeling.
But before I continue, I also have to get a quick word in about rebalancing. Rebalancing is moving your funds back to their set percentages at a scheduled time. So let's say you set your fund to 50/50 at the begging of the year. Over the course of the year, each fund will grow differently, so by the time the years ends, your portfolio might look for like 54/46. So you set it back to 50/50 and do so each year at the same time. This can actually improve your return through the years, as you will have a tendency to sell off inflated assets and scoop up underpriced assets. This is because the market is cyclical with prices getting inflated, then there's a bust, and then we repeat. But you can only really do this to any effect with uncorrelated assets. Remember that.
Okay onto the magic. Let's look at that top two results from yesterday's post, 60/20/20 C/S/I - 50/50 C/S. We're just looking at domestic holdings right now, so that first allocation is really 75/25 C/S if you just look at domestic holdings. Let's compare these two to 80/20 S/F. You can see the magic here. From 1998 to now, a 20 year time period, which should be very close to 2 full market cycles, the S/F fund had:
Better return - 8.05% compared to portfolio 2's 7.67%
Lower maximum drawdown - -45.59% compared to portfolio 1's -51.44%
Better Sharpe ratio - .44 compared to portfolio 2's .42
But how? Bonds are for weenies! Right? Well no, and it's simple. The third portfolio utilized the small cap premium, and it utilized the benefits of rebalancing and diversification. And with this type of portolio, it's much easier to control your risk and tailor your holding to your risk profile. Just dial the F fund up or down depending on your risk tolerance.
Now before you run off to flip your portfolio around, I'm not saying you should absolutely change your portfolio to S/F. The C fund isn't garbage, and depending on what time periods you test, you may find the C fund to provide better return as the small cap premium doesn't win out our every single timeframe. And sometimes the small cap premium doesn't provide a big enough premium to compete with all stock portfolios. And we haven't even discussed the I fund at all. It's also worth noting the interest rate environment which may or may not affect bonds performance depending on the funds structure.
Here's the takeaway. You might need to rethink your portfolio. And don't write the F fund off while you're rethinking it. Mathematically, you're truly optimal portfolio is probably going to include it. It depends. You're previous held opinions probably don't match modern portfolio theory and what the records really show. And backtests, even mine, do not mean everything.
Top Comment: And if this post alone is too much reading about investment finance for you, then you put it in the lifecycle fund like me and don't touch it.
Grant Cardone - Cardone Capital Fund SEC Docs show only a 1.76% return! (with proof)
Main Post: Grant Cardone - Cardone Capital Fund SEC Docs show only a 1.76% return! (with proof)
Top Comment:
Huh, who would have thought a used car salesman would lie about his fund's returns...
Edit: spelling
Fundraiser by Jim Lucas : Eli's Show Of Support fund
Main Post: Fundraiser by Jim Lucas : Eli's Show Of Support fund
Top Comment:
Do we have independent confirmation that this is legitimate?
Anyone in here from the Hedge Fund world?
Main Post:
Die hard fan of the show, also a trader myself. Wondering if there's any people in here from the hedge fund or Wall Street world and what they have to say about the authenticity of the firms operations
Top Comment: I'm a PM at a mid-sized HF. Previously worked in IBD and briefly in S&T at bulge bracket firms. Feel free to ask me anything or PM. RE: the show Honestly, the writers seem to base Axe off of scrappy brokerages instead of actual hedge funds. Brokerages are completely different than buy-side firms and thus it makes it hard for me to appreciate Axe and Axe Cap scenes. The Bloomberg's are cool but the setup and layout of the trading floor, research process, and even ideas are so damn amateur that it gets annoying. I don't want to sound snobby the whole thing reeks of what non-WS people think WS is like, lol. I feel like the first 1-2 episodes were the best, but even then, again, amateur ideas. In the real world, Axe would be running a long/short or event driven absolute strategy, pairing each trade, hedging out greeks (gamma, theta), using synthetics and derivatives to manage exposure, etc. Words like "committed capital" and "RAROC" would be thrown around a lot more. In the latest episode he does a Gekko and issues a derivative of "I see a hundred deals everyday, I only pick one"--but in the show he's running around and barely at his desk lol (and when he is at his desk he is having trouble with employees or personal issues). Running money on a large scale is very complex--you have proxy's, broker issues, trade execution, trade strategy, investment selection, etc. Yet when we see scenes from within Axe cap, it looks like one of those scammy prop shops lol.
I am Joseph Carlson, host of The Joseph Carlson Show, an investing YouTube series that follows my progress in building a passive stream of income through dividend investing. Ask me anything!
Main Post:
The Joseph Carlson Show is a YouTube series centered around my personal investment portfolio. At least once a week for nearly two years, I have made videos showing my investments, sharing commentary on news and current events, and answering audience and critics’ questions. Over this short time period the youtube channel has grown to over 134,000 subscribers on YouTube, 20,000 audio listeners on the various podcast platforms, and a very engaged following.
You can check out any of my work here:
- YouTube channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCbta0n8i6Rljh0obO7HzG9A
- Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/joecarlsonshow/
- Twitter: https://twitter.com/joecarlsonshow
A little about myself: I am a husband to a beautiful wife, father to two awesome kids, a Sr. level full stack web developer, amateur investor, and now "Youtuber" (that still doesn't sound like a real job to me). I have been interested in investing for a very long time as my father had me involved in his rental income properties growing up. I'd say my biggest influences have been my dad, Buffett, and Peter Lynch.
Ask me anything!
Top Comment:
Welcome to r/dividends and thank you for taking the time!
Why you chose dividend investments so young, instead of other strategies?