Again, it's baffling why someone who didn't understand the a fundamental aspect of how the TQQQ security works thinks they're in any position to "educate" us on the fact that the Nasdaq 100 isn't composed of the same companies in 2021 as in 2001. No shit sherlock! It's frankly quite depressing to see low side Dunning Kruger in action like this.
I understand how the daily return works. Let me try to simplify what I'm saying: Do you see how TQQQ increases at a rate greater than what QQQ does? Now, do you see how, in your chart, TQQQ increases at a rate lesser than what QQQ does? Yet, your chart properly shows the decline of TQQQ is greater than that of QQQ Again, how do you explain that?
Here's an example from Yahoo charts you can look at yourself. As you can see if you bought TQQQ on Feb 19, 2020 then on July 1st, 2020 you'd be down 11% even though QQQ was up 7.4%. It not only didn't return 3X but actually returned -1.5X! If you're still saying that something is wrong because over a period greater than a day TQQQ doesn't reflect 3X QQQ or doesn't reflect QQQ in general, or doesn't move at the same ratio as QQQ at different times, than you don't understand daily percentage returns, sorry. Those are all fundamentally expected behaviors due to the path dependency of anything based on daily percentage return. I'm not sure how much clearer I can be that 3X funds DO NOT, IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM, return 3X the underlying index over any period greater than a day and can in fact at many points not only return something other than 3X but actually return a negative X of the underlying, the the exact opposite of what one might expect, as I demonstrated above. It would seriously only take you about 10 minutes to replicate what I did with 3X the daily percentage return of QQQ starting in 2000 in Excel. I sincerely think its worth the investment in time, as it all becomes clear when you actually work through how the instrument works. And BTW, I'm not the only one to have done this analysis, you can do a quick google and see it replicated by lots of folks. The question isn't if what I posted is correct, it's not original thought on my part. The only question is why it's correct, and if you take the time to replicate it I think that answer will come far better than I could explain it.
If you look at this chart you just posted, you'll see that TQQQ properly declines faster than QQQ; then properly increases faster than QQQ When I said I would simply what I was saying. I did. I purposely didn't mention 3x, or any percentages. I said, 'greater' and 'lesser.' Again, this chart you posted shows TQQQ behaving as it should. The tradingview chart I posted correctly shows TQQQ behaving as it should. Your homemade chart doesn't show TQQQ behaving as it should. Again, I left 3x out of it. TQQQ should increase faster than QQQ; and decrease faster than QQQ. On your chart it doesn't. And instead of you being curious, and recognizing that something is a miss. You've somehow ignored those facts within your chart, and have called everyone that disagrees with you, a dummy. You obviously have an error within your spreadsheet. When you eventually are able to admit that, it should be easy to spot. Well ... for most people, at least.
So I tried to explain it intuitively and I provided a concrete example of TQQQ doing the opposite of QQQ over a given time period, something you're continuing to insist is impossible or at least "improper" so I'm not sure how else to explain it. If you took the Yahoo chart I showed and compressed it to the starting day and the ending day, you'd say Yahoo obviously made an error because while QQQ was going up TQQQ not only failed to "properly" go up faster it actually went down! And yes, my chart is compressing down to several weeks of return per point, and yes, when you look at snapshots several weeks apart it's not at all implausible for 3X the daily return to go down several periods in a row when QQQ goes up or at the very least not "properly" follow QQQ. Again, this isn't unique analysis. If you do a Google you'll see the same thing from everyone who has taken the effort to build a simple excel spreadsheet to run the analysis. It's interesting that you're unwilling to make even a modicum of effort to do that while lobbing grenades at those who did. Are all of us curiously wrong in the same way? I would absolutely love to have you replicate this and show me that I had an error, in fact I wouldn't be surprised at all if there was an error somewhere if I had been the only one to do this analysis. But you haven't done that, you just keep saying that because 3X QQQ doesn't generally follow QQQ during a given time period it must be wrong. All of us who have done this must be wrong, but you who have not must be right simply because it's "proper"?
It was believed that madoff had the magic touch in his stock selection. He was buying a basket of stocks he thought would perform and then buying the collars. I interviewed with a very seasoned prop guy (from around your and taowaves time) who thought very highly of madoff in 2007.
I've also been debating this intuitively with you. Again, TQQQ is increasing and decreasing faster than QQQ. Your chart is the only chart where that doesn't occur.
Never said nor suggested that anything was impossible. I don't need you to explain anything. I was likely going to have to explain things to you. No. I wouldn't have said that. Your chart is inconsistent with at least one commercial charting platform. Pulling up another just to show you it's also inconsistent with another commercial platform would be a waste of time. I did this sort of thing many years ago. You've been the one referencing Dunning Krueger and etc. When I start lobbing grenades, you'll know. I haven't seen "all of their" charts. Just yours. And yours is wrong. That was my original intent. To teach you for free. Now, you couldn't pay me. Never said that. Never said that. Not only are you bad at math; you're bad at bullshitting. That was a grenade. Again, I haven't seen "all of their" charts. Only yours. And yours is wrong. I'm neither right nor wrong. I asked you to explain why only your chart shows QQQ climbing faster than TQQQ. That's a fact that anyone can clearly see by looking at your chart. Then they can look at a commercial chart and see that, during the same time frame, TQQQ climbs faster than QQQ.
The fuck I know about all this shit. All I know is, my new positions, entered after my happy profit exits on Labor day, are collapsing this week. I once again bought at the tops. This could be it. Death and destruction for the bulls. Go ahead, long the TQQQQQQQ and short the QQQ or whatever, I've been through this before. *sniffs* I fucking hate bears. They must all die.
Again, if you compressed the Yahoo chart to the start and end dates, it not only doesn't show TQQQ increasing faster than QQQ, but it decreases! Therefore between any two points longer than a day apart, it's demonstrably possible for TQQQ to not increase faster than QQQ, and in fact even do the opposite of QQQ. I guess I just don't understand, do you believe those two Yahoo points are false, or that that couldn't happen for several points in a row if you compressed your graph to showing several weeks per point?