Is RobinHood good or bad?

I honestly can't see the down side to this when you are just fucking with penny stock during the day.

File: Tony-Robbins-Biography-Video-part-3.png (361KB, 526x355px) Image search: [Google]

361KB, 526x355px

It Made penny stocks worth it. But those have never been more than a gamble any way. Now its a relatively free gamble.

Better than the lotto, but not by much.

At entry level though, why would you play with pure unrefined speculation? With 100% risk? And turning a liquid asset into a structurally illiquid one?

It matches 1 Securities investment strategy.

If you're trying to buy large stocks in volume, where pennies translate to a few hundred to a few grand, that's where you get hit.
I'll pay my $10 a trade to not eat $20 on a purchase price fail.

There's no education or risk mitigation to it. Its just time to dance in the fire.

The thread as I can see is mostly containment. and its worked very well.

Futures have the exact same risk profile, but are leveraged.

Options you can set your risk, at order entry.

They're both much cheaper than outright stock. with much better Risk/Reward profiles.

You start on the index fund bunny slope where everyone is having a good time together. You don't start on the double black diamond penny stock. Sure you might get lucky and get a helicopter ride to the top. Most get a helicopter ride to the hospital, some just got chewed up by an avalanche and if they're lucky look forward to months of eating bloody snow.

>>1022129
you sir are one autistic motherfucker

>>1022205
He's right about Robinhood posts being a containment thread for stock-picking morons.

He's retardedly wrong about everything else: options, trad execution, index funds, etc.

So, he's really just a typical /biz/ poster: good with memes; bad with money.

Who cares if it's a good app, it's simply a means to learn how the stock market work until I can afford a margin account and other brokerages

>>1022216

could you elaborate on my retardation? so that I may be less retarded in the future.

File: article-2153805-136972A8000005DC-836_468x695.jpg (84KB, 468x695px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 468x695px

Do you have leverage instruments in robin hood?

>>1022248
1. You claim that options and futures have a better risk/reward profile than traditional equity, which is false.

2. You claim that options and futures are cheaper than traditional equity, which is entirely irrelevant and misleading.

3. You imply that index funds are only for beginners, which is stupid and false.

4. You imply that penny stocks are for advanced investors, which is again stupid and false.

Those are the highlights of your retardation. If you care to say more, I'm sure you'll provide me with more examples.

>>1022271
ah 3 and 4 I could see how you could get that from my wording. Nope implication not there. Indexes are great and Penny stocks generally stupid.
a few folks with informational advantage can win that game. informational meaning within 2 degrees of someone who's been inside somebody close.

1. Some options structures do point of fact have better risk/return and probability of Profit than equities and some do not. Futures it is equal. and with 24/6 access to the markets, arguably better.

a 1 SD simple naked short put has 87% POP.
an 1sd Iron Condor has 69% POP and risk ratio around .25

Naked equity is 100% risk, with 50/50 direction. you could argue 47/53 which is a 12% bias. Now an index won't likely fall to 0, but large drawdowns happen with frequency. largest being around 50%. When I get more I'd do index investing, but hedged with options positions. but 50% risk for 12% probability bias isn't enticing to me, but it is a better game then most people play.

and on 2 different risks at different scales, once you pass the threshold where there's a risk you won't want to cash settle a futures contract more power to you, you wouldn't be looking for advice on the internet. If efficient capital outlay isn't much of a problem for you anymore, congratulations.

>>1022480
>better risk/return and probability
There's no such thing. No risk/reward ratio is inherently better than any other unless you hold one variable equal (not possible), especially after costs. Not everyone has the same investment goals or timeline as you.

>different risks at different scales
Scale is irrelevant in investing, except perhaps in lowing fees. Adding leverage isn't better investing; it's just more risky investing. Don't confuse alpha with winning -- see above.

Index investing is the best core strategy not because it has the highest expected rate of return (though it is high, relatively speaking). It's the best core strategy because its offers (a) excellent reward at (b) a risk level that tends to match the needs and expectations of a majority of long-term investors, and (c) at a low cost. That it happens to be an "easy" strategy to implement is just a happy coincidence (with thanks to Jack Bogle).

File: image.jpg (65KB, 499x499px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 499x499px

>That file name

File: image.jpg (546KB, 893x502px) Image search: [Google]

546KB, 893x502px

>>1022555
>those digits

Trump confirmed for first triple term president.

>>1022253
Not sure. I still have to confirm the two small deposit amounts to my account to authenticate my Podunk ass bank.

>>1022561
>Who is FDR?

>>1022668
>What are consecutive terms

>>1022715
I don't understand what you are implying. FDR's terms were consecutive. He actually won four elections but died during his 4th term.

File: 1450447004964.jpg (3MB, 1082x9999px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 1082x9999px

>>1022509
I disagree, all those variables together, give you an expected return.
Winning is Winning and everyone who won the lotto is better off than me.
But that's a very jagged expected return graph.

> goals and timeline
true but I think its best to be strategy agnostic while learning, in order to find what works where.

>scale irrelevant
I can't say that I agree, at its core investment is just choosing the vehicle in which you store your value. Futures are like a train, Index ETFs are like taking the bus.

>>1022001
Robinhood Pros:
>you can trade low volume cause no commissions
>simple to use its like a mac computer for stocks trading
Cons:
>only available in US(and US markets) atm
>tree days for your money to be put back into your buying power after a sale (so no day trading)
>no advice or tools
>pretty much all you can do is buy stock and sell stocks thats it.

>>1022722
Are you just trolling or severely retarded?

How can you not grasp my concept?

>>1022743
>everyone who won the lotto is better off than me.
That's a very small group, and it sits besides a very large group of unhappy poor losers.

Going into an investing decision is like stepping behind the veil of ignorance: you know you are taking a risk, but you don't yet know the outcome. To ever assume what will happen on the other side of the veil is wrong. You have to assume all outcomes, and make your choices accordingly.

To hear you talking about lottery winners makes me sad, honestly. You may be a smart person, but you have a lot to learn about the laws of probability.

>>1022743
>its best to be strategy agnostic while learning
That's the wrong approach. Learning how to invest means learning how to make investing work for you and your goals and your needs. There is no "one size fits all" strategy, not even something as conventional and broadly applicable as index investing. You can't make a singe intelligent investing decision unless you know the investor's risk tolerances, goals, and timeline. Anything less is useless noise.

>>1022743
>>1022937

You two are hilarious.
Both trying to show that the other is uninformed. To be honest, you both make some good points.

You guys should hang out.

>>1022253
"soon"

My question is how secure is it regarding information like your bank account you have to input?

>>1022937
> veil of ignorance
we're saying the same thing different ways here. I was arguing probability to begin with. In investing you start with effective and repeatable high probability trades, and work your way down to a level of improbability you think you can absorb provided, sufficient returns.
The way you said it > no risk/reward is inherently better
is true in math land but in the real world with historical probabilities that can be generated, you can make that judgement. Thus the quip about the lotto, b/c you were its advocate.

> useless noise, one size fits all
I've not invested money for others, they keep asking me to, but this has me worried, explaining my bets to people without a team of analysts to pin the finger on.

>>1022870
Not >>1022722, but are you implying that being elected for three consecutive terms does not count somehow as a triple term president?

>>1022937
You obviously have a terrible time investing in things that are sure to go up over a given period of time.

You should stick to working 40 hours a week and football on the weekends, lmao.

>>1024005
>sure to go up over a given period of time
No such thing, bro. No such thing.

>should stick to working 40 hours a week and football on the weekends, lmao
I'm not sure what you're trying to imply here, but if you're trying to pretend that you're some Wolf of Wall Street then you're just making an ass of yourself. When it comes to investing, compared to me, you're an infant.

>>1022785
Pros are spot on

Cons, not so much:
Availability only matters if you're not an American. In reality, there's no reason someone in Bongland or glorious Nippon can't do exactly the same thing.

Three day settlement is pretty standard for any firm. My TD account had a 3 day turnaround for funds availability until I paid to upgrade it.

Advice or tools, easily worked around. Open an account with any other brokerage (TD, eTrade, Fidelity,) and keep it at the funding minimum. Bam, all the tools you want.

Buy and sell stocks? The stated purpose of the program is a con? That's not really a con.

The only real con in there is that you're stuck on mobile devices, you can't even get frigging PC support, whereas I could trade on my phone, laptop, desktop, or through my motherfucking Xbox on TD.

>>1024308
>Three day settlement is pretty standard for any firm
Yeah, if you're not using a margin account, which any trader who's halfway serious and not an idiot does.

Also, what about after hours and shorting?
Again, no trader with a brain would go without access to these.
RH is for gambling, people who don't care about their positions because they have 3 shares.
That's all.

>>1024308
>that day when robin hood goes under
>everyone on /biz/ shitposts about only getting 60% of their money back
you kiddies are gonna learn a thing or two about markets.

>>1022480
you sound like a fucking queer