To the oil speculating cunts, I hope you enjoy knowing you will

>>1086036
>t. guy who lost everything betting DWTI

File: 1296943641016.jpg (10KB, 215x276px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 215x276px

>>1086036
I'm about to get a bunch back when I file my taxes.

File: chrome_2016-02-10_14-16-03.png (3KB, 234x61px) Image search: [Google]

3KB, 234x61px

>>1086064
DWTI is up though

>>1086064

i dont even think thats possible

DWTI went from 70 to 480 in a couple of months

>>1086323
Thats not how it works. Plenty of -10% days inbetween

>>1086337
>Thats not how it works. Plenty of -10% days inbetween
No, that's exactly how it works, sperg.

If I bought at $70, it doesn't matter one bit what the stock did in getting from there to $480. If it was $480 the day before, opens at $210, and I sell; I'll make 300% despite the ticker reading a +50% loss for the day.

>>1086357
DWTI isnt a stock, newfriend. Go read about leveraged ETNs

>>1086385
Shhh. Just let him lose his money the good old fashioned way while he sits back and assumes he's the next warren buffet or some shit.

>>1086036
>>>/b/

>>1086036
Why so butthurt, Bro-Magnon?

Exxon did well on Tuesday. That's all I care about.
>inb4 it was down
No it was down because of ex dividend, but it was down less than the dividend.

>>1086385
>>1086410
Literally does not matter that it's leveraged or that it's an ETN. If it was bought at $70, and sold at any price above that, it will return a profit to sell. Would I hold a product with 3x leverage for almost a year? Fuck no, but that's another issue.

>>1086337
>>1086385
Hes right you know.

>>1086635
>what are resets?
Lol stop, anon. You look foolish

>>1086036
That's nice dear

>>1087324
Reset is just a fancy term for the fact that the returns and losses compound when you hold longer than a day in a leveraged fund. Foolish is suggesting that selling something for 7x what it was bought for wouldn't net a profit.

The original point of contention was that one wouldn't have made a profit buying DWTI at $70 and selling at $480 because of 10% settings in the interim, which is patently false.

>>1087918
No, you idiot. It literally resets. The chart you are looking at is adjusted to account for dozens of resets that you arent seeing. It could close at $100 one day and reopen at $10 to increase liquidity. $10 is now the new $100. It's not a split, you dont get more shares, you just lose $90 overnight. But, hey, don't believe me. Go find out for yourself, newfriend.

>>1087984
That's not true at all you retard.
They roll over options/futures contracts, the ETF itself doesn't roll over to a completely different fucking price.
And yes ETFs can in fact perform a reverse split.
Holy shit the financial illiteracy on this site sometimes is baffling.

>>1087987
>>1087918
Both of you need to read this before continuing your shitposting:
https://investor.vanguard.com/investing/leveraged-inverse-etf-etn
>Most leveraged and inverse ETFs and ETNs currently reset on a daily or monthly basis and are therefore designed to deliver their stated returns for the reset period only (i.e., one day or month)
If it says "dont hold this ETN overnight," then don't fucking do it. This isnt hard to figure out

>>1087998
They're reset by their asset managers rolling over contracts to stay in line with a 3x daily performance.
I'm not saying a 3x daily etf tracks with the underlying asset over a long period of time.

>>1087998
>https://investor.vanguard.com/investing/leveraged-inverse-etf-etn

Holy fuck you're retarded. It doesn't just magically go down 90%. There has to be volatility.

And it doesn't matter. However the fund performed is how it performed. If it went up and down a bunch of times then yes, the fund would go down even if at the end the net result of the underlying assets went in the direction of the leveraged ETF. But based on the chart of DWTI, if you bought at 70, and sold at 480, you fucking made 6.8x your money.

The ORIGINAL point of contention was that the retard OP probably didn't buy and hold, but traded all day and lost money.

>>1087984
The price of any stock or ETF is determined by supply and demand. Period. For a leveraged ETF, the leverage against the NAV (period) is reset at certain intervals. There is nothing that forces a stock price has to match the value of the underlying fund. If it doesn't match then you have a price drift then you would pay a premium or discount.

>>1088026
>NAV (period)
NAV (keyword)

>>1088026
Cont. There is no danger to holding leveraged ETFs themselves. The danger is people relying on the price of the leveraged ETF to move in the complete opposite/same direction of another index. It's better to analyze a leveraged ETF alone than to use another index as your calculation.

Ok, Im out. Have fun buying and holding 3x leveraged ETNs
>It'll totally work out guys, just look at the chart!

implying i don't buy on deep in the red days and sell into rallies.

anybody buying and holding is foolish...trade it and take those 10% gains

>>1088032
Except literally nobody has said that. I said not to in my original post. You're the anon that said buying at $70 and selling at $480 wouldn't net a profit. This was due to an egregious misunderstanding of how any derivative product works.

You then went on to demonstrate a poor understanding of the reset concept. Reset, as stated earlier, is basically just the ETF's "goal period." If it's a double-inverse with a single day reset, it should track the underlying product's performance for the day neigh perfectly. If the reset is a week, it should do the same. What reset doesn't mean, however, is that they literally reset the price of the ETF at the end of that period. Know why? Because if it was going for $150 at 3:58pm, I would short it with every fucking dollar at my disposal (And then some on margin) and simply cover at the open for an easy 33%. It would be a layup. All reset means is, "Hey dipshit, this only mimics the tracked commodity/index for the day/week/month. If you hold it longer, they won't match up."

>>1088047
whats your exit strategy if the holding tanks?

File: 1423806999583.png (85KB, 210x210px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 210x210px

>>1086036
I covered my contracts yesterday.

Who else waiting for uwti to finally start fucking jumping?

Pls help.