Why 5-10%?

Yes we do.

Gotcha ya but it worked well for me.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide this ad.

Survivorship bias doesn't seem like bias to the survivors.

 

No it doesn't.

 

Look at each precious metal like a stock. Would you want a large percentage of your portfolio to be in one or two stocks?

 

Yes, WITH THE BENEFIT OF HINDSIGHT. Or insider information. But one of those isn't available until it's too late, and the other one might save you money by seeing you put up in an all-expenses-paid government resort.

 

Because if something catastrophic happens in the financial or political realm, a 5% position would probably triple or quadruple ovrnight and go up 10-fold within a few years, protecting a portfolio of stocks and bonds which gets decimated.

 

You know your financial situation better than any of us, but for the most part PM's should be Disaster Insurance and NOT an investment.

PMs are a speculation.

For me personally, the only thing that would change my allocation and/or inventory would be a huge collapse in metal pricing (I would buy more) or a spike of 100-200% (I would probably sell SOME but not ALL).

Again, that's me.

 

Mine is.

Two stocks that have a nice history of paying dividends have treated me great.

 

I wouldn’t get that tight myself. But dividend payers are the way to go in my book. May the market treat you well.

 

For income, yes. But growth stocks have killed value stocks the last few years.