ITA Wealth Management

  • Home
  • Blog
  • Lifetime Membership
  • Portfolios
    • Bethe Portfolio
    • Bohr Portfolio
    • Carson Portfolios
    • Dirac Portfolio
    • Einstein Portfolio
    • Franklin Portfolio
    • Galileo Portfolio
    • Gauss Portfolio
    • Huygens Portfolio
    • Kahneman-Tversky Portfolio
    • Kepler Portfolio
    • McClintock Portfolio
    • Millikan Portfolio
    • Pauling Portfolio
    • Rutherford Portfolio
    • Schrodinger Portfolio
  • Forum
  • Reset Password
  • Contact Me
  • ITA Feedback
  • About Me
You are here: Home / Technical Indicators / Tranche Investing / Tranche Investing: How to Reduce the Number of Transactions Per Month

Tranche Investing: How to Reduce the Number of Transactions Per Month

July 30, 2015 By Lowell Herr

Tranche Investing:  How to Reduce Transactions

Based on results from extensive back-testing, there is a degree of luck as to when a portfolio comes up for review and when securities are bought and sold.  Did the review come when it was time to buy and the market dipped?  Or were ETFs sold when the market was low.  Was the trade delayed or missed due to setting a limit order when the market moved in the opposite direction of the order?

Tranche investing is a model designed to mitigate this “luck-of-the-transaction” problem by spreading out the transactions over what are called Portfolio Offsets or Offset Portfolios.  The Tranche 1.6 spreadsheet is constructed to help users implement the Tranche Investing Model by allowing as many as 12 different offsets.  We can also vary the number of trading days per offset.  The default setting is six (6) trading days.  A view of this worksheet is shown in the following video.

One of the negatives of the tranche model is the increase in the number to transactions per month.  Click on this link to find the “Camtasia” where I put forth an idea that will reduce the number of transactions per month.  The overall concept is to keep investors out of low performing ETFs and at the same time invest available cash in the better performing funds.  The reduction in transactions comes by way of not paying attention to every buy and sell recommendation that emanates from the Tranche 1.6 spreadsheet.

This idea requires judgment rather than following a mechanical model.  As a result, it is nearly impossible to back-test.  Discussion is most welcome.

Share this:

  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn

Filed Under: Tranche Investing Tagged With: Tranche Investing

Comments

  1. Ernest Stokely says

    July 30, 2015 at 7:11 AM

    Lowell,
    I think your suggestion shows a lot of investor common sense. Several comments:

    – As you know, I am currently running a very large back test of the 12 X 6 set of adjustable tranche parameters in the tranche workbook. This test is going to shed some light on how to select these parameters, hopefully.

    – I ran a back test in my original tranche article where I used a temporal weighting suggested by Herb Haynes where more recent tranche results are given a higher weighting and more distant (in time) results are given lower weight values. The results of this back test were positive, suggesting that temporal weighting of this type could be a useful adjunct to the tranche scheme by providing higher returns with a slight degradation of the tranche effect of reducing timing luck. I will include this twist in my current back test study.

    – I also ran a back test on another twist of the tranche idea. I set a limit on the number of tranche assets I would allow in the final selection. For example, suppose I said I only wanted a maximum of 3 assets in the final tranche selection. If I run the tranche algorithm and I get 5 assets, I pick the 3 with the highest tranche weightings. I then re-normalize the weights of those 3 so that the sum of their weights is one. That reduced the number of trades at a slight reduction of the tranche effect of reducing the timing luck. I’ll also re-run this twist.

    – Finally, one could wonder why you choose to use all 12 period if you are only going to pay attention to the last N of them. Why not just limit the number of tranche sub-periods to N to start with?

    More to come.

    Ernie

    • Lowell Herr says

      July 30, 2015 at 7:28 AM

      Ernie,

      By using 12 offsets, it better illustrates my idea of not paying attention to every recommendation. As a default, I set the offsets to four (4). You will see that in the screenshot when I update the Einstein tomorrow.

      Lowell

Meta Data

  • Log in
  • Entries feed
  • Comments feed
  • WordPress.org

Search

Subscribe to Blog via Email

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.

Recent Posts

  • Rutherford Portfolio Review (Tranche 5) – 16 April 2021 April 17, 2021
  • Galileo Checkup: April 2021 April 17, 2021
  • Relative Portfolio Performance Data: 16 April 2021 April 17, 2021
  • Kepler Portfolio Update: 16 April 2021 April 16, 2021
  • Aristotle Portfolio Review: 15 April 2021 April 14, 2021
  • Over-Valued Market Update: Four Critical Indicators – April 2021 April 13, 2021
  • Gauss Portfolio Review: 13 April 2021 April 13, 2021

Recent Comments

  • HedgeHunter on Rutherford Portfolio Review (Tranche 4) – 9 April 2021
  • Phil Coleman on Rutherford Portfolio Review (Tranche 4) – 9 April 2021
  • Lowell Herr on Kepler Portfolio Update: 16 April 2021
  • HedgeHunter on Kepler Portfolio Update: 16 April 2021
  • Lowell Herr on Kepler Portfolio Update: 16 April 2021
  • Steven Lefley on Kepler Portfolio Update: 16 April 2021
  • Lowell Herr on Kepler Portfolio Update: 16 April 2021
  • HedgeHunter on Gauss Portfolio Review: 13 April 2021
  • Stellaluna on Gauss Portfolio Review: 13 April 2021
  • Stellaluna on Gauss Portfolio Review: 13 April 2021

Users Online

5 Users Online
Users: Lowell Herr, 3 Guests, 1 Bot

Popular Posts

  • Modified Kipling Workbook with Risk Ratios 58 views | 0 comments
  • Over-Valued Market Update: Four Critical Indicators – April 2021 57 views | 2 comments
  • Relative Portfolio Performance: 8 April 2021 50 views | 2 comments
  • Rutherford Portfolio Review (Tranche 3) – 1 April 2021 40 views | 2 comments
  • Kepler Portfolio Update: 16 April 2021 38 views | 5 comments
  • Rutherford Portfolio Review (Tranche 4) – 9 April 2021 38 views | 2 comments
  • Gauss Portfolio Review: 13 April 2021 35 views | 6 comments

General Investment News

Portfolios coming up for review are:  Franklin, Huygens and Schrodinger.  Non-scheduled portfolios may be reviewed.  If you are a new user, check the posts you missed. Links to Random Posts are found in the lower right-hand footer or just to the right of what you are now reading.  Most popular posts are found in the lower left-hand footer.

Contact me at itawealth@comcast.net if interested in a Lifetime Membership.  Current Platinum members will be grandfathered into a Lifetime Membership before the end of 2021.

Random Posts

  • VTI-TLT-SHY Portfolio: Clearing Up Ranking Issues
  • Rutherford Portfolio Review (Tranche 3) – 1 April 2021
  • McClintock Portfolio Review: 9 April 2021
  • The Feynman Study: Part 6-1
  • New Cluster Weighting Momentum Spreadsheet Available: Version 6.0.11
  • Risk Management
  • Schrodinger Story and Review
  • Copernicus Portfolio Review: A Passive Model
  • Tranche Recommendations For August 24th
  • Tranche Model Recommendations for Week of October 19th

Log in | Website Design by BOING