Skip to main content

Sound Advice: April 29, 2026

Why You Should Avoid Carnivore Style “Investing”

You should avoid “carnivore”‑style stock investing because it’s essentially high‑turnover, short‑term stock picking with marketing‑driven promises, which conflicts with evidence‑based, long‑term investing.

What “carnivore” investing is

  • It’s usually a subscription alert service that tells you what to buy and sell, often multiple times per day.
  • The focus is short‑term momentum trades, including concentrated positions and sometimes margin/shorting, not broad long‑term ownership of businesses.
  • Marketing often highlights huge historical outperformance and “veteran Wall Street traders” using proprietary methods, with limited transparent, verifiable track records.​

Key reasons to avoid it

  • High turnover and costs: Frequent trading means spreads, commissions (where applicable), and tax drag in taxable accounts, all of which compound against you over time.
  • Concentration risk: Alerts often cluster in a small set of high‑beta names; a few bad trades can damage capital much more than in a diversified index fund.
  • Strategy opacity: Methodology is proprietary and only loosely described, so you can’t rigorously evaluate edge, risk or whether results are cherry‑picked.
  • Behavior risk: Rapid alerts encourage reactive trading; users on forums report whipsawing in and out of positions with quick 5–6% losses, which is the opposite of a disciplined IPS‑driven process.
  • Misaligned with your likely goals: Most long‑term investors are better served by diversified, low‑cost total‑market exposure rather than trying to front‑run short‑term moves.

Red flags in the marketing

  • Implied or explicit “100% per year” type return targets and big “we crush the S&P 500” claims without institution‑grade, audited performance reporting.
  • Reliance on personality and mystique (anonymous or semi‑anonymous traders, “Lions of Wall Street” branding) instead of robust, testable process and risk disclosures.​
  • Targeting beginners by saying “we tell you exactly what to trade,” which encourages outsourcing judgment without teaching proper risk management.

Better way to think about it

  • Use broad, low‑cost index funds or systematic strategies as your core; they give diversified exposure, low fees, and strong odds of beating most active traders over time.
  • If you’re curious, limit any “carnivore”‑style experiments to a small, explicitly capped “fun money” sleeve that you can lose without affecting retirement or core goals.

  

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sound Advice: July 16, 2025

Fixed annuities are poor investments Fixed annuities are often criticized as poor investments for several reasons, despite their reputation for providing stable, predictable income.  Here are the key drawbacks and concerns:   High Fees and Commissions Internal Fees:  Fixed annuities can carry a range of fees, including administrative charges, mortality expense risk fees, and rider fees. These can add up to 2%–4% per year, significantly eroding returns over time. Commissions:  Sales agents and financial advisors often receive high commissions for selling annuities—sometimes as much as 5%–8% of the invested amount. This creates a financial incentive for advisers to recommend them, even when they may not be the best fit for the client. Comparison to Other Investments:  Mutual funds and ETFs typically have much lower fees and commissions, making them more cost-effective for long-term growth. Limited Growth a...
Post a Comment
Read more

Sound Advice: October 8, 2025

How many investors have outperformed the stock market over the last 20 years? Very few investors have outperformed the stock market over the past 20 years.   Data shows that only about 6% to 8% of actively managed equity funds in the U.S. beat the market over this period, with the vast majority—over 90%—underperforming the S&P 500 or equivalent broad indexes. Percentage of Investors Beating the Market Only 8% of equity funds investing in large companies managed to outperform the market over a recent 20-year span. About 94% of all domestic funds underperformed the S&P 1500 Composite Index from 2005-2024. Over shorter timeframes (5-10 years), typically fewer than 15-20% of fund managers beat the S&P 500, and performance persistence is rare. Why It Is Rare The S&P 500’s high returns have proven immensely difficult to beat, especially as indexing has become popular and markets have ...
Post a Comment
Read more

Sound Advice: November 10, 2025

The stock market indexes seem to be dominated by a handful of tech stocks, but how is the average stock doing? As of late October/early November 2025, the S&P 500 index excluding the Magnificent Seven stocks (the "Other 493") has delivered a modest year-to-date return of approximately 5.3% to 5.4%. That’s barely more than one third of the performance of the full, market-capitalization-weighted S&P 500 index, which was up around 15.1% to 16% over the same period.  (The Magnificent Seven stocks are Alphabet (Google), Amazon, Apple, Meta (Facebook), Microsoft, Nvidia, and Tesla.) Index Concentration and Market Breadth The S&P 500 Equal Weight Index underperformed the standard, cap-weighted S&P 500 by about 12% in 2024, reflecting the gap between the top performing giants and the rest of the market. Only sectors like utilities, industrials, real estate, and energy outperformed their cap-weighted peers, while tech and consumer-focused sectors were ...
Post a Comment
Read more