I’ve been seeing a bunch of “buy and hold is dead” pieces. Here’s an example. Look, my view is that investment methods travel in eras. I remember the 80s-90s, where buy-and-hold was the rage. I also remember the 70s where tactical asset allocation returned, as well as gold bugs and other tangential market participants.
The popularity of investment styles is a trailing indicator of investment performance. Buy and hold will once again be popoular after three years of a rising market, and that should arrive in the next 20 years sometime.
It may take too long, but “buy and hold” will return.
Asset Allocation, Macroeconomics, Portfolio Management, Quantitative Methods, Speculation, Stocks | RSS 2.0 | 
Been thinking about this since the end of last year. Buy and hold is probably not dead, but you better pick the right assets, and be ready to sell if fundamentals for that holding deteriorate. One must pick the right individual stock, bond or sub-asset class. Buying and holding the S&P 500 might be a rough ride. Jury is still out.
Buy and hold conservatively managed consumer product companies with nice dividends and little debt. Same with a moderate allocation of precious metals, in my opinion.
Banks might be the worst buy and hold strategy for the rest of my lifetime now that the government has disincentivized sound management by subsidizing the worst banks to the detriment of the more conservatively managed local/regional banks. I can’t imagine a bank manager ever conservatively managing risk again when they have an implicit guarantee from the government now.
Buy and hold was never really “alive” in the first place, was it? How many investors bought the S&P 10 years ago, for example, and held it all this time without adding any money to it or employing the use of any other assets?
Using the obvious Warren Buffett as a “buy and hold” champion, why is Berkshire Hathaway not “dead?”
Buy and hold, as a term or phrase, has been used and worn out to the degree that it has become abstract — but I would not say it is “dead.”
Thanks for provoking thought, as usual, David…
“If I can assign names as well as pictures to objects, the right assignment of them we may call truth, and the wrong assignment of them falsehood.” ~ Socrates
I beleive Buy and Hold is back in the commodities and some emerging markets.
If a significant portion of the investor class are “gun shy” and are keeping their powder dry, how can share prices get ahead of themselves? With a negative bias in the market, anything smacking of a bubble will be piled upon and driven back to reality. The bias is towards buy and hold.
Buy and Hold works fine if you pick the right business (not stock). Great prices on businesses right now!
You have to adapt your strategy according to secular cycles. In secular bulls, as from 1949 through 1968 or from 1982 through 2000, buy-and-hold is the right strategy. However, in secular range-bound markets, as from 1966 through 1982 or from 1997 through 2013(?), buy-and-hold is clearly wrong. So, know your market cycles!