Is it possible to be... almost 100% vested, almost 100% profitable*, almost 100% of the time, in the "extended" equities market?
Often, we read a lot about folks advising people to cash out and get out of the (equities) market when it turns down, with the notion of protecting capital and biding the time to raid again at/near the bottom.
I can understand the logic of this in the past when: (1) the markets were neatly distributed - you trade commodities on one market, equities on another, currencies on another, etc. and one was not inclined to trade on different markets, (2) one was not-inclined to trade equities derivatives like options and futures (due to the higher risks).
Now, since last year, we've seen quite a number of new ETFs/ETNs spring up, some of which track commodities indexes (through futures contracts), currencies, etc. Since these ETFs/ETNs trade like equities on the equities market, it is now possible to rotate to the other asset classes without leaving the equities market itself (hence my use of the term "extended" equities market). Examples of such ETFs include: RJA, DBA (agriculture), GLD (gold), DBP (precious metals), DBC (commodities, heavily weighted towards oils/gases), UUP and UDN (US$ directions), one ETF/ETN which tracks US/Swiss Francs rates (can't remember the symbol), etc.
So, in view of these new products, does it make sense to argue that one could now more safely stay almost 100% vested in this "extended" equities market, almost 100% of the time and still be almost 100% profitable, assuming one can pick the right ETFs/ETNs to rotate in and out of? My primary assumption here is that all markets don't tank at the same time (they're inter-related and interdependent, but not necessarily all +vely/-ve correlated). Is this a sound conclusion?
Paiseh for asking this goondu question.