I see your point. But it's difficult to know when over-valued stocks will be punished. Eventually, they will be (unless they grow into that valuation). Could be tomorrow. Or next year. Or five years from now. I read Saul's board, but I don't converse with him at all (I'm not one of the "cool kids"). But from my reading, I think this is what he means about timing the market. So he sells (or buys) based on financials, not stock price. As he said, he stays with "high confidence companies".

My portfolio is composed of several companies like that. For example, COST and V. I have high confidence they will be solvent long after I'm dead, so I do not fret fluctuations in their prices. I don't even notice them. I have two Saul stocks, and while they have been beaten-up, I think they are still good companies. So I'm not bailing. Then I have a couple of speculative stocks. I'm more prone to bailing on those if I think they aren't going to do well (and I did bail on a few over the past year). The speculative stocks are the only ones I lack "high confidence" in. Like QS. I know they are a few years away from a product, but I'm betting (literally) that they will have it, and there will be demand (e.g. VW is heavily invested in them). I do not have the same confidence in them that I have in COST. Or DDOG (a Saul stock).

I'm certainly not going to hop in and out of stocks based on fluctuations, or even fear (e.g. Goofyhoofy sold almost all this positions when Trump won because he thought the economy would tank...turned out that was a bad decision, as he freely admits). Mostly I own good companies with good financials, and then I don't sweat it.

FWIW.

onepoorguy