Q: I'm stuck in a losing position I can't bear to sell — should I realize the loss and switch to the Nasdaq?

In 30 seconds: Sell it all at market immediately and switch to the Nasdaq. Don’t stay stuck in a bad holding just to “wait for it to come back.” James uses the “broken elevator” metaphor: the elevator is broken — do you keep standing in it waiting for a repair, or just switch to a good one? You want to go up to the 55th floor, you took the broken elevator, there’s a good one right next to it, yet you insist on staying in the broken one — that logic itself is wrong. What’s already fallen is a sunk cost; moving your capital to something that “keeps creating value and will rise” is the point.¹

Variants (how people actually ask)

• “I have a batch of ETFs (healthcare, consumer, HK Hang Seng Tech) I bought at ‘lows’ and they fell another 20% — can’t bear to sell, should I realize the loss and switch to the Nasdaq?”
• “These positions have fallen for years; I’m waiting for them to come back — should I wait a bit more?”
• “My A-share account still has 40% stuck — won’t switching it all to the Nasdaq mean selling at the very bottom?”

James’s answer: swap out the broken elevator

00575 a member had already moved 60% from A-shares to the US Nasdaq, with 40% stuck: part in “bought after a big drop” healthcare / consumer / HK Hang Seng Tech ETFs (which then fell another 20%), part in A-share dividend-low-volatility (income). She can’t bear to sell and wants to wait for a recovery. James’s response:¹

• “That you’d even ask this shows you haven’t watched enough of our videos.” The answer is blunt: sell everything at market immediately, buy the Nasdaq (the 14 / 100 companies) immediately, and it’s done.
• The broken-elevator metaphor: “What’s broken is broken — rather than wait for it to be fixed, just switch to another one. You have three elevators, two are broken — will you keep standing in a broken one waiting, instead of switching to the good one?”
• On “but what if it rises later”: “Then keep waiting in the broken elevator.” The opportunity cost of not switching to a good holding far outweighs the occasional missed bounce.
• This is the same psychological trap as “always wait a bit longer”: being unable to realize a loss = letting the sunk cost hold you hostage, keeping capital locked in an inefficient holding.

Why this doesn’t violate “hold to the death”

“Hold to the death” means not selling the core index position (QQQ / Nasdaq); it never included “clinging to a bad holding you shouldn’t own at all.” Switching from single stocks, thematic ETFs, or A-shares into the Nasdaq is moving assets onto the correct vehicle — do it once and then enter “hold to the death.” This matches James’s own path from market-timing to holding-to-the-death (see 從擇時操作到打死不賣). Get both the buy and the sell right, and don’t jump around once you’ve switched (see 家人朋友賣掉了該怎麼辦).

Answer log

• 2026-07-25 (00575): a member, should the 40% stuck position switch to the Nasdaq → sell all at market immediately and switch; broken-elevator metaphor; if you fear it rebounding, “keep waiting in the broken elevator.”¹

🔎 “Bought at the top / stuck — what now, should I switch” is evergreen (recurring in sessions like 00375 “Bought at the top — can I keep buying?”). The core answer is consistent: don’t be held hostage by sunk cost; switch to the right holding, then hold to the death.

⚠️ Realizing a loss to switch crystallizes the loss and may have tax implications (varies by locale), and “switching to the Nasdaq” still carries market risk; this page only organizes James’s spoken stance, not personalized investment advice.

Footnotes

1. CLEC James, 長篇 00575 “What truly teaches you is not the result, but the process!”, 2026-07-25, a member switching a stuck position to the Nasdaq, broken-elevator metaphor @1:16:30–1:19:00 (“You just sell everything at market immediately and buy the 14 immediately and it’s done … a broken elevator — rather than wait for the repair, switch to another … there’s a good elevator next to you and you insist on staying in the broken one?”). Transcript in raw/transcripts/長篇/00575…. ↩ ↩² ↩³