You’re increasing your market exposure.
Volatility decay issues aside, that’s buying at the low with the usual open questions of “is it really the low?” and “if you can afford that level of risk at potentially not the low at all, why aren’t you more leveraged all of the time?”
Can I as a CH taxpayer?
True enough, no argument.
Good food for thought actually, perhaps I need to give this some more in-depth thinking, as although I am not daytrading anything, LETF or not, I hadn’t thought about it as a really long-term hold.
Correct way to look at it. But I get the aspect to lever up at lows.
Because that limits your downside somewhat and can be a lot easier psychologically.
Theoretically optimal is to be levered at that level all the time, but the drop from top to bottom in a crash is a lot bigger that way as well.
Levering at lows is basically timing the market. It will have a worse outcome than not timing.
But if your baseline is unlevered buy & hold, levering up at lows (up to a certain amount to not risk liquidation of course), while otherwise you would not use leverage, that leverage at lows will give you extra returns (of course by increasing your risk).
No. 
tax wise interest of loans can be deducted I guess
We just marked that for demolition. On a related note: Will debt interest inside an etf be treated differently than holding the debt directly? Probably not?
the “problem” is in the leveraged its included in the fee and not listed as interest
AFAIK, leveraged ETFs do not just borrow money and buy stocks/ETFs on margin. They typically hold swaps, complex financial contracts, when a counterparty would give them e.g. 3x daily performance of S&P 500. Borrowing costs do not even appear explicitly in the agreement, but are calculated in as reduction of performance or in a similar manner.
I never heard that leveraged ETFs can transfer tax deductions for borrowing costs, although I only looked at US ETFs. Borrowing costs, implied or actual, are also not included in their TER, otherwise UPRO would have to show TER of 10+%.
I wonder if Irish leveraged ETFs can declare borrowing costs. If anyone interested, you can look at ICTAX statements, maybe you can see something interesting.
I also have a vague memory that Swiss domiciled funds are “tax-transparent”, I guess that means that actively managed CH funds might be able to transfer tax deductions to investors. However I am not interested in them.
in the end , alot of complexity for something which could be achieved with a loan and buying VT
Not the same. Leveraged and short ETF do level out on a daily base. So they sell after a bad day and they buy after a good day. Buy high and sell low…
I prefer to control leverage myself. But that has to be done. Either the ETF does it in a simple (and expensive) manner or you do it yourself!
BTW: interesting that those kind of questions always pop up at the top of a bull market. Believe me, that is not the time you want your highest leverage. You want your highest leverage at the end of a bear market.
That is exactly my way of using leverage. I want to be invested always at least 100%, but after a big sellout I buy some more on credit. Otherwise one of the big “L” will send you to bankruptcy: “Liquor, Ladies or Leverage”.
And yes, I know, it is market timing and you should not do that. But if you do it you better do it right: sell high and buy low.
Inside, maybe.
so much so that leverage and exposure to the market could be useful contrarian indicators.
i’ve actually just fully de-leveraged and will be considering when to build up dry powder cash.
OK, I never ever could time a market high. Not with all the signs.
A low is more easy to detect: everybody is shitting his/her pants…
This is absolutely true. And the market always goes more insane than I’d imagine, so it probably makes sense to stay fully invested so that you ride it all the way up, even if you ride it back down again.
But since I need to spend cash over the next few years, it makes sense to take chips off the table in advance.
Only if you are poor. Everybody spends money…
That was Kostolany: If you have much money you can speculate. If you have little money you cannot speculate. If you have no money you have to speculate.
I thought the received wisdom was if you need cash in the short term, you shouldn’t put it into the stock market or other volatile investments.
If you need anything in the short time you should just have it. At least one second before you need it…
OK, thinking a few years about that second may be disruptive…
Absolutly true I timed the low right in April but when to sell and when to reenter is tough.
I know a guy, who predicted the Corona affects right and sold everything before. But he missed the rally afterwards…
I assume “before” refers to the news in China before the lockdowns in Europe followed. To me, this sounds more like classic panic selling 
You can see it again now on Reddit. The question keeps coming up there as to whether the bubble will burst and a market crash will follow. And I’m always unsure whether the person asking the question wants to time the market for more profits or is afraid of losing a lot. The effect is the same, but the intention is not. I think it’s a fine line between the two.
And when you do panic selling, you can always say afterwards:
“I wasn’t panicking! I just wanted to time the market. But this time it didn’t work out.”
Personally: I’m really excited to see how I can handle the first real market crash. I started investing after Corona and haven’t experienced a real market crash yet. But I have my strategy and I’m counting on following it even in a crash. If not, at least it will have been a good learning experience. Humans are made for learning by doing, at least that’s true for me! 