> That's quite a claim, where's the evidence to back it? There are funds[1] that have consistently beat the market every year for decades, their very existence

> That's quite a claim, where's the evidence to back it? There are funds[1] that have consistently beat the market every year for decades, their very existence disproves the gambling hypothesis. No it doesn't. I was a professional poker player, and professionals have existed for decades. Their existence doesn't mean there's no gambling in poker. If you're taking offense to the wording of "just gambling," sure, I can see that. Like poker, it's gambling with an element of skill. Or perhaps more aptly put, it's a skill game with a gambling element. What makes it gambling is that you have no influence over part of the process. You can control your decisions (bet/fold/buy/sell), but the rest (company performance, turn/river cards) is out of your hands. So yes, of course this is gambling.