> The market inpounds any new, publicly available information into the price, not merely business information. Yes, and the “price” is not the expected net val

> The market inpounds any new, publicly available information into the price, not merely business information. Yes, and the “price” is not the expected net value of future cash flows, it’s an estimate of what people are going to pay for it. The price and the value are two distinct concepts. > If you have a reason to think for example that “dumping money into index funds” is somehow inefficient, please share! If the resulting price of companies in the index is a mispricing opportunity, let us know! I know that you’re taking a positive “well show me” kind of stance to imply that I don’t know the market better than the people actively involved in it. But I’m not claiming to know where prices should be. I’m claiming prices are driven by a variety of things, one of which is value, but much of which is just various unsubstantiated assumptions. Many of those assumptions could be entirely incorrect. That does not mean the market will realize this soon, or ever, so assuming that any particular world view of what’s incorrect will materialize in a price change isn’t the wisest decision. For capital gains oriented growth tech stocks especially, significant money has been invested because of a simple lack of alternatives, which has inflated prices. Should those prices fall? Irrelevant question, because value is not the sole driver of price. Irrationality is a part of the system.