3 ms·

I know a few people who have done quite well with technical anaylsis. Personally I found a lot more alpha in ML models but the idea isn't bad. HOWEVER you will

I know a few people who have done quite well with technical anaylsis. Personally I found a lot more alpha in ML models but the idea isn't bad. HOWEVER you will not find the good stuff being published to some meme stock wsb retard substack. Because when you share a strategy like this with everyone you remove most of its worth. Like for example there's absolutely significance to "resistance" levels just like certain mkt caps or price targets. Bc people place orders for those prices. Same as how breaking 1b mkt cap usually gets a pop bc it unlocks a lot of institutional capital.

NovemberWhiskey 4y ago
I know a few people who have done quite well with totally random stock picking too. Without correction for selection bias, it doesn't tell you anything. There is no good stuff here; it is no better than augury and the people making serious money in the markets are Not Doing It Like This.
- gammarator 4y ago
  “ The automatic mind creates causal stories out of dubious raw material. When Kahneman studied the records of managers at one investment firm, over 25 years, he found there was zero link between managers earning an above-market return one year and repeating that kind of performance the next — although, of course, pay was pegged to annual returns and managers with good years were richly rewarded. Unsurprisingly, the firm’s executives refused to believe that variation in performance was random. “I’ve done very well for the firm and no one can take that away from me,” one told Kahneman. “I took it away from you this morning,” Kahneman recalls thinking.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/thinking-fast-and-slow-by-daniel-kahneman/2011/12/08/gIQAmyh4yO_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/thinking-...
lottin 4y ago
Some people have done quite well betting on horses, but from that we can't infer that it's a good investment strategy.

NovemberWhiskey 4y ago

I know a few people who have done quite well with totally random stock picking too. Without correction for selection bias, it doesn't tell you anything. There is no good stuff here; it is no better than augury and the people making serious money in the markets are Not Doing It Like This.

gammarator 4y ago
“ The automatic mind creates causal stories out of dubious raw material. When Kahneman studied the records of managers at one investment firm, over 25 years, he found there was zero link between managers earning an above-market return one year and repeating that kind of performance the next — although, of course, pay was pegged to annual returns and managers with good years were richly rewarded. Unsurprisingly, the firm’s executives refused to believe that variation in performance was random. “I’ve done very well for the firm and no one can take that away from me,” one told Kahneman. “I took it away from you this morning,” Kahneman recalls thinking.” https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/thinking-fast-and-slow-by-daniel-kahneman/2011/12/08/gIQAmyh4yO_story.html https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/books/thinking-...

lottin 4y ago

Some people have done quite well betting on horses, but from that we can't infer that it's a good investment strategy.