That astrology managed to result in a significant loss compared to "buy and hold" shows that astrology is very effective, unlike the suggested "SMA crossovers"

That astrology managed to result in a significant loss compared to "buy and hold" shows that astrology is very effective, unlike the suggested "SMA crossovers" technique. A strategy that is based on pure chance is going to make, on average, as much as the "buy and hold" strategy, for the time you actually hold the stock. Looking at the "SMA crossover" graph, it looks like the stock is held for about 80% of the time, so, the result is about 25% better than 100% "buy and hold". Good but... The "moon phases" technique gets zero benefits even though the stock is held for 50% of the time, seems bad right? Now think about it, if it made nothing during the time you held the stock, it means all the valuation must have happened during the time you didn't hold the stock. So all you need to do is to do the opposite of what is suggested: buy on new moon, sell on full moon. In the end, you should get as much as the 100% "buy and hold", but because you only held it for 50%, it is actually twice as good. So to summarize, here is the ranking. The number corresponds of how much better it is to "buy and hold": - buy on full moon, sell on new moon => 0 - buy and hold => 1 (reference) - SMA crossover => 1.25 - buy on new moon, sell on full moon => 2 So, the article got it wrong, done right, astrology is clearly the best.