Search results

That is what most people try to do. Overbought/oversold, support/resistance, buying pullbacks, not to mention all the myriad of indicators and oscillators, are all attempts to quantify what is (relatively) low and high.

It's no wonder people get exasperated with this thread. First we're told the obvious is so simple that even a child could work it out. Then those supposedly in the know proceed to convolute the hell out of it. What next? Another deeper obvious that's even less obvious than the original obvious?

It may be obvious that institutions dominate the market but how many traders stop to think about what that 98%+ of volume actually represents. Is it active short-term trading, like they're doing, or something altogether different? Of the less than 2% of volume, which is attributable to...

o_O

http://repository.law.umich.edu/articles/118 "But recent New York Stock Exchange ("NYSE") data reveal that trades by individual investors represent, on average, less than 2% of NYSE trading volume for NYSE-listed firms. There is no question that U.S. securities markets are now dominated by...

4 Well J_S... 1) the obvious is simple ✓ 2) it is because it is so simple that the majority will never discover it ✓ 3) it is so simplistic that, once revealed, it will be instantly dismissed ✓ 4) it is different to what the majority try to do ✓ 5) the risk on every trade is always nearly the...

For the record... It is possible I've got it wrong about the obvious the OP was referring. But, for me, all the clues point to this. I've never actually tried trading this way. In fact, I haven't traded for quite a long time; the previous failures made me eventually stop (although not soon...

I believe the OP mostly traded individual stocks. With hundreds of them to choose from it shouldn't be difficult to screen for ones which are going up, or ones which are going down.

No, I'm not the OP. I only stumbled on this thread long after the OP had left. It would only be disastrous, to buy the top or sell the bottom, if you risked too much. Bet very small, with a stop, and the worse that can happen is a small loss. I think it was RN who said that, in his opinion...

It's not what I'm saying. It's what I understand, the obvious to be, that the OP was driving at. Trying to predict turning points certainly lost me a lot of money over the years. That, and risking too much, not realising trading is just another form of gambling.

Yep go short but, for some reason, a lot of traders will want to go long. Some will use an indicator, or draw lines on the chart, to try and predict when it will turn around. Others will sit on the sidelines waiting for a bounce. It's the same for a stock which is shooting up. Many traders will...

There is an old saying that you shouldn't try to catch a falling knife. What's the obvious way to trade it?

;)

99% of traders would agree with both of you.

Read ScoobyStoo's posts, and the OP's replies, in your PDF. I will give you another clue. Those in the know gave much more away in their early posts when they weren't so cagey.

The 90% figure is a joke. Maybe 1 in 100 know what they are doing. Probably only a lesser few really get it. Is the "holy grail" any more unbelievable than millions of traders around the world betting on squiggly lines?

I am TO. Just not that TO.

A total of 276 users have posted on this thread. How do I know this number? Because I was curious. I bet only a handful really get it (nowhere near the 27). For anyone struggling to figure out the Obvious, don't give up. Persistence pays. You never know, you might even deduce the real...

I can't disagree with your second sentence. The majority of pension/mutual funds can't even keep up with a passive index tracker, so they are obviously useless at trading. I'm inclined to agree with the OP that fund managers are just another bunch of idiots.

Virtually all stock is generally owned. It's just that most people own stock through pooled investments like pension funds, mutual funds. That's why fund managers are the big players in the market.