So it's tough to get an accurate image of supply demand except perhaps through price action.
Increased demand for stocks and its effect on the stock market.
- Thread starter Laissez Faire
- Start date
So it's tough to get an accurate image of supply demand except perhaps through price action.
The whole system is dependent on arbitrage. Knowing how much of it is happening, and with what instruments, is the only real way to measure supply/demand IMO.
Knowing how a generic portfolio (28% SPX, 72% Long Dated Bonds) is performing will tell you what fund managers are likely to do. Just my opinion.
Knowing how a generic portfolio (28% SPX, 72% Long Dated Bonds) is performing will tell you what fund managers are likely to do. Just my opinion.
Interesting question. I see a lot of patterns in real estate + stock market. IN REAL estate, an appraiser said ''ask price tells you what it is NOT worth'' [huge bid ask spread, thru MLS, but can be worth it ]LOL. BUT in stocks, the trend is your friend+ if I cant get in in my price in a certain amount of time,may get in @ market. With liquid stuff in a good trend, penny bid /ask '' free ''commissions...……………………………………………………………………………………..
Yes. My cab driver and barber have not yet mentioned the stock market. Hysteria is when the hairdresser talks about it.
%% Good points.
Because even if/when something works 80% +/of the time, like NYSE short selling ratio;
they are not predictors also. Fundamentals, such as tek sector QQQ can help some; if someone does not mind more of a roller caster stuff .
In other words fortunes have been made in oil stocks, but they tend to trend so very different, so that's what I mean by fundamentals help some...........................................................................................................
From what I am told retail is but a grain of sand...My personal belief is that Retail is money for the taking by the Smart money.
Correct, ALL of the smart money, year on year make money, only place said money can come from is Retail, Millions of us losing small to large amounts which basically pay for there Ferrari's.
They fight among themselves to take more of the retail losses, nothing more.
I am not talking about a few rich dentists going all in at a market top, but the net effect of a significant number (and increasingly so) of people saving in stocks on a monthly basis.
But it may be that the aggregate sum of these individuals are still not a significant influence, although they should exert at least some buying pressure/price support.
But it may be that the aggregate sum of these individuals are still not a significant influence, although they should exert at least some buying pressure/price support.
%%
Exactly;
on QQQ for example on my charts, I never try to figure out what part of 20-25 million@ dav volume is elephants, turtles, or retail- but that's just me. Like IBD noted ,as a figure of speech= you can always tell if an elephant gets in a bathtub LOL
.
it's very unlikely demand from retail have any matter.
Maybe people didn't invest directly but still were invested indirectly through pension plans.
I have education plan for children which is 100% in stocks and I put some small amount every month. And I have it like that for 10 years.
It grew a lot. Although mutual fund fees ate a lot too
And flows show no money new from retails and will likely won't be unless stocks shoot up like supernova like 1998-2000 which is possible but not probable
demography doesn't support it and 10 % of the upper class already own 99% of stocks
those monthly retail middle class purchases don't move a needle
buybacks and central bank purchases dwarf it