Markets are not Random

[PistolPete]

"Name a market that has ever done the opposite."

"In my limited knowledge"

you got that right

 

[tiddlywinks]

Why bet against that?

If you are immortal and never need money, go for it. Don't die intestate.

You probably want to illustrate Buffet as some sort of example, It is clear with your logic you lionize him. Not only can you NOT get the "deals" he does, he could LOSE, literally lose not drawdown, 42 BILLION or more, (Forbes lists 2018 net worth is 84B) and it would not affect his quality of life. Captain AmericanDream with his 1M net worth can not sustain the same.

This convo is silly. Trends change. Timing is important.

 

[Sprout]

The trend of the "market" is up. It always has been, and always will be. How many centuries must pass before this point is driven home?

Someone show me the downtrend in this chart. Hmmm?

https://www.macrotrends.net/1319/dow-jones-100-year-historical-chart

That’s pretty easy. Depends on your view;
https://www.macrotrends.net/2526/sp-500-historical-annual-returns

 

[themickey]

Yes. I like that definition tomorton. I would add that a higher time-frame trend is a higher time-frame trend if it results in the trades taken using my trading trend having higher expectancy. And, closing when the market closes, I sleep well every night.

WHOOOOOAAAAA!!,
You've been away a long time! Welcome back!

 

[tomorton]

BAM! YOU GOT IT! OMFG, SOMEONE UNDERSTANDS!

Name a market that has ever done the opposite. In my limited knowledge, the only one that ever has is the XIV, which bet against the idea of a market getting volatile? The point here is, is that equity markets go up, and HAVE been going up, since the beginning of time. That is the nature of a planet that keeps expanding in both population and output growth.

Why bet against that?

Careful, equity indices tend to go up. This is because the equities which are falling or not rising or which are no longer listed are aggressively replaced as members of the index by equities which are rising. But individual equities have no inherent long-term tendency to move either up or down.

 

[SunTrader]

I understand now as well how some think. As long as you don't sell .... you never lose.

Unless you die first.
Unless the company you buy doesn't die, aka go bankrupt
Unless you need the funds for another financial matter.
Unless you don't consider opportunity cost of being in a better trade.
Unless ...

 

[SunTrader]

This convo is silly. Trends change. Timing is important.

Exactly. Why sit through a massive drawdown if you don't have.

Basic Econ 101 and "Trading 101" stuff.

 

[MarkBrown]

With that logic, as long as the "market", which ever market it is, remains above it's initial opening print, it's trend is up.

why opening ? and which opening ? sounds arbitrary like trends. lol

 

[Peter8519]

Markets are not random... then it can be anything...
1. From the book Trading in the Zone... The semiretired chairman of the board of the brokerage firm was a longtime trader with nearly 40 years of experience in the grain pits at the Chicago Board of Trade. He put a big order and slammed the market to prove the market technician wrong.
2. At times, it just follow the 50 days moving average for months.
3. Can we tell what is close price of a particular stock for tomorrow?

 

[SunTrader]

LOL markets don't follow any moving averages. If at all, it is the complete opposite. But then again that would be on a random basis.