98% of stock commentary on the internet is fundamental, so that would lead you to believe that most investors/traders are fundamentalists. OTOH, there is so much charting/technical info available that there have to be more chartists than before. But I wonder if after the internet bubble there aren't far fewer than before. Like a lot of people, I first learned about charting from GBS at thestreet.com, but there's probably less technical commentary these days than back in the day. Remember that IBD predates the internet. If you visit the big sites like Businessinsider, Seeking Alpha, Zerohedge, they are all fundamentalist or loony. So I wonder if most of the chartists/traders/etc haven't been flushed out by the wild up and down markets over the last 15 years. I'm just thinking out loud, but my question is why technical trading hasn't taken over the market. Why are there still so many fundamentalist suckers willing to buy a bad chart? Do they never learn, or are they just a new batch of suckers?
more or fewer technical traders than before
- Thread starter billyjoerob
- Start date
98% are reporters. they are not traders. They are paid to write stories.
Mathematics traders are successful traders, but they are not in public. they are make a living trading and not as a reporter or a salesman
Technical traders are wannabe traders (debunkers) making a living selling. In other word, they are only a salesman no difference than a car salesman making a living selling products.
More than 90% of small traders lose! They just lose!
I wouldn't know about what others say because I don't listen to anybody. (I consider this a major accomplishment 
)
My own observations lead me to think fundumentals are the predominant force over months to years while at shorter frames price movement is the resultant of a continous process of testing based on technicals.
ras72
)My own observations lead me to think fundumentals are the predominant force over months to years while at shorter frames price movement is the resultant of a continous process of testing based on technicals.
ras72
Most gamblers are risking less now and leveraging it in forex for most part. I was talking to a broker I met at a conference the other day and he told me 99% of accounts blow up in less than a month. Hard to profit from TA in many markets. Most competent traders are becoming secretive or even do the opposite of what their analysis supports. This is a tough game but lucrative if you can figure it out.
I'm still fairly new to the trading game but I've found thus far that what I learned in engineering school is profitable as opposed to what I learned in Bill O'Neil's books and the book Technical Analysis and Stock Market Profits.
My system is based on mathematics and engineering principles and I still struggle to take trades sometimes when it gives me signals which trade directly against what is taught in these technical analysis books.
That's what you would think. But I don't see it. Fundamental analysis tells a better story, so that has to explain a lot of it. There's a basic resistance to technical analysis because it doesn't tell a story.
There's probably less coverage of technical analysis than there used to be. Pre-internet shows like FNN and Nightly Business Report and Dick Davis on the radio (a bit before my time) all followed technical analysis, or at least advocated trend trading. The Rukeyser show regularly had Martin Zweig on. Cramer and Fastmoney still do some charting, but CNBC has like 60 hours per week to fill. NBR is pretty much exclusively about gainers and decliners and market breadth and other market statistics. I don't know who the market is for that, but it is kind of soothing, it's probably on in the background in retirement homes.
Probably the simplest explanation is that pre-internet, stock commentators sold newsletters and tried to make subscribers money. Now it's mostly entertainment and technical analysis is not entertaining.
Over at Amazon, a technical analysis book (O'Neill) doesn't show up until the 36th most popular book in investing.
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-.../2665/ref=zg_bs_2665_pg_3?_encoding=UTF8&pg=3
Under exclusively stock market investing, technical analysis is a little more popular.
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-...esting/zgbs/books/2674/ref=zg_bs_nav_b_3_2665
What's remarkable is how old the books are . . . Magee and Edwards is 80 years old, Darvas is another like 50 years old, Market Wizards is about 25 years old.
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-.../2665/ref=zg_bs_2665_pg_3?_encoding=UTF8&pg=3
Under exclusively stock market investing, technical analysis is a little more popular.
http://www.amazon.com/Best-Sellers-...esting/zgbs/books/2674/ref=zg_bs_nav_b_3_2665
What's remarkable is how old the books are . . . Magee and Edwards is 80 years old, Darvas is another like 50 years old, Market Wizards is about 25 years old.
My impression is that most retail daytraders are technical traders - there's a lower barrier to entry, don't need to actually understand the companies, don't need any accounting knowledge, no need to have contacts in companies/in the industry, etc. In other words, it's a MUCH easier sell for a typical part-time retail trader who doesn't have the time nor contacts.
I think classifying traders as technical or fundamental is way too broad though. The traders who read a seekingalpha article and making trading decisions based on that is way different from a trader who is doing his own research, calling contacts, doing company visits, etc.
I only know a couple of long-term successful traders personally, and would not describe them as "technical" or "fundamental" traders as they are usually doing some out-of-the-box stuff.
I think classifying traders as technical or fundamental is way too broad though. The traders who read a seekingalpha article and making trading decisions based on that is way different from a trader who is doing his own research, calling contacts, doing company visits, etc.
I only know a couple of long-term successful traders personally, and would not describe them as "technical" or "fundamental" traders as they are usually doing some out-of-the-box stuff.
Yeah, I know some guy who's really killing it, but he's got some funky method that's hard to understand, totally crazy black box stuff. He pulls like $5000 out of the market every day, like clockwork.