If I ever met the retarded fucking loser who came up with such a retardedly wrong idea, I’d literally punch him in the face. At this point I’d punch any moron who even thinks he’s right. How were people in the 70s-90s so fucking stupid?
the market is efficient over the long term
>>62022279/thread
>>62022279So the hypothesis is wrong?>The Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) is a financial theory stating that asset prices fully reflect all available information, making it impossible to consistently "beat the market" on a risk-adjusted basis.There is no mention of duration. The premise is that every stock/index/commodity is priced to perfection at all times, thus there is no way to outperform.
>>62022304>The premise is that every stock/index/commodity is priced to perfection at all times, thus there is no way to outperform.pretty dogshit hypothesis that is probably laughed at. it's just an academic idea that is taken too seriously.
>>62022245It's literally true. There is no such thing as a perfect edge. You cannot have a strategy and execute that strategy with 100% success. And the more you trade the closer you will get to the markets gain, probably even slightly below it.This is because there are people trading the opposite of your strategy. >>62022304Read your quote again. >asset prices fully reflect all available information>making it impossible to consistently "beat the market"The mention of duration is right there. It doesn't say you can never outperform the market, it says you cannot consistently do that. It's an extremely simple model. One which you've failed to udnerstand.
>>62022279The market is inefficient until the day it accidentally reflects the answer i think is correct, which defines the interval of time i will label "long term"
>>62022318“Consistency” is entirely dependent on the individuals personal definition. It’s not an objective measure of duration or even throughput. Does consistency mean 10 years? 100? 5? I’ve beaten the market 3 years in a row now. Does that fall within or outside the definition of “consistently”?It’s either a true or false statement. The premise is correct and provable in all cases of incorrect and flawed. The market is NOT always efficient, otherwise outliers wouldn’t outperform it.
By the way, this was a rhetorical thread, we all know (at least I hope we do” that the market is NOT “efficient” namely due to things like the rise of vol control funds, the massive growth of options and their pinning effects, and the further indexation of equity markets.The thread was made off the fact that Trump caused a 4% rally in the ES on a literal made up event
>>62022354Three years is a drop in the ocean of the duration of the market. It's like saying you smoked cigarettes for 3 years and didn't get lung cancer, so you must be personally immune to it. That mentality is exactly what OTHER traders will take advantage of and wipe out your gains. Eventually, your strategy will become the losing strategy. Because the market is made up of participants of differing views and strategies. And some of those strategies will prey on your personal strategy. >>62022366The market is efficient, and you're only proving that the theory is correct by talking about Trump "moving the market", or funds, options, etc. Because all these things influence the market. Just like insider traders influence the market. And the fact that they have an influence on the market PROVES the very idea you're claiming is false. I find it humorous that you've misunderstood this very simple concept.
>>62022245You clearly don't understand it.
>>62022354>The market is NOT always efficientBut it eventually it always is. That is what the hypothesis proposes.
>>62022366>The thread was made off the fact that Trump caused a 4% rally in the ES on a literal made up eventThat's your opinion.
>>62022485>>62022491>>62022494>3 posts in quick successionYou sure are mad
>>62022435If the market was efficient it wouldn’t have round tripped. It did because of algos, yet another feature of our “not” efficient markets. I’m arguing with somebody who works a day job and DCAs into the SPX and QQQ, not somebody who manages money, so I understand completely this take. I promise you anybody who manages even an iota of significant wealth knows that the EMH is a running joke in the industry.
kek absolute goy cope
>>62022494And I can even argue against it. Even if Trump is lying about talks with Iran, him making up the lie already shows his disposition for backing out of the war, thus TACO.>>62022501No retard. I simply don't waste time coming up with elaborate posts, I write posts as I think and read things piecemeal because I want to.
>>62022494Not an opinion when the other side of the war literally said it’s not true. Algos rush in to buy, squeezing vol and causing a gamma squeeze due to heavy put positioning, you go from -1.5 to +2.5% in 3 hours. It’s not humans making the decision or being “efficient”. Again, if you understood mechanicals of how markets worked, you’d get it.
>>62022502>If the market was efficient it wouldn’t have round trippedAgain, confusion your opinions are interpretations of reality with how the market acts. The point is shit is unpredictable that's why you can't come up with a theory like you are and make free money all the time. How fucking stupid are you.
>>62022245Oh, the market is "efficient" alright
>>62022304How does your chart refute the efficient market hypothesis? You sound like a crybaby retard
>>62022516>Not an opinion when the other side of the war literally said it’s not trueRead my post right above yours. Just like you can argue this move is irrational I can argue it's rational. Doesn't mean I'm right and that's the point.
>>62022512> him making up the lie already shows his disposition for backing out of the war, thus TACO.Damn, if only hitter HACO’d when the red army was marching to Berlin. What a retard he was. Losers don’t dictate terms in war, and it’s quite apparent to anybody with a three digit IQ which party has more leverage in this conflict. But I guess that’s the efficient market hypothesis, right? SPX down 3 weeks in a row at 7% surely is pricing in American victory (:
>>62022520These trades were made by bots
>>62022516>It’s not humans making the decision or being “efficient”Bro you have a completely warped definition of efficiency in the context of the hypothesis. Go read it and actually understand it before sharing opinions.
>>62022523Nobody’s crying, anybody who thinks market price action is “efficient” and not a function of options flow/algos/CTAs/funds/index funds is literally retardedAgain, anybody with an iota of experience managing money will laugh you out of the room if you said the aforementioned things don’t influence markets the vast majority of the time
>>62022533>But I guess that’s the efficient market hypothesis, right?No dumbass. Can't you read? I'm losing my patience here. I don't give a fuck about the politics here, I'm making a point. There's no ground truth in this conflict of narratives. If you can't see that you yourself are pushing a narrative you're beyond saving.
>>62022554Dude I don’t even read your posts
The hypothesis is true to the extent that all current knowledge about the market is already known. Practically it means that there's always a degree of luck involved when it comes to making money in the market. If something was a truly logical sound bet, it would have already been taken by funds and firms with millions if not billions of dollars in infrastructure and manpower to figure it out first and front run you. You're only allowed to buy or sell when they believe it's not worth the risk.
Basically you lost money trading and now you're crying about it. If you understood the efficient market hypothesis you wouldn't be trading without insider information in the first place because it's a losers game. You are a victim of your own ignorance.
>>62022556If you did you'd learn something. That's your main problem, you don't read. Retard.
>>62022549That's an example of available information. Try again pissbaby
>>62022557I mean covid alone disproves that. When Italy was shutting down nobody cared, when cases were rising nobody cared, it only only after quarterly options expiration that the market unpinned and cascaded lower. You could have tried to short early before anything happened, predicting a crisis, and “front ran” institutions yourself Also those billions of institutions take literally weeks to load/unload positions. They don’t even touch stocks that aren’t super high mcap. Not only that, but they were WRONG last year, refusing to believe in TACO. Big money was irresponsibly short last year into the tariff downturn and retail were the ones who bought that dip and profited. The reason funds underperform the market is precisely because they are “too big” to front run something. If you have a hedge fund manager a 500k account I guarantee you they’d demolish the markets returns, as many retail traders/investors do.
>>62022578>>62022568Sorry, but nothing I posted was refuted. Most price action is a result of gamma exposure and managed funds/algos. Not some boomer with a top hat reading a report and saying “it’s a value buy!!!!”. You don’t know what those things are, I understand. This conversation is between somebody who manages money for a living, and somebody who works a 9-5 who DCAs in the stock market every week expecting to be wealthy at 60.We’re not the same, just like how I wouldn’t get in the weeds arguing physics with an 11 year old (:
>>62022595Dude shut the fuck up. You are using hindsight to validate your ability to make predictions. Italy shutting down could have been a nothingburger. TACO could have not happened. You said it yourself, they had to BELIEVE in TACO, not logically calculate it based on an infallible model of cognition that fits perfectly to Trump's specific brain. You are losing money because you are stupid. You are making stupid decisions. You are saying stupid things with 0 basis in reality. Grow the fuck up.>>62022616The fact you're continuing to post pretending like you won when you're doing maximum damage control, won't even tell me how your baby chart refutes the efficient market hypothesis, shows you are like a wounded animal trying to get a W before you succumb and die. Just die. Get reborn into something better
>>62022630>hindsightYes my friend, that is exactly what you are arguing. That the market is maximally efficient, yet it couldn’t even price correctly a current event? Wow, thanks for proving my point. I’m not wasting any more time replying to you or your airplane mode You’re gonna have so much money when you’re 50 bro, life is gonna be GOOD. Anytime you have a rough day or your boss gives you shit just imagine the end of the tunnel. 50 and FINANCIALLY FREE
>>62022616Goodbye forever, and have fun losing all your money.
>>62022512>Even if Trump is lying about talks with Iran, him making up the lie already shows his disposition for backing out of the war, thus TACONo, it shows his disposition for trying to move markets. He did not need to publicly announce his 48 hour ultimatum, or its retraction. He could just say nothing and then announce the end of the war the moment it ends.
If you sell options you consistently beat the marketDaytrading is for retardsTime is the only thing algo bots cant manipulate
