In my opinion, daytrading is merely the recognition of patterns. A rat eventually learns to run the correct way in a maze. Fundamental analysis is requires brainpower, for it is required by the analyst to examine the data and apply it to his own view of what is a successful business model. Making a proper call on the proper fundamentals means that the analyst actually knows more than the market. It's a great place to be. So I summarize by saying===> average returns are for average investors, superior returns are for superior investors. Your comments are welcome.
If Fundamental analysis is requires brainpower-------- __________________________________________ Then How's daytrading treating you?? Vega
Your one to complain. Atleast, he makes an interesting point above that is worthy of debate unlike most of your useless posts that we have to wade through everyday in our search to find posts with actual content.
There is a certain amount of truth to what you say. I've always thought that fundamental analysis requires great intellectual arrogance. As you say, it's an exercise in saying you are smarter than the market. The historical returns of actively managed funds, with all the high-priced analysis talent at their disposal, suggest that this arrogance is usually misplaced. As I understand your selection criteria however, I wouldn't say you invest using fundamental analysis, at least not as your primary tool. You run several quant screens, then I suppose make a final due diligence type review that has fundamental elements. You are trying to ride the last momentum gasp of great winning stocks. I like that approach, but it's not really what Warren Buffett does, is it?
I prefer TA cause when done right its like Zen â you just go with the flow, trade the trend, donât argue with the market. But I realize that the richest people in the world use fundamental analysis as their approach to investments in: stocks, businesses, real estate, ect. The best approach probably is to combine both, bet on value and trade the trend.
Why is what I wrote considered spam? I think it is a hypothesis that needs some cathartic discussion.
Triple AAA...once again you get high marks for your insight and proper assessment of what it is I do. To me it makes no sense to perform the time consuming fundamental analysis on the entire universe of stocks when you can save that final step for a handful that are all exhibiting the behavior that you seek. It's not what Warren Buffett does. I think he is kind of old school...I mean really old school and he has had time on his side to help him look pretty good. With regard to all the actively managed mutual funds....To that I say just take a look at the gazillion of funds out there. What it means is these things are being run by and large by a bunch of also rans....many of whom have very inferior educations. It is a known fact that the money managers who went to the top business schools outperformed those that went to lesser schools when they did empirical and normalized return analysis of their respective funds. Not to be outdone, $$$MR. MARKET$$$ has outperformed all of these bozo's in the last 12 years, using my system.
I wouldn't call it a pattern...I think it is more of a screen. I define pattern as candlesticks and cups and handles and all that jazz.