Is his performance record in public domain? Not that it has to but someone who tries to sell something predicated on claimed knowledge or skills is usually required to back it up. He sells books to the public so I believe he has some sort of responsibility to back up his claimed skill set in the exact same way than someone who is interviewing for a job and makes claims about his work experience or education. That person is asked to provide proof or a background check is run. If he only ran his fund then this duty would only be owed to his investors and not the broad public. But if someone wants to sell books and claims skills in that area then I expect some sort of provision of proof that this person knows what he is talking about unless he or she does not care to be taken seriously or not.
No, but this is true for many people, they work for closed funds or run a sub funds, but they're still bona fide. A quick Google shows that Andreas is clearly not one of those dodgy 'Trading gurus' that don't actually make money as professional traders or fund managers. Also his work is clearly not in the 'make $$$$ per day' category. You may not like his books but you're doing him a disservice. Rob
I also sell books to the public. You can verify my background quite easily. But you can't verify my performance. Does that matter? It is clearly better if someone has proper financial experience with serious firms, something most dodgy gurus don't have. But ultimately the tone and quality of someone's work should determine if you take them seriously. Example- I have no idea what Jack Schwahgers track record is. And I don't care. He clearly knows what he's talking about. And that's enough for me. Rob
I disagree. He pushed out tons of books and apparently has a lot of time writing books. Hardly anyone in professional space who trades investor funds and has a fiduciary duty that I know of has time to write books. The few who do have a public track record of performance such as Warren Buffet or Ray Dalio. People who write generalized books about trend following and hardly back up that any of the introduced techniques work are highly questionable in my book. Why should I trust anything they say? Based on what exactly?
Yes it absolutely does matter. And no, the tone and demeanor in financial trading space has absolutely zero bearing on their performance nor credibility. Some of the most obnoxious traders perform incredibly well. And some others who hardly ever say a word also do exceptionally well. There is zero correlation. Someone is credible when they can back up their performance with numbers, not words or attitude. Jack Schwager never claimed to know how to trade nor wrote books about trading tools or approaches. He interviewed traders who do have proven track records of success.
3 books is tons? I wouldn't trust that trend following works just because one guy has made money doing it. That's a sample of one. Insufficient data. Rob
I counted 5 on Amazon alone, ignoring the many articles he published as well. I ask again, what bearing does anything he says in any books or articles have without providing any proof that what he says is of any substance or replicablility? Especially when he asks for 110 dollars for one book or 65 for another? Those are prices highly respected scholars and professors charge for their research material in niche areas that they demonstrated top notch expertise over decades...
I count 3 books on trading: Following the trend Stocks on the move Trading evolved (Plus one fiction book) What are the 5 books you are seeing??? He hasn't written that many articles. Bearing in mind he's a low frequency systematic trader, he has plenty of free time Rob
Let me ask a different question. To anyone who reads *my* books, and is reading this thread, why should you believe anything *I* say, given I have no verifiable trading track record? Rob
"A most private bank" is finance related and hence should be included. I double counted one, apologies, so 4 books, speaking engagements, newsletters, and many articles. You keep on dodging my questtion: what lends him any credibility. Why should anyone take his content seriously? Please note that I not even once claimed he does not know what he is talking about. I said that I have no benchmark nor yard stick by which to judge his content. And that does not make someone credible as much as I like to give him credit for sharing with the world all the great stuff that he seems to be sharing almost for free with the public...