Be a dipster. Buy the dips. Make money. Sell short the rips. Lose money. Sell the rips. Make little money. Don't buy the dips. Make no money. It's so easy even a caveman can do it.
If your idea of technical analysis is moving average crossovers, then I gotta go with the value thing. Don't they teach kids not to use them in elementary school now?
nobody is talking about ma crossovers. ta allows traders to accurately define risk and reward while value investing by def doesn't (if you buy something at 50 keep doubling up all the way to zero like bill miller did on aig, fre, fnm and a lot of other "value" investors you have no appreciation for risk. it's one thing to blow your own account up - it's another for him to do it and screw over all the holders of his fund. as far as strategies go i personally don't care what people do - i'm only stressing the importance of managing risk which is typically a weak point of value investors. IF a value investor says "i think xyz is undervalued here but if it falls another 10% i'll exit" that's a diff shade of value investing and closer to trading off of technicals. so to sum up and make sure no one takes this the wrong way since i don't want this thread to start into a flame war - trade how you want but remember to manage risk how you need to.
Value investors presume their perceived bargain purchase price has wrung out the majority of the risk. Sometimes that's right, sometimes not. Sometimes when a stock goes from 100 to 40, it's because the company is sick. Sometimes sick companies die. So... if a value investor loads up on value stocks, he's praying at least in the back of his mind, "I hope all of this value stuff doesn't go to shit.. 'cause if it does, I'm wiped out". It takes only 1 or 2 bad bouts to wipe out 20 years of gains. TA investors are supposed to have more control over risk.