/biz/ - Business & Finance

>>4094091
You are free to try. It is hard because most people aren't robots and make emotional decisions.

>>4094091
do people really say that? The 'market' is like 10% max per year most profitable traders make like 800%

>>4094091
Well, BTC is up, but ChainLink, and DGB, and OMG, and IOTA and Ripple and Doge arent doing so hot.

>>4094091
Actually no.

The idea that it's easy to beat the market is created by (((them))) aka Wallstreet Jews.

Index funds take trillions of dollars away from Wallstreet, which I'm sure you're aware is populated by jews.

>>4094131
It isn't hard if you just trade infrequently and focus on stable companies. Most people actually try to trade as frequently as professionals on wall street which is why they loose, and that'a stupid idea unless you are majoring in finance.

>>4094144
I doubt you're right about the 800% but yeah, the meme is spread everywhere.

>>4094162
Sure, because it isn't like it just gives (((them))) more power to change the price of stocks then use pump and dump schemes to advertise it CNBC.

>>4094192
Your jew meme makes no sense here. Trading stocks is a zero sum game, even worse than zero sum with fees involved.

There's so much data there to show that you're not going to beat the market consistently that it's just boring to even talk about this.

>It isn't hard
If it's so not hard why the fuck do the vast majority of fund managers not manage to do it then? You should just give them the advice of "Focus on stable companies".

>>4094242
>zero sum game
Actually you're fucking wrong. Markets generally go up, so it is not a zero-sum game. A zero-sum game would be trading when markets are stagnant.

An example is FOREX, where the value of currencies is based on one another, and that people are trading on a global line that never goes up but are simply scamming each other.

>>4094242

>>4094272
>>4094242
Combine this with the fact that there aren't just foreign exchanges that come out of the air and issue shares. It's entirely based on scamming one another, unlike stocks where everything just keeps increasing.

>>4094282
>The jews WANT us to use empirical evidence, logic and reasoning to conclude that passive investing is superior! It's a conspiracy@!

It's a good investment strategy for the average person, who doesn't have the time to trade/invest, which can consume large amounts of time.

It has excellent risk adjusted return, and compounding will allow you to accumulate large amounts of wealth (in the very long run), and it does this at very low cost.

I find it distasteful though. If too many people eventually do it, it will lead to distortions in market valuations. And at the very heart of the indexing strategy, you're, essentially, betting on the continued mercy of a Central Bank, which can allow for extended periods of elevated equity prices in the general market.

I'm not some champion for active funds though. If there's anything I "like" about John Bogle, it's that he's a steadfast supporter of the average, often naive, investor. He brought a lot of competition to the industry, in terms of reducing fees.

I just wish more people took some initiative into how they operate in financial markets. You allocate capital and reward companies that perform well. Giving every company your money goes against Capitalist foundations.

>>4094306
did you not read what I fucking said earlier, passive investing means that you're playing along with them and supporting their actions without thought on your end by buying index funds and S&P 500/DOW.

Why do you think people like (((Timothy Sykes))) publicize every trade they make? It's to give (((people like him))) more power to alter the price of stocks and do massive but subtle pump and dump schemes.

>>4094355
Okay man.