Thoughts on this?

[Anonymous No.15873537]

[Anonymous No.15873554]

>>15873537
LINK is going $1000 eoy

[Anonymous No.15873577]

>>15873554
Absolutely BASED & REDPILLED.
Never ever selling.
#StinkyGang

[Anonymous No.15873616]

>>15873554
>>15873577
stop ruining /biz/ you boileroom faggots

[Anonymous No.15873626]

>>15873616
buy before it’s too late

[Anonymous No.15873632]

>>15873537
You read it?
If so give me TLDR please

[Anonymous No.15873636]

>>15873616
have sex incel

[Anonymous No.15873662]

>>15873636
why don't you COOM chad!

[Anonymous No.15873663]

>>15873577
tank fren

[Anonymous No.15873669]

>>15873577
what about when linkies hit $1,488?

[Anonymous No.15873752]

>>15873669
How much link do I have to hold to get a purple link?

Also where can I buy link merch?

[Anonymous No.15874200]

>>15873752
>How much link do I have to hold
0
you?

[Anonymous No.15874321]

>>15873537
biz is such a shithole now. 11 replies and nothing to do with OP bringing up a legit topic. Just retarded drivel from third worlders.

I only read half the book so far OP but the author seems totally biased against TA - his reasoning being; the market is efficient and value can only be found in good companies with positive growth outlook and low p/e ratio but, then goes on to contradict himself completely and says to diversify into everything because of the beta and improved sharpe ratio that you get from a diversified portfolio of every single possible stock and equity.

The book so far at least is "boomer investing" incarnate imo. Not to say it's worthless - the stuff on diversification is pretty good and the anecdotes of market history in the first chapter; that after 300+ years of the stock market, every 10 years or so the same cycle is repeated again, and again, and again, and again. Parabolic rise followed by a large bust. Soros' book The alchemy of finance explains it well, Also "How markets fail" by john cassidy goes more in depth in how credit cycles start and end.

To emphasise, the stuff on diversification helped me reinforce the belief that the phenomenon can be used in a few areas of active trading as well. i.e. trading multiple strategies (one for chop, trend, counter trend etc.) simultaneously in as many non-correlated markets as possible - that is to say you should trade 3+ strategies on xbtusd for example, eurusd, AAPL, US10Y etc. and the diversification of not just assets but strategies as well, will make your equity curve smooth as fuck.

[Anonymous No.15874330]

Stop reading this popularized nonsense.

Read mcgraw - investments and attend investment management lectures of your local uni.

[Anonymous No.15874340]

>>15874321
put this text in a filter to remove shitcoin spam:
/(l+[i1]+n+k+)|([5s]+[1ie]+r+g+[ae43]+y)|(1(k|0+)\s[3e][0o]y)|([o0]+r+[4a]*[ck]+l+[3e]*)|(rus+[ia41]+n)|(m[4a]+r[1i]+n[3e]+)|(r[3e]+d[4a]+ct[3e]+d)|(fund[4a]*m[3e]*nt[4a]*l+y*)|(sm[4a]+rt\sc[0o]+ntr[4a]+ct)|(cr[ie13]+r)|(m[1i]+x[i1]+cl)|(ari(\sj[0oue]+l[zs]+))|(h[4a]+p+[3e]+n+[1i]+ng\s*t[0o]+n[1i](ght|t[3e])*)|(st([34ea]|[4a]c*|[140aeiyou]+)k[3e]*([1i]ng)*)|(th[1i]s\sm[4a]n)|(s[ui1o0]+c[1i]+d[3e]\sst[4a]+ck)|(w[ai14]+t([1i]ng)*\sr[o0u]+m)|(2\sy[ea43]+r[zs5]*)|((b[aou04]*ght|s[o0]+ld)\sat\s(\$*\d{1,5}\.*(\d{2,5})*[c\$]*))|(dr;n(f)*s)|([dnr\s]+\;[\snfsrd]+)|(d[0o]+\s(n[o0]+t\s)*([o0]+v[3e]+r|und[3e]+r)[3e]+st[1i]+m[4a]+t[3e]+)|((4|f[ou0]+r)th\s([1i]+nd[ou0]+str[1eia]+l)\s(r[143eiaou]v[o0]l[0ou]+t[1io0]+n))/i

[Anonymous No.15874380]

>>15874321
>biz is such a shithole now. 11 replies and nothing to do with OP bringing up a legit topic.
True

>will make your equity curve smooth as fuck.
what's yours look like?
mines kinda choppy but been compounding @ 12%+
doing it on the side.

what do you trade?

also on the book, the efficient market hypothesis is such a cope.

Blair Hull got the absolute low tick of 1987 and he didn't know what the fuck he was doing.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bt2N7rUFzTM

[Anonymous No.15874401]

>>15874340
thanks anon
55 filtered

Remember to buy LINK so you become a Billionaire by the end of the year

[Anonymous No.15874455]

>>15873537
It doesn't make sense with how markets mechanically function. To look at crypto, as an example:

https://blog.bitmex.com/convexity-rektum-damn-near-killed-em/
>What you immediately notice is that you will lose more money when the market falls, and make less money as the market rises. This is suboptimal as you must post margin in XBT. Thus, your margin requirements increase in a non-linear fashion, and this is why longs get rekt quickly in a falling market.

>long speculators will be liquidated faster on the way down. This explains why dumps in these derivatives dominated markets are now more extreme than pumps and will continue so long as inverse style derivatives dominate the cryptocurrency derivatives markets.

To show the calculations demonstrating this actually happening: https://www.bitmex.com/app/pnlGuide

Let's say you're long 1000 XBT/USD perpetual contracts, and the XBT/USD mark price has fallen from $1000 to $900, what's the XBT loss?

((1 / $1000) - (1 / $900)) x 1000 contracts = -0.11 XBT

What if it drops further to $800?

((1 / $1000) - (1 / $800)) x 1000 contracts = -0.25 XBT

What if drops even further to $700?
((1 / $1000) - (1 / $700)) x 1000 contracts = -0.43 XBT

Notice how there isn't a constant rate of change going from -0.11 to -0.25 to -0.43? The rate of change is actually increasing (aka Accelerating, and Gamma is an Option's greek which measures the acceleration of Delta, which is why Bitmex uses that terminology - which just adds unnecessary confusion to something already hard to understand for newcomers)

This aspect of the derivatives used in crypto is actually part of the reason why market drops can be violent, as I quoted before. Because as the XBT/USD price falls, the higher the rate of loss (in XBT terms for those Long perpetual contracts) becomes. This means a greater rate of Liquidations happening when bitcoin falls. It isn't "randomly" moving around. There are always reasons for movements on a given time frame.

[Anonymous No.15875036]

>>15873632
Stocks are very unpredictable. Technical analysis is nonsense, only a very tiny minority profit from fundamental analysis (even then, they can't do it consistently for a long time).
You're better off investing in Index funds, as opposed to creating your own portfolio.

[Anonymous No.15875051]

>>15875036
That is the book TLDR?
If so meh! avoid the book

Chat with traders interview series refutes this, but you have to build a skill that puts you in the tiny minority.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCdnzT5Tl6pAkATOiDsPhqcg

Yes trading is hard...
like almost any business

[Anonymous No.15875324]

>>15873537
read this OP https://www.amazon.com/Non-Random-Walk-Down-Wall-Street/dp/0691092567 and in general early work by Lo & MacKinlay. Like all other market models, GBM is but an approximate simplification, validity of which comes down to several factors usually not in line with empirical evidence.
> t. former quant now trading shitcoins

[Anonymous No.15875379]

>>15875051
>you have to build a skill
no you need luck

they've done scientific studies on the success of traders over decades. literally everyone is losing money trading stocks UNLESS you get lucky here and there and hit a jackpot that makes up for the losses and makes your whole portfolio look good and makes you look successful--when in reality you just got lucky once

traders make money on commissions not with trading. the whole professions is built on the APPEARANCE of having skill

[Anonymous No.15875391]

George Soros said this books main theory is retarded so i will not bother

[Anonymous No.15875394]

>>15873537
Buffet BTFO the efficient market hypothesis decades ago, but nothing will convince the disciples of EMH that they are wrong. Even the GFC, which should be impossible according to the EMH, didn't shake their faith.

https://www8.gsb.columbia.edu/sites/valueinvesting/files/files/Buffett1984.pdf

[Anonymous No.15875405]

>>15874455
I would like to subscribe to your newsletter

[Anonymous No.15875410]

Good thread

[Anonymous No.15876215]

cant wait til im rich when im 70!

in this era, ignore this stuff until you're worth millions.

[Anonymous No.15876312]

>>15874321
good post.

this is absolutely right. boomers believe the world is inherently random and you can't know anything the herd doesn't know.

remember folks, indexing is a GOOD and EASY way to invest. if you have been convinced that it's impossible for anyone to make a better investment deliberately, then you have been deluded. the principle of investment is far broader. billionaires rent getting rich of the s&p, or winning lotteries.

[Anonymous No.15876378]

>TA is useless.
Explain Medalion fund then.