Forget random quotes - page 25
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
And the FT reports 22.
For markets to continue to be inefficient I am prepared to light a candle in a church, pray in a mosque and pay a rabbi. (sacrifices are being considered :)
You can only make money in an inefficient market.
A year ago I would have agreed with you, but not now. Trading the ross. fund again and again I notice a direct correlation between TC performance and market performance. In the most open, liquid and massive markets, TCs show the best results, which cannot be said for illiquid stocks with dubious reputations. Apparently, market efficiency does not strive in its limit to a roulette wheel, but gives everyone an opportunity to make money.
Please explain to me, if I'm not smart, what an inefficient market is and what an efficient market is. But please explain it not only and not so much in words, but in the form of formulas, if any.
And also please explain why it is possible to make money only in an inefficient market and therefore it is impossible to make money in an efficient market. Why? Where do such assertions come from?
An efficient market is a market in which: equally educated participants, with the same intelligence, have the same access to information and have the same perception of it. And it is impossible to earn in such a market that all these participants are equally honest.
But there is a problem with formulas.
An efficient market is a market in which: equally educated participants, with the same intelligence, with the same access to information and with the same perception of it. And it is impossible to make money in such a market that all these participants are equally honest.
But there is a strain on the formulas.
Now read again this so-called "definition" of the "efficient market" and ask yourself, what defines this "definition"?
Who introduced this "definition"? For whom does it apply?
Such a "definition" is not just empty, and not just stupid -- it is purposefully misleading!
Be critical, after all. Don't take for granted the "econometrics" nonsense being hammered into your brains...
An efficient market is a market in which: equally educated participants, with the same intelligence, with the same access to information and with the same perception of it. And it is impossible to make money in such a market that all these participants are equally honest.
Did you come up with this on your own? ))
An efficient market is one in which: equally educated participants
Did you come up with that yourself? ))
Such a "definition" is not just empty, and not just stupid -- it's purposefully misleading!
Well, there you go. That's what the hundreds of millions of Pinocchios who brought money into mutua fonds believe,
Be critical, for God's sake. Don't take for granted the "econometrics" nonsense that's been hammered into your brains...
Well, why are you so irrepressible. Econometrics has always disproved it, it has the non-stationarity of the market as a postulate. That's what hate does to people. It's creepy.
It's more likely hatred from jealousy, someone failed to apply it, or stupidity, perhaps someone got some effects not with econometrics, but with something else, and insists that he is right and econometrics is wrong.
It may not have occurred to them that both can happen, approaches are not the only ones. Although I don't argue that even econometrics should be applied unconventionally, only that econometrics will work.
It's more likely hatred from jealousy, someone failed to apply it, or stupidity, perhaps someone got some effects not with econometrics, but with something else, and insists that he is right and econometrics is wrong.
It may not have occurred to them that both can happen, approaches are not the only ones. Although I don't argue that even econometrics should be applied unconventionally, only that econometrics will work.
Such a "definition" is not just empty, and not just stupid -- it's purposefully misleading!
Well, there you go. That's what the hundreds of millions of Pinocchios who brought money into mutua fonds believe,
Be critical, for God's sake. Don't take for granted the "econometrics" nonsense that's been hammered into your brains...
Well, why are you so irrepressible. Econometrics has always disproved this, with the non-stationarity of the market as its tenet. That's what hate does to people. That's creepy.
Well, you're getting off on the wrong foot... what does hate have to do with... what are you talking about?
But as an econometrician you should know that there is an American book called "Econometrics". That's what I'm talking about. That's where all this nonsense about "market inefficiencies" comes from.
And if you were to get out of the corridor of your econometric, and ask how efficiency is calculated in technology, you would see the inconsistency of such "definitions" from "Econometrics".