How much of a meme is the whole "Just put your money into

if youre satisfied with 10% - 15% a year.. its not a bad investment vehicle

but meme trading can get you 100% per day, if you know what you're doing. Like all things, high risk brings high rewards. No guaranteed success everytime, but for those good at it.. There is simply no comparison to meme trading profits

>>1553665
It's a good idea for long term investing. Anything else is closer to gambling or likely to underperform.

>>1553673
I'm pretty sure you can only get about 7% yearly average from mutual funds.

>>1553683
It seems like starting a business is a much faster way to become wealthy while young. From what I've looked into, you don't become wealthy with mutual funds until you're old.

>>1553665

It's the absolute best choice for stupid people, or people without any time or inclination to dedicate to the serious study of fundamental analysis, and reading financial accounts

File: IMG_0178.png (268KB, 361x691px) Image search: [Google]

268KB, 361x691px

It's not a meme, hedge funds run by turbo ivy league autists don't even beat the market in the long run. I get it you are arrogant and smarter than the average joe, it doesn't matter, whatever short term jack pot returns you get are cancelled out by brokerage fees and also the times you will inevitably lose big. Just put your money in the lowest expense rate index tracker funds, reinvest the dividends and use tax deferred or Roth accounts and you will do better than any meme trader. (Exception! It's worth it to put aside like 5-10% for crypto and meme stocks for funsies)

It's good from a perspective of balancing free time vs returns. Just throw your money into a simple target retirement fund and forget about it.

>>1553708

>I'm pretty sure you can only get about 7% yearly average from mutual funds.

I imagine he's thinking of shuffling money around relatively frequently to get to 15%. You know anyone who takes meme trading seriously is not going to be able to just let those funds sit there.

>>1553792
>brokerage fees
>market tracker underperforms the market
>crypto
Jesus Christ, you're like an entire basket full of stupid.

>>1553736

>thinks he can beat the market

LAFFO

>>1553936

Well yes, i'm looking for quick returns. I do love my vanguard funds, but I have a 75yo mentor who has made hundreds of thousands from shares and I've learned from him. I'm building up my own portfolio for capital gains and dividends.

I have diversified with a small selection of about 6 mutual funds of various classes, mostly vanguard

>>1553942

does your 75 year old "mentor" provide the knee pads?

>>1553952

I'm pretty sure if you have a client that regular he's going to expect you to get your own and write it off as a business expense.

>>1553952

No, I buy my own.

It's not a meme. Mutual funds don't beat the market (over the long-term) so the next best option is an index fund. Vanguard has a solid reputation and low fees.

Next year, I'm going to allocate part of my marijuana stock gains into more long-term Vanguard (and Blackrock) ETFs.

>>1553673
Please KYS

>>1554045

Actively managed ones don't, but most people implicitly mean passive funds, i.e index trackers when they say mutual funds

It is a meme. The returns are fucking garbage. You're literally getting hosed.

File: 1475282417120.jpg (266KB, 692x1024px) Image search: [Google]

266KB, 692x1024px

>>1553927
Explain please I have an 80 IQ.
Why is Mr. Jack bogle wrong?
Brokerage fees eat up profit, unless you use robinhood, which has limited trades
Crypto is going to be relevant in some way.

Got anything to contribute mr. Greentext?

>>1553665
If you think you can beat Ivy League grads with a 4.0 GPA and ASICs directly wired to the trading floor that achieve nanosecond latency then go ahead and try trading yourself.

>>1553673
>if youre satisfied with 10% - 15% a year..
There's like a handful of people who managed to get more over long term.
>but meme trading can get you 100% per day
sure, and then lose you 50% the next day. One thing is certain, it's 100% gambling.

>>1553927
One of the biggest factors in performance is costs. They eat into returns, compound interest. How is this stupid?

>>1553708
That has not been accurate since '95

>>1554505
What do you mean?

File: Photo on 10-10-16 at 11.23 AM.jpg (137KB, 1080x720px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 1080x720px

>>1553936
>>1553792

>>1555892
>one month performance
>dirty disgusting nails
I'm choking back vomit, and I'm not sure of these reasons is worse.

Use your brain, and wash your hands.

>>1553665
Warren Buffet recommends 90% vanguard S&P 500 and 10% bonds

>>1553665
The math checks out. Anything other than longing Vanguard index funds carries the risk of underperforming the market.

File: IMG_0317.jpg (88KB, 570x776px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 570x776px

>>1555892
Woah +1 respekt bro. Wanna email me some tips? I can only dream of getting 500% returns on $500 of meme stocks. I can put in a word at some prop firms in NYC and let them know about your godly month of Robinhood trading.

File: its-free-realestate-o.gif (970KB, 320x240px)

970KB, 320x240px

>>1556769
i posted a months returns 2 show how far off the mark indexes are in comparison.


>>1557208
im not invested in meme stocks.
>best investment is indexing

all stocks in the current market track the price of oil , low beta

oil isn't going to stop being the life blood of the economy .
it is currenly undervalued due to bidding wars.
that bidding war is aversely affecting all economies and cannot last.

ergo. im 3x oil which has 4x beta of the index.
when it hits 80+ $'s a barrel, i start pulling out and seeking other equities.


its not 2 late 2 buy in obviously
but i bet u wish u had listened 2 me last month...

File: 1470518032340.jpg (184KB, 800x600px)

184KB, 800x600px

I work for Vanguard. If you're too lazy to actively manage your own money diligently there really isn't many better options. There's a reason Vanguard is poaching business from a ton of other companies.

>>1553665
mutual funds are garbage and hard to understand. just learn about stocks instead.

>>1557410
>too dumb to understand mutual funds
>thinks the answer is gambling on stock picking
Wew lad.

You get a decent return from vanguard but if you put your money in bitcoin and was smart enough to hold for a couple years you'd likely see an amazing return

>>1553673
>these are the people giving you advice

>>1553665
It's a complicated question. It's hard to outperform the market when you have 10 billion AUM.
100,000 is different.
Genuine DD and disciplined investing will let you outperform the market, and usage of options will enable you to defend your positions in tough weather.
It's a full time job though, and you have to have a knack for analysis, and be able to insulate yourself psychologically from loses.
Einhorn has an annualized rate of 18% since he opened his fund 20 years ago. It can be done.

>>1557539
>Genuine DD and disciplined investing will let you outperform the market
That's guaranteed?

Rhetorical question. Of course it's theoretically possible to outperform the market picking your own stocks. And it's also possible to underperform, and far more probable once you factor in the fees, commissions, holding costs, taxes and devaluation that inevitably accompany stock picking..

I never understand why people flock to the tired argument that "it's possible" to beat the market. No one says it's literally not possible. They just mean its so improbable (and risky) that's it's not a smart financial decision.

Easy analogy: Just people some people do win the lottery doesn't make it a smart investment or a smart plan for retirement.

>>1557569
Which is why you do genuine DD. It's not easy, but it's certainly possible. I've spent my career working in Intelligence, so maybe I'm better at analytical work than the average person, but the vast majority of people that don't outperform the market likely don't do ACTUAL DD. How many people know the average real estate value of the holdings in the REIT they are invested in for instance?
How many people know that they are able to sell monthly covered calls against their stock?
It's not the lottery, but its damn near a full time job.

>>1557577
>it's certainly possible
You're just repeating yourself, and arguing against a strawman.

There's no evidence that extra work, time, resources, education, manpower, or due diligence makes stock picking any more profitable. Wall Street and hedge funds have been doing due diligence for their entire existence, with much more thoroughness and skill than you could ever muster. And yet 95% of professional money managers and hedge funds can't beat the market.

So, yeah, it is a lottery ticket. You might win -- when pigs fly -- but studying the old winning tickets certainly isn't going to help

>>1553665
My dad did this because he was too busy with work to watch CNBC/read Seeking Alpha. He would just do a little bit of reading here and there and park his money in something good.

Made better returns than my mom who got all of her investing information from Jim Cramer.

If you don't have the time or effort to do your own analysis, it's not a bad strategy IMO. Better than half assing things and losing like 5%.

>>1557634
>Since inception (May 1996 – Dec. 2015), David Einhorn's hedge fund, Greenlight Capital has annualized returns of 16.5%.[5]
>The firm was founded in 1969 by George Soros and in 2010 was reported to be one of the most profitable firms in the hedge fund industry,[1] averaging a 20% annual rate of return over four decades.[2]
>Peter Lynch (born January 19, 1944) is an American businessman and stock investor. As the manager of the Magellan Fund at Fidelity Investments between 1977 and 1990, Lynch averaged a 29.2% annual return,[2]

GFY. Not all money managers and hedge funds seek to beat the SPY. Some funds a 2% gain is the benchmark. Money Market funds only seek to keep the value of the dollar.
Most of the others don't beat the market because they're prep school kids that blank faced their way through a MBA program then yes manned through an IB. They wouldn't know the first thing about actual DD if it slapped them in the fucking face. You know what I did before I bought in X? I made friends with Chinese stock private Intel analysts, so I have accurate information on the export of cheap rolled steel. You know what I did before I shorted SHLD? Looked up the average value of their land holdings, to see how much capital they could raise in the event they wanted to buy time for a turn around.
If you want to sit around and bitch about luuuckkkk, be my guest. But you're wrong.

>>1557634
let me ask you this.

would u rather buy peice of a taco truck that a guy owns, or a small peice for about the same price of a bunch of taco bells,

or would u rather buy a peice of the new hardrock cafe that opened down town...could be iffy. but the owner has run 3 successful hardrocsk already....

stock picking is kinda like that.

ofc u know that. ur just being intentionally difficult.

>>1557669
Huh? Are you seriously under the impression that money market funds are included in the stats? You really love these strawman arguments.

>If you want to sit around and bitch about luuuckkkk, be my guest. But you're wrong.
Funny you should mention luck. Feel free to go debate the guy who won the Nobel Prize, because he agrees with me that it's luck.

https://faculty.chicagobooth.edu/john.cochrane/teaching/35150_advanced_investments/Luck%20versus%20Skilll%20in%20the%20Cross%20Section%20of%20Mutual%20Fund%20Returns.pdf

But hey, you're some CIA hotshot, so what do I know.

/s

>>1557671
If that's how you go about picking stocks, then I'm pretty sure you're solidly in the 95%.

>>1557696
if thats how you DD, i can see now why you dont make money...
>>1555892

>>1557669
If any of this were true, you wouldn't be bragging about it on a forum that is 33% NEETs trying to feel productive and 33% people shilling whatever memecoin has become the latest trend.

>>1557696
>MUH LUCK
Jesus Christ, use fucking leverage, aggressively target markets that are in a cyclical downturn and congrats, you've returned 25% on the year.
Or me buying CHK at an average of 3.7 was just total fucking blind luck. So is me making 1k a week on vertical spreads on X. Or that 10/1 Reward to Risk vertical spread on the VIX created its own god damn self out of the magical forces of luck.
Fuck my face, I'm retarded I guess, Vanguard funds here I come.
>>1557705
I wouldn't say I'm bragging. But people being dissuaded from genuinely learning about the market by fuckwits yelling about index funds annoys the shit out of me. The market is more than just flipping on CNBC in the morning and jerking off to a monitor of stock prices, and since most people aren't willing to do any more than that figures like 95% of people under performing exist. I try to post DD in here when I can for the off chance some people are listening.

Hot Tip: Chinese analyst girl says China isn't willingly exporting the steel, the communist party has lost control of the small steel producers and they're doing it by themselves.

>>1557669
>Most of the others don't beat the market because they're prep school kids that blank faced their way through a MBA program then yes manned through an IB
this. lol.

the individual has more at stake and will do more research, cuz his own money is on the line.
with the advent of the telephone and internet and various finance terminals and trading softwares. the individual has access to just as timely information as any institution that does investments.

File: money_manager_infographic_final.png (339KB, 1279x8191px) Image search: [Google]

339KB, 1279x8191px

>>1557700
>if thats how you DD
Which part are you referring to, dirty hands? The part where I read scholarly articles or the part where I don't fall for Wall Street myths.

On the other hand, here I am asking for a reasonable response form the guy who thinks that one-month returns put him in the same league as Warren Buffet. So what do I know?

>>1557714
>turn the risk dial up to 11+11, buy some dogs, and pray
Great strategy. CIA approved.

>>1557724
>leverage means more risk
Oh, you're retarded. Nevermind then.

File: 1471726474101.jpg (98KB, 619x616px)

98KB, 619x616px

>>1557724
but do you realize
that by not stock picking
and instead indexing
u are actually still "picking"
an asset and disregarding all other alternatives?

you are using information
*none of which is from the future btw*
based on past performances
using charts and quotes

to try to make the best choice for your money and predict future performance.
do you start to see how hypocritical and foolish your postion is?


the justification being is that, im stupid , so ill let smart ppl do it for me???

which is already what u do when u buy a stock...
ur trusting th3 ppl who run the stock...

anyways im not gonna get in this same tired ass arguement here.

no one here has a crystal ball.

the market could shit itself tomorrow, it could even go negative.


everything is historically likely, until the opposite happens. get real.

>>1557739
>inb4 u run me down for saying "run the stock"


if u wanna disregard facts and theory for childish semantics ur gonna be going down that road without my blessing.

>>1553708
Your #1 vehicle to gaining wealth is your income. ALWAYS. Starting a good(even decent) business is absolutely the best way to gain wealth because the returns are yours. Of course, that's if you can start one that makes a shit ton more than you make at a job.

>>1557726
>>leverage means more risk
Yes, Mr. Hoover, increasing your carry costs, adding time delay, increasing your downdraw, and shortening the amount of time you have to realize gains is most definitely adding risk.

Or do you have secret Russian intelligence briefings that contradict established investing wisdom?

>>1557739
Huh? I never said to choose indexing to the exclusion of other alternatives. There's a place for active management, direct investment, private equity, and even some long-term individual stocks alongside a core index portfolio.

Not everything has to be 100% one way or another. That's another strawman that gets trotted out all the time.

>>1557748
>utilize margin to lower cost basis via naked puts.
>sell covered calls
Huh, weird.
So risky.

>>1557748
funny that you come after me on the basis of logical fallacies

i can count like 5 off hand in your previous post.


if u have enough money for a "core index portfolio"

how did u get that money?
it wasn't by indexing. i promise you that.

indexes dont promise positive returns
they cant.
they simply suggest them .

but obviously u see the sense in what i am saying , you are already weakening your marriage to your proposition.

File: 1475812869729.jpg (94KB, 932x791px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 932x791px

>>1557751
>literally increasing your carry costs to mitigate risk that you created by leveraging your underlying investment
You're a joke.

And covered calls are the punchline.

>>1557764
>how did u get that money?
My job.
>it wasn't by indexing. i promise you that.
Indexing returns 12% annually over the last 90 years. That's better than you'll perform in your lifetime.
>indexes dont promise positive returns
No legitimate investment promises a positive return. You're just being stupid.
>they simply suggest them
No, they don't do that either. Are you 12?

I'm done with you. You're a waste of time. At least Mr. CIA can posit a coherent strawman argument.

>>1557775
>poorly executed covered calls on an index are the same thing as well selected strikes against individual stock
W E W

>>1557777
Checked, but wrecked.

All you've done is assume your premise. "My better-than-market stock picks perform better than the market."

File: 14c.jpg (17KB, 207x253px) Image search: [Google]

17KB, 207x253px

>>1557775
>Indexing returns 12% annually over the last 90 years.
past performance is not indicative of future results, miss cleo....

>That's better than you'll perform in your lifetime.

>another statement of the state of a financial future based on little to know information

>this person is giving financial advice

File: 1476113055064.jpg (29KB, 410x700px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 410x700px

>>1557793
>this person is giving financial advice

File: 1470437107260.jpg (88KB, 750x747px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 750x747px

>>1557804
>only friendly white people with overpriced degrees up in nice office in manhattan with clean fingernails can know the deep dark secrets of buying low and selling high
and only just enough to get 14% a year

>>1557810
>only friendly white people with overpriced degrees up in nice office in manhattan
Idk what crawled up your butt, but I only insulted you for being a disgusting, dirty slob. And yes, you are an poorfag idiot, as proven by the low quality of your post.

Your race doesn't change the fact that your a stupid, dirty NEET poorfag. Stop deflecting. This is /biz/ not /pol/.

Here we go

File: cuck.jpg (79KB, 500x500px) Image search: [Google]

79KB, 500x500px

>>1557818
since its biz , why are u zoomed in on my skin, and not my financial earnings percentage?

>>1557825
I already pointed out that your 30-day performance track record isn't convincing of anything. I've said it at least twice already in the thread, not including this post.

I zoomed in on your fingernails because their gross. And while this is /biz/ its still 4chan, so I'm going to mock you as I wish. Your personal hygiene habits are pathetic. I wouldn't hire you for any job, not even garbage collector. Any adult needs to have basic standards of personal health and cleanliness, and you can't even meet those.

Is this irrelevant to your investing skill? Maybe, but maybe not. Someone who's so slovenly that they allow a pound of filth to accumulate under their nails doesn't exactly inspire confidence. If you're so pathetic as to allow yourself to look like that, how can we believe you have any investing or financial acumen?

tl;dr stop posting your short-term coin flips as evidence of anything, and wash your fucking hands.

File: 1472737971905.jpg (88KB, 718x820px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 718x820px

>>1557836
>how can we believe you have any investing or financial acumen?

>>1557836
Since this is 4chan, I'm going to point out that you probably meant "they're" not "their"

>>1557855
Stop attacking my race.

>>1557861
I know nothing about your race. Just pointing out the obvious.

>>1557837
I scrolled up to see the pic of your returns. He's kinda right, one month doesn't mean shit. Sustainability is everything.

File: 1475209895836.jpg (259KB, 891x576px)

259KB, 891x576px

>>1557861
u have a very reductionist perspective.
i cant wait till you single handedly reduce your own portfolio to 0 by only taking advice from people who meet all your superficial physical requirement and are totally not scamming you and sweet talking you out of your potential profits in exchange for fees and commissions ;)

>>1557862
>one month doesn't mean shit. Sustainability is everything.


show us how u did last month ;)

i can take time snapshots wehre the market shit the bed , and times where it did great.


ur point doesn't make any sense.

theres no way to forecast "sustainability"
ur trying to predict the future.

ur just arguing urselves in circles
indexing is for comatose drooling retards and morons.
thats really the end of the story..
if u wanna make some real money , get ur head out ur ass , put down ur charts of the markets past performance, pull ur vanguard reps dick out ur ass , pull the dum dums out your ears, and ask me to explain how the basic principle of buy low sell high works to you

File: 1473457037816.png (105KB, 640x1136px)

105KB, 640x1136px

>>1557864
all of them have clean manicured fingernails btw.

never the less i wouldn't take financial advice from any of them.

is the point of that image...

pic related , its your portfolio after the recession

>>1557871
First off, I think you're targeting the wrong guy.

Sustainability means that you show returns over a long period of time - not a one month snapshot that could be chalked up to statistical noise(luck).

My comment had absolutely nothing to do with future returns.

Also I never made a comment about indexing on /biz/, on any post, EVER, so I'm not sure who you think you're talking to.

File: 1472067869961.jpg (84KB, 1440x900px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 1440x900px

>>1557876
22%gain in 1 month
isn't noise or luck. i dont think you understand how the market moves.

22% isn't a luck move, and if it was, it would quickly correct.

at some point luck stops being luck and starts being skill.
i have been doing this sort of thing on sims, hitting million billion and trillion dollar time marks using commodities futures, options and blue chips and shit for a long time so transitioning 2 the actual market and seeing high gains isn't unusual 2 me
but of course the good ones always make it look ez.

i'd love to see someone else with similar capital making similar returns .

File: Jack-Ma-Quotegraphic-CNNPH (3).png (388KB, 640x384px) Image search: [Google]

388KB, 640x384px

>>1557876
also dont get all victimized and defensive and run 2 ur safespace the moment u get ur shit called out. you had no problem trying 2 gang up on me with ur anon buddy, so you should have no issue taking a few of her hits for her.

File: 92438168ba09c4d68d34d284df7a6a21.jpg (12KB, 236x236px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 236x236px

lastly

File: dick_showing.png (22KB, 740x222px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 740x222px

>>1557885
Uh yeah, it is noise. I don't think you understand what "quickly correct" really means, and 1 month is far too short of period for that.

>>1557890
Who's running to a safe space? Who's ganging up on you? Who's "her"? I just got here. You sound like a paranoid delusional prick. I really have nothing to be defensive about when my gross income covers your monthly gains in just a couple days. See attached. Truly an idiot.

File: 23UP-SUB-big-short-master675.jpg (71KB, 675x450px)

71KB, 675x450px

>>1557895
yes. a wage paying job should earn more in a month than 20% returns on 2k

i'm glad we both have the same understanding of the fundamentals of math.

now post where your market portfolio made you 20% one month.

you pick the month.
im just curious.

File: 837c397cbb9f9574062c1a8794a95431d0d02ff28b3e3ef5252ec70de2f1952b_1.jpg (87KB, 616x711px) Image search: [Google]

87KB, 616x711px

>>1557895
>>1553665
look op.
this anon beat the s&p with their paycheck.

the thread is over. we can all go home :)

>>1557902
Why don't you just post all your months and just settle that you're not full of shit and you're making returns hand over fist? It's really that easy. I'm not the one asserting the claim here, I'm calling you out. The burden of proof is not on anybody in this thread except you.

And yet another serious /biz/ thread gets dragged into the shitter by some roleplaying NEET.

Remember when /biz/ was good?

File: Photo on 10-11-16 at 2.05 AM #4.jpg (233KB, 1080x720px) Image search: [Google]

233KB, 1080x720px

>>1557908
cuz im still thinking about what a tool u were for trying to post a paycheck in a thread about market return percentages

>>1557789
You know what?
Fuck it, I am better than the market. Most people in the market are fucking dumb as bricks. Sue me.

>>1557910
I haven't been here long enough. Can only imagine.

>>1557915
You obviously took the picture out of context; a clear demonstration of your lack of reading comprehension. You can avoid it all you want. Doesn't matter to me.

File: GAINZ.png (8KB, 203x162px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 203x162px

>>1557925
>that file
Literally what. I posted this.

File: 1472828716565.jpg (40KB, 680x492px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 680x492px

>>1557924
the context ?
u trying 2 use someone elses paycheck to brag about your non existent penis on the anonymous massage board?

>>1557930
Oh sorry I didn't post my SSN, full name, home address, and company name/logo all for a moron like you. Guess you got me. You sound really butthurt. Are you butthurt? I think you're butthurt.

File: 11427369_843093932438760_209161707_n.jpg (64KB, 640x640px) Image search: [Google]

64KB, 640x640px

>>1557937

>>1557940
Yep, butthurt confirmed. I've had enough fun here. Let's talk again when your portfolio plummets to $0. Good talk.

File: 1474593342678.jpg (440KB, 1080x1440px) Image search: [Google]

440KB, 1080x1440px

>>1557941
>lets talk again when fossil fuel becomes free
so never?

>>1557916
Ah, this guy always shows up in these threads.
First he admits some people do manage to beat the market, then he goes full REEEEEEEEE on anyone who expresses interest in attempting it, insulting them and deep throating Jack Bogle.

Oh, and he loves to call people "roleplayers".

File: 7995b40e5c167d35b41270133178f9e5.jpg (45KB, 736x391px) Image search: [Google]

45KB, 736x391px

>>1557994
he's a she btw. >>1557890
she made a little bit of money as a child thru inheritance or some other such shit and needs an echo chamber to constantly remind her that the market wont tank in her life time, at least not as long as she religiously shills vanguard.

>>1558005
It's understandable, I guess.
If she admitted that diligence and active study paid off to any degree, she probably wouldn't be able to rationalize doing fuck all with her money.

File: 1475749476046.png (61KB, 325x971px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 325x971px

>>1558005
>>1558009

>>1558010
Is that Gary Larson?
He wrote some funny shit.

>>1558005
>isn't it ironic that the black guy is pointing out the gender of a poster in an attempt to disparage their credibility
Sorry anon, but you played the race card here. You don't get to be a pissy little bitch, and then fall back on worn 4chan memes when it become apparent you have no rational points to contribute.

You're a dirty, roleplaying, sexist, NEET, roleplayer. Fuck you and gtfo my /biz/.

File: 1471718213426.jpg (74KB, 564x564px) Image search: [Google]

74KB, 564x564px

>>1558019

>>1558019
Jesus, calm down lady.

>>1558040
lrn2id you retarded troll

In my opinion, somewhere along the lines (((somebody))) started a meme that individuals are not capable of outperforming index funds. I suspect that they acted in their own interest when they wrote a book or ran an ad or did a thinkpiece or whatever that made people say things like

>traders are necessarily gamblers
>you can't outperform the elite mathematicians with their supercomputers
>you can't make a living trading, please don't try
etc.

Now, I've never read the book or seen the advert that makes these claims, but they are SO oft-repeated that I am convinced they are a super-effective financial meme.

To me it sounds like defeatist bullshit. Who knows

>>1558046
Midol.
Take a double dose.

>>1558047
sounds like advertising for financial services providers who make big commissions pulling down new customers.

cast fear.
then present the savior.
u dont even feel the fees cuz they come out of your "gains" (or losses)
just follow the money.

vanguard probably puts her through to a recording by now.

>>1558047
You know you can just compare the 5-year performance of reputable funds to an, let's say MSCI World ETF? More than 90% really do perform worse.
Also, stocks in a small index often do correlate, so even if you pick the two best stocks of an index, the other 98% will determine in which direction the index (and your stocks) are going.

>>1558047
>now I've never read the book, seen any evidence or even researched via google for two minutes but it sounds dumb and not true

Thanks for imparting your financial wisdom

You can beat the market consistently just by doing option strangles. Uses less of your capital and with less risk.

>>1558005
T R A N N Y A N G L E S

>>1554373
>brokerage fees eat up profit
Only if you are retarded.

>>1556782
I actually daytrade/swing trade but I agree with this for most people.

>>1556782
I'll be a millionaire by 70 if i stick to that plan.

>>1555892
Holy shit, stuf! You must be rollin\ balls deep with that $2500 you have! That's enough money buy like two months rent!