Building the Inverse Jim Cramer Index • Hacker News Board

Re: Building the Inverse Jim Cramer Index

#31

Post by faangiq » Sat, Apr 23, 2022, 8:46 PM UTC

ProjectArcturis wrote: post #18

So, they tried a whole bunch of things, and even with the benefit of that lookforward bias, their final strategy still underperformed the S&P? Color me unimpressed. Edit: I looked at their site and it's clear that their business model is just to gather assets to charge fees on. Which is why they've developed strategies like Inverse Cramer, Pelosi Tracker, WallStreetBets -- these strategies don't have any alpha, they'…

No dude. Zoomlennials are disrupting the market with their apps and TikTok ads. Because.

Re: Building the Inverse Jim Cramer Index

#32

Post by pavlov » Sat, Apr 23, 2022, 8:50 PM UTC

dominotw wrote: post #10

pavlov wrote: post #7

For taking a position against another growth stock hype luminary, there exists an inverse Cathie Wood index you can trade: an ETF with the ticker SARK (“short ARK”). It has done quite well since its inception last year.

>done quite well since its inception last year. that probably doesnt say much though. what happens if its run since ark's inception?

A short fund like this is a trading instrument. I don’t imagine anyone holds it for years.

The fund makes its money on fees, not on price appreciation.

Re: Building the Inverse Jim Cramer Index

#33

Post by askafriend » Sat, Apr 23, 2022, 8:56 PM UTC

kadoban wrote: post #23

vampiretooth1 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Having fun? What are rich founders doing that are still at the helm of their own company, what are rich fund managers doing that have already proven their merit?

Mostly making money because they don't know what else to do? Does anyone actually enjoy doing a ~daily tv show? Seems like a lot of work.

Well it takes a certain type of person...and I guess he's that person. I'm sure he likes the attention.

Re: Building the Inverse Jim Cramer Index

#34

Post by kadoban » Sat, Apr 23, 2022, 9:54 PM UTC

askafriend wrote: post #33

kadoban wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Mostly making money because they don't know what else to do? Does anyone actually enjoy doing a ~daily tv show? Seems like a lot of work.

Well it takes a certain type of person...and I guess he's that person. I'm sure he likes the attention.

He probably also likes money. In my experience "has money" doesn't equal "can't be corrupt", to tie this back up a few levels in the thread.

Re: Building the Inverse Jim Cramer Index

#35

Post by kjs3 » Sun, Apr 24, 2022, 2:14 AM UTC

tstewart314 wrote: post #29

ProjectArcturis wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Yes we charge a fee on AUM. All robo-advisors do. This aligns incentives: we make money only when you do. This is absolutely false. You charge a 0.94% management fee. That fee gets paid whether or not customers' portfolios go up.

We can't charge performance-based fees as much as we'd like to with mass retail clients, according to the SEC[0]. Not charging except when a client portfolio beats a benchmark or profits counts too. AUM fees are considered by the SEC to be the best way to align incentives between advisors and clients. Furthermore, up to this point, we've been completely free for current clients to ensure we're providing value before…

So...still false.

Re: Building the Inverse Jim Cramer Index

#36

Post by jjeaff » Sun, Apr 24, 2022, 3:34 AM UTC

HWR_14 wrote: post #15

calderwoodra wrote: post #4

Is there any reason to believe that Jim Cramer (or the inverse of Jim Cramer) would do particularly well in the stock market? I imagine following a cat picking random stocks works about as well. https://www.npr.org/sections/money/2013/01/14/169326326/hous...

> Is there any reason to believe that Jim Cramer (or the inverse of Jim Cramer) would do particularly well in the stock market? Jim Cramer, before he was on TV, did well beating the market as a fund manager. So there is a good reason to believe he could. Whether he could televise his strategy to retail investors and funds looking to profit from retail investors and make his viewers money is a different question.

He beat the market according to him, with no evidence to back it up. Multiple analysis of his stock picks that I have seen have all found his picks to underperform the market.

Re: Building the Inverse Jim Cramer Index

#37

Post by chii » Sun, Apr 24, 2022, 4:00 AM UTC

The idea of an inverse cramer index assumes that cramer is always telling the "wrong" thing - that is, his predictions are inversely correlated with the truth (or outcome).

That's not what cramer's predictions are though - his predictions are likely not far off from a random flip of the coin. So an inverse is likely to perform just as well (or poorly) as the real prediction!

Re: Building the Inverse Jim Cramer Index

#38

Post by leobg » Sun, Apr 24, 2022, 9:51 AM UTC

My tongue-in-cheek heuristic for the last couple of years has actually been the Inverse Gates Index.

Re: Building the Inverse Jim Cramer Index

#39

Post by kjs3 » Sun, May 01, 2022, 3:29 PM UTC

chii wrote: post #37

The idea of an inverse cramer index assumes that cramer is always telling the "wrong" thing - that is, his predictions are inversely correlated with the truth (or outcome). That's not what cramer's predictions are though - his predictions are likely not far off from a random flip of the coin. So an inverse is likely to perform just as well (or poorly) as the real prediction!

I'd always assumed his trader-buffoon shtick was to push the proles to trade a particular way so that his trader buddies could profit from the herd. But coin toss is probably as accurate and more charitable.

Re: Building the Inverse Jim Cramer Index

#40

Post by geemsr » Tue, May 10, 2022, 9:32 AM UTC

kjs3 wrote: post #39

chii wrote: post #37

The idea of an inverse cramer index assumes that cramer is always telling the "wrong" thing - that is, his predictions are inversely correlated with the truth (or outcome). That's not what cramer's predictions are though - his predictions are likely not far off from a random flip of the coin. So an inverse is likely to perform just as well (or poorly) as the real prediction!

I'd always assumed his trader-buffoon shtick was to push the proles to trade a particular way so that his trader buddies could profit from the herd. But coin toss is probably as accurate and more charitable.

[dead]