Live data from Hacker News

Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth [pdf] (2000)

faculty.haas.berkeley.edu

41–50 of 116 posts

Re: Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth [pdf] (2000)

#41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What’s the difference between the dead person strategy and an index fund? The dead strategy involves whatever stocks they had selected at the time?

The dead person can't make bad decisions on when to buy/sell the index fund. Those "bad" decisions don't even require an attempt to time the market, if e.g. you always invest whatever's left over after ~fixed living expenses, and you get paid more when the market's higher.

[deleted]

Re: Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth [pdf] (2000)

#43
post #35

It's my understanding that, if commissions are free (e.g. Robinhood) then on average, any trading strategy is going to perform comparable to the market average. If you can find any reliably bad strategy (in a fee-less market), then you have necessarily found an outperforming strategy that is the opposite.

Eh, if I wanted bankrupt a trading account by playing a reliably bad strategy, I'd buy deep out-of-the-money options expiring this Friday. The expected value is $0 (neither positive nor negative), but they have only a miniscule probability of profitability.

When you say "expected value" are you trying to say most likely value?

Re: Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth [pdf] (2000)

#45
post #26

If markets were truly random, you might expect 50% of day traders to lose money, not 90%. Of course, markets are not random and most untrained humans have emotional biases that actively optimize for losing money in markets. This is likely a controversial opinion: 90% of the time, someone who wants to break out of the "rat race" or achieve wealth for some future vision should go the startup route, or if the wealth par…

>If markets were truly random, you might expect 50% of day traders to lose money, not 90%.

Only if the humans were making decision to buy and sell randomly.

Re: Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth [pdf] (2000)

#46
Not in any way defending day trading, but I think it's interesting that it's become such accepted wisdom about how bad it is- here on a website dedicated to startups. 90% of day traders lose money, what are the odds for startup founders? Probably more than 90% fail, yeah?

Imagine if, within the next 20 years, it becomes normal & accepted wisdom that joining a startup and taking their basically worthless 'equity' is more likely to lose you money than day trading. Just kind of an interesting juxtaposition- Hacker News, Website Devoted To Risky Startups, Decries Risky Day Trading

Re: Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth [pdf] (2000)

#47
post #26

If markets were truly random, you might expect 50% of day traders to lose money, not 90%. Of course, markets are not random and most untrained humans have emotional biases that actively optimize for losing money in markets. This is likely a controversial opinion: 90% of the time, someone who wants to break out of the "rat race" or achieve wealth for some future vision should go the startup route, or if the wealth par…

>If markets were truly random, you might expect 50% of day traders to lose money, not 90%. Only if the humans were making decision to buy and sell randomly.

Intuitively, I don't think this is necessarily true. It probably depends on the type of random distribution for price movements.

Re: Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth [pdf] (2000)

#48
post #26

If markets were truly random, you might expect 50% of day traders to lose money, not 90%. Of course, markets are not random and most untrained humans have emotional biases that actively optimize for losing money in markets. This is likely a controversial opinion: 90% of the time, someone who wants to break out of the "rat race" or achieve wealth for some future vision should go the startup route, or if the wealth par…

> I suspect trading offers a higher expected value of return than starting a bootstrapped company. Startups, especially those not started by someone wealthy, have a higher failure rate than day traders

This seems highly unlikely

Sure, there are people that have the skillset and capital to earn a living from day trading that don't have the skillset or interest in running a business who'll be better off trading. But successful businesses selling products or services can consistently earn very large multiples of their initial investment, and day traders can't. Short term financial bets are much closer to a zero sum game than starting businesses. And we've already established that 90% of day traders fail, just like startup businesses. More than 90% since the criteria in this study is beat the index, not earn a living.

Re: Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth [pdf] (2000)

#49
post #46

Not in any way defending day trading, but I think it's interesting that it's become such accepted wisdom about how bad it is- here on a website dedicated to startups. 90% of day traders lose money, what are the odds for startup founders? Probably more than 90% fail, yeah? Imagine if, within the next 20 years, it becomes normal & accepted wisdom that joining a startup and taking their basically worthless 'equity' is m…

I agree, I just think capital feels more tangible and riskier to lose than opportunity cost. Also easier to put a specific number to so easier to quantify the risk.

Re: Trading Is Hazardous to Your Wealth [pdf] (2000)

#50
post #46

Not in any way defending day trading, but I think it's interesting that it's become such accepted wisdom about how bad it is- here on a website dedicated to startups. 90% of day traders lose money, what are the odds for startup founders? Probably more than 90% fail, yeah? Imagine if, within the next 20 years, it becomes normal & accepted wisdom that joining a startup and taking their basically worthless 'equity' is m…

> that joining a startup and taking their basically worthless 'equity' is more likely to lose you money than day trading.

How is that not obvious already?

Post reply on HN