Massive stock rally today (3/10/2009)

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: alien42
some of us trade/invest for a living.

But generally that's with other people's money. I don't think there are many out there who actually make their living only on what they have put into the stock market and taken out at the right times.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: TallBill

Originally posted by: alien42

Originally posted by: Zebo
Just to get the suckers back in ....the fundis don't lie and soon drop will be eclipsing any low we have seen so far.....- Tomorrow, Thursday and Friday should be very interesting. I'm shorting after staying out today... The following - SDS, BGZ, SMN and FAZ just a matter of when.... I will watch for precipitation like weather man.

how are those shorts treating you?

zebonomics 4TL!

Every time someone is right, someone else is wrong.

what's your point? zebo is the moron who states everything as fact even though he doesn't know jack squat.

Don't pick stocks unless you want to gamble.

some of us trade/invest for a living.

If you pick stocks for living, I hope you have a safety net to fall back on. Statistics are working against you ... might as well go to a casino daily, at least they comp your stay.

 

[TallBill]

Originally posted by: halik

If you pick stocks for living, I hope you have a safety net to fall back on. Statistics are working against you ... might as well go to a casino daily, at least they comp your stay.

Yeah, not many people beat the market indexes for a prolonged period of time. And if they do, a large portion can chalk up their success to luck. Unless you're buying a significant portion of a company and taking over part of it's management of course.

 

[StageLeft]

Damn. 500 points today, up big in the last two weeks.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: dullard
Here are the DJIA's biggest % gain days:

#1) March 1933: +15.3% in a day. Yes, this was near the all time bottom and was near the start of a new rally. But the DJIA stagnated in 1933 and 1934 and didn't really get out of its funk until 1942.
#2) Oct 1931: +14.9%. This was halfway through the 1929-1933 crash.
#3) Oct 1929: +12.3%. This was right at the start of the depression stock market crash.
#4) Sept 1932: +11.4%. This was still in the 1929-1933 crash.
#5) Oct 2008: +11.1%. Well, you know what happened since then.
#6) Oct 2008: +10.9%. Well, you know what happened since then.
#7) Oct 1987: +10.2%. This was a day after black Monday, and the DJIA kept crashing for the next month. Thanks geoffry for pointing out that fact.
#8) Aug 1932: +9.5%. This was near the end of the fall.
#9) Feb 1932: +9.5%. This was still in the 1929-1933 crash.
#10-#13) All were in the 1929-1933 crash.
#15-#16) All were in the 1929-1933 crash.
#18-#20) All were in the 1929-1933 crash.

Today's gain of 5.8% was a bit less than the 6.8% gain of #20.

With the possible exception of #1, all big gains were in the crash phase. Stocks don't rally big during bull markets. Stocks usually rally big when the stock market is still falling.

According to this we could still be in for a fairly bumpy ride

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: dullard
Here are the DJIA's biggest % gain days:

#1) March 1933: +15.3% in a day. Yes, this was near the all time bottom and was near the start of a new rally. But the DJIA stagnated in 1933 and 1934 and didn't really get out of its funk until 1942.
#2) Oct 1931: +14.9%. This was halfway through the 1929-1933 crash.
#3) Oct 1929: +12.3%. This was right at the start of the depression stock market crash.
#4) Sept 1932: +11.4%. This was still in the 1929-1933 crash.
#5) Oct 2008: +11.1%. Well, you know what happened since then.
#6) Oct 2008: +10.9%. Well, you know what happened since then.
#7) Oct 1987: +10.2%. This was a day after black Monday, and the DJIA kept crashing for the next month. Thanks geoffry for pointing out that fact.
#8) Aug 1932: +9.5%. This was near the end of the fall.
#9) Feb 1932: +9.5%. This was still in the 1929-1933 crash.
#10-#13) All were in the 1929-1933 crash.
#15-#16) All were in the 1929-1933 crash.
#18-#20) All were in the 1929-1933 crash.

Today's gain of 5.8% was a bit less than the 6.8% gain of #20.

With the possible exception of #1, all big gains were in the crash phase. Stocks don't rally big during bull markets. Stocks usually rally big when the stock market is still falling.

According to this we could still be in for a fairly bumpy ride

There is no validity in using that data to predict the future.

 

[StageLeft]

I thought this was interesting. Sure sounds like a lot of nonsense. Not that it won't necessarily happen.

 

[nageov3t]

it's amazing how when the stock market goes up, it's all because of Obama, but when it goes down, it's completely unrelated.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Originally posted by: dullard
Here are the DJIA's biggest % gain days:

#1) March 1933: +15.3% in a day. Yes, this was near the all time bottom and was near the start of a new rally. But the DJIA stagnated in 1933 and 1934 and didn't really get out of its funk until 1942.
#2) Oct 1931: +14.9%. This was halfway through the 1929-1933 crash.
#3) Oct 1929: +12.3%. This was right at the start of the depression stock market crash.
#4) Sept 1932: +11.4%. This was still in the 1929-1933 crash.
#5) Oct 2008: +11.1%. Well, you know what happened since then.
#6) Oct 2008: +10.9%. Well, you know what happened since then.
#7) Oct 1987: +10.2%. This was a day after black Monday, and the DJIA kept crashing for the next month. Thanks geoffry for pointing out that fact.
#8) Aug 1932: +9.5%. This was near the end of the fall.
#9) Feb 1932: +9.5%. This was still in the 1929-1933 crash.
#10-#13) All were in the 1929-1933 crash.
#15-#16) All were in the 1929-1933 crash.
#18-#20) All were in the 1929-1933 crash.

Today's gain of 5.8% was a bit less than the 6.8% gain of #20.

With the possible exception of #1, all big gains were in the crash phase. Stocks don't rally big during bull markets. Stocks usually rally big when the stock market is still falling.

According to this we could still be in for a fairly bumpy ride

There is no validity in using that data to predict the future.

Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again. [Franklin P. Jones]

No one or nothing I'm aware of can predict the future, but that doesn't stop me from looking at history and trying to deduce possible trends.

 

[her209]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
No one or nothing I'm aware of can predict the future, but that doesn't stop me from looking at history and trying to deduce possible trends.

How is that working out for you?

 

[BoberFett]

Originally posted by: loki8481
it's amazing how when the stock market goes up, it's all because of Obama, but when it goes down, it's completely unrelated.

What's equally amazing is that right now when the market goes down it's because of Bush, but when it goes up it's because of Obama.

Crazy!

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
According to this we could still be in for a fairly bumpy ride

There is no validity in using that data to predict the future.

Legend, history is never a perfect predictor of the future. However, history is USUALLY a good predictor. History can and will fail. But to ignore it is folly. History should be one of many pieces of data used to plan your investments. The problem comes when people try to use history as the only piece of data.

 

[halik]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
According to this we could still be in for a fairly bumpy ride

There is no validity in using that data to predict the future.

Legend, history is never a perfect predictor of the future. However, history is USUALLY a good predictor. History can and will fail. But to ignore it is folly. History should be one of many pieces of data used to plan your investments. The problem comes when people try to use history as the only piece of data.

Comparing biggest changes from 1930 to 2009 won't tell you anything.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: halik

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
According to this we could still be in for a fairly bumpy ride

There is no validity in using that data to predict the future.

Legend, history is never a perfect predictor of the future. However, history is USUALLY a good predictor. History can and will fail. But to ignore it is folly. History should be one of many pieces of data used to plan your investments. The problem comes when people try to use history as the only piece of data.

Comparing biggest changes from 1930 to 2009 won't tell you anything.

Ignoring history doesn't tell you anything either. When the stock market acts more like a commodity market then the true long term investment it is supposed to be then I for one think checking past history for what happened in similar situations certainly isn't a bad idea.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: loki8481
it's amazing how when the stock market goes up, it's all because of Obama, but when it goes down, it's completely unrelated.

On hte other hand, coming from the right wingers - its amazing how when the stock market goes down, it's all because of Obama, but when it goes up, it's completely unrelated.

What is really funny is that neither side has a clue =)

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again. [Franklin P. Jones]

No one or nothing I'm aware of can predict the future, but that doesn't stop me from looking at history and trying to deduce possible trends.

History is largely irrelevant in the terms of the stock market and prediction of the future. There hasn't been a single study done in finance that has proven a high correlation to historical analysis predicting future performance, not one. I know because I've looked long and hard, both independently and through my MBA and CFA studies.

If it were possible, the market would use it and then quickly eliminate all gains that could be produced by using it, eliminating the possibility of actually using it. Thus, the idea that you can use historical information to predict the future is pure silliness.

Your quote is in the context of cause and effect and prevention of that effect by not reproducing the cause. If I burned my hand when I was a kid, I know not to burn it again in the same manner, because I *KNOW* for certain that if I do it again I will get burned.

However, the stock market is not as predictable as that and thus your comparison is completely illogical.

anybody who tells you

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: nobodyknows
According to this we could still be in for a fairly bumpy ride

There is no validity in using that data to predict the future.

Legend, history is never a perfect predictor of the future. However, history is USUALLY a good predictor. History can and will fail. But to ignore it is folly. History should be one of many pieces of data used to plan your investments. The problem comes when people try to use history as the only piece of data.

No, past historical price movements tells you absolutely nothing in the context of chaotic and randomness associated with changing times, markets, and the inability to predict how those circumstances have or will change. There are so many differences in the economy, both micro and macro, the nature of the problem, the entities involved, the interplay in geopolitical and geoeconomic events, the different tools, regulations, and entities involved, the different ways of looking at securities, the different ways banks fund themselves. There are a gazillion differences and not *ONE* constant in that situation.

You see, you fall into the same illogical reason why we got ourselves into this situation, you use something as a tool to predict the future that can't be used to predict the future because the past has no relevency on the future.

The Rating Agencies used past performance of RMBS to predict the future, using the same loss curves and stress levels as any other RMBS bond issued in the last 30 years. However, the difference was that underwriting, types of bonds, and credit quality changed massively in 5 years, yet they went marching on. The past was such a perfectly *IMPERFECT* predictor of the future that they completely blew it.

Any sane structured finance professional could tell the problems, yet nobody listened. Any sane finance person can tell that your assumption has more holes than swiss cheese, yet you refuse to listen.

You're just another sucker, same as the fools who bought AAA rated CDOs.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
No, past historical price movements tells you absolutely nothing in the context of chaotic and randomness associated with changing times, markets, and the inability to predict how those circumstances have or will change...You're just another sucker, same as the fools who bought AAA rated CDOs.

I'm doing quite well with my investments, thanks. Do a search, I've put my money movements on Anandtech. I've posted about moving to bonds in early 2007 (first of several links). Sure, I was half a year early and missed the peak by about 10%, but that was still a really good move in the end. I posted about moving back from bonds to stocks twice, on the two days that the stock market bottomed last month (example thread). Etc. I can go on with more examples of good timing due to my analysis that I've posted (I say that so you don't accuse me of making up examples). I don't mind making myself rich being a "sucker".

Actually, I think you simply don't understand my post.

Do you use earnings data for your investments (historical data)? What about PE ratios (historical data compared to historical data)? What about political situations (historical facts)? Market shares (historical data)? Comparison to other stocks or indicies (historical data)? Etc. Just about anything rational people use to make their decisions is at least somewhat based upon historical data. To ignore historical data is to make wild guesses for your investments.

There are two important conclusions that I wanted people to take from that specific list of data in my prior post:
[*]#1: Even though we thought the market soared big, it only barely made the top 20 list. That is, it isn't that big of a gain. Don't overreact based upon one day's change. Especially when that day wasn't even that big to begin with. Legend, do you honestly disagree with that bit of advice?

[*]#2: Don't be a fool and simply follow short-term trends. Don't jump on board when the market soars and don't abandon ship when it falls. Why? Because as is often true, the long term trend is vastly different from the short term moves. I use historical data to show that being a lemming who follows the leader and ignores pertenant information is bound to lose. Again, Legend, are you saying that all of your experience that you'd disagree with that conclusion?

If you answered "yes" to either, then you are just another internet quack. If you answered "no", then you actually are agreeing with me.

 

[Firebot]

Originally posted by: loki8481
it's amazing how when the stock market goes up, it's all because of Obama, but when it goes down, it's completely unrelated.

Really? I could have sworn that our local political analysts would disagree

Oops again, quite amazing isn't it how some ATOT members have selective memory when it suit them?

You even posted in that 2nd one, within weeks of Obama getting in office

who cares, that TRAITOR IN CHIEF sucked.

 

[retrospooty]

Originally posted by: Firebot

Originally posted by: loki8481
it's amazing how when the stock market goes up, it's all because of Obama, but when it goes down, it's completely unrelated.

Really? I could have sworn that our local political analysts would disagree

Oops again, quite amazing isn't it how some ATOT members have selective memory when it suit them?

You even posted in that 2nd one, within weeks of Obama getting in office

who cares, that TRAITOR IN CHIEF sucked.

LOL. Exactly. Its funny how one sided people can be.

 

[nobodyknows]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

Experience is that marvelous thing that enables you to recognize a mistake when you make it again. [Franklin P. Jones]

No one or nothing I'm aware of can predict the future, but that doesn't stop me from looking at history and trying to deduce possible trends.

History is largely irrelevant in the terms of the stock market and prediction of the future. There hasn't been a single study done in finance that has proven a high correlation to historical analysis predicting future performance, not one. I know because I've looked long and hard, both independently and through my MBA and CFA studies.

If it were possible, the market would use it and then quickly eliminate all gains that could be produced by using it, eliminating the possibility of actually using it. Thus, the idea that you can use historical information to predict the future is pure silliness.

Your quote is in the context of cause and effect and prevention of that effect by not reproducing the cause. If I burned my hand when I was a kid, I know not to burn it again in the same manner, because I *KNOW* for certain that if I do it again I will get burned.

However, the stock market is not as predictable as that and thus your comparison is completely illogical.

anybody who tells you

But human nature is fairly predictable and that is what I'm looking at when looking at old data. This is a completely different world then what existed in the past but we are the same old stupid, greedy, fearful human beings. That is where I try to find the "order in chaos".

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: nobodyknows

But human nature is fairly predictable and that is what I'm looking at when looking at old data. This is a completely different world then what existed in the past but we are the same old stupid, greedy, fearful human beings. That is where I try to find the "order in chaos".

are you fucking kidding me? Human nature is perfectly unpredictable. After 4 years of psychology undergrad, resulting in a BS, I know that pretty damn well. if it were fairly predictable Psychology wouldn't be a still developing soft-science and we'd not be using drugs to solve problems and use targeted treatments.

Behavioral finance points out that there are some emotions that can be somewhat predictable, but the reactions caused by those emotions cannot be. The chaos, not predictability, in the market is caused by humans. If you think otherwise you have a very, very, long way to go.

Humans are not rational nor will they ever be. Rationality is order and predictability. You need to go back and try to bring order to your own knowledge before you extrapolate what you think you know into solid decisions.

 

[LegendKiller]

Originally posted by: dullard
Do you use earnings data for your investments (historical data)? What about PE ratios (historical data compared to historical data)? What about political situations (historical facts)? Market shares (historical data)? Comparison to other stocks or indicies (historical data)? Etc. Just about anything rational people use to make their decisions is at least somewhat based upon historical data. To ignore historical data is to make wild guesses for your investments.

I use a combination of historical data from many data points to rationalize a decision, not price points. This is what I was arguing against in your post, you use one data point, which is illogical and silly since it has no bearing on the future. I was arguing exactly for what you just mentioned above, incorporation of why certain data points are irrelevant by using many others (differences and similarities). You are doing nothing more than proving my point.

There are two important conclusions that I wanted people to take from that specific list of data in my prior post:
[*]#1: Even though we thought the market soared big, it only barely made the top 20 list. That is, it isn't that big of a gain. Don't overreact based upon one day's change. Especially when that day wasn't even that big to begin with. Legend, do you honestly disagree with that bit of advice?

It has been a two week change, with massive fundamental changes, to say that people shouldn't react to the new world by adjusting expectations is beyond ridiculous. Historical data points are irrelevant to the current situation.

[*]#2: Don't be a fool and simply follow short-term trends. Don't jump on board when the market soars and don't abandon ship when it falls. Why? Because as is often true, the long term trend is vastly different from the short term moves. I use historical data to show that being a lemming who follows the leader and ignores pertenant information is bound to lose. Again, Legend, are you saying that all of your experience that you'd disagree with that conclusion?

If you answered "yes" to either, then you are just another internet quack. If you answered "no", then you actually are agreeing with me.

Who says it is a short-term trend? what if it isn't? What if this is the beginning of the end, how do you know that? Based upon historical price points? The fact is, you have no idea.

If anything, you're the lemming ignoring data. you're focusing on a silly and irrelevant data point and ignoring tons of new data.

If you can't agree on that then you are another quack.

 

[Budarow]

I'm guessing the financial stocks will lead the market to 9,500 by the end of this year. Then the market will fall again to new lows.

The con is on.

The "new" program to buy sour mortgage assets with the changes to "mark to market" policy and the soon to be reinstated "uptick" rule will allow the financial firms to "off-load" all that crap to the American tax payer (at greatly inflated prices) and to "private investors" (with money from Uncle Sam at LOW interest rates or for free) while reducing the ability of short players to push the market down to where it should be (based on slowing business conditions, printing tons of money and the swelling debt).

I'm waiting to load up on UYG.

If the market can correct again by the beginning of next week, the above changes will start to go forward on 4-2-09 and 4-8-09 and the financials should start their party.

At the end of the year, gold might be relatively cheap again and I can switch to that since the U.S. will suffer from the "second" hangover from the most recent party.

Just my 2 cents.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: LegendKiller
If anything, you're the lemming ignoring data. you're focusing on a silly and irrelevant data point and ignoring tons of new data.

I post data and use data, you say to ignore data, and now you accuse me of being the one who ignores it? I think you lost it yesterday. That is ok, you'll come to your senses soon enough.

Who says it is a short-term trend? what if it isn't? What if this is the beginning of the end, how do you know that? Based upon historical price points? The fact is, you have no idea.

No one said it was certainly a short-term trend. By the way, as posted on Anandtech, I'm just about fully into stocks now. I've said many times that we were right about at the bottom. My my money is where my mouth is. My opinion is based upon current AND historical data. What if it isn't a short-term trend? Then I'll be rich. What if it is a short-term trend? Then I bought in a bit early but at an average of 92% profit from what I sold 2 years ago.