Investing General Discussion

Shonuff

Mr. Poopybutthole
5,538
790
I think you said this much more eloquently before. Something like...

"Technicals don't mean shit. But people think they do, so they do."
-Sanrith
That's a whole shitstorm just waiting. I used to be solely fundamentals, but there is a great deal of research now supporting technicals.
 

Fogel

Mr. Poopybutthole
12,236
45,680
Okay. This makes a lot of sense. I also like the idea that the SMA's become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

So, then, what does it mean when stocks hit the 100 DMA or the 200 DMA if the algorithms are programmed to buy at the 50?

The algo's aren't programmed to be one size fits all buy at the 50 dma, they're adjusted daily by the people who programmed them. So if something falls below the 50 MA, there's still reasons i.e. recall, earnings, rumor, lawsuit, etc.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Shonuff

Mr. Poopybutthole
5,538
790
But they behave similarly even if the implementations and optimizations are different.
And they do have AI programs for retail investors. I look at the reviews on some of them on youtube and wonder what would happen if I messed with AI a little bit as an experiment.

Overall, I hear AI is shit for us.
 

Jysin

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
6,276
4,031
That's a whole shitstorm just waiting
Not exactly. It's just a self fulfilling prophecy of which day traders have trade around chart patterns. Algos are programmed based on the human behavior, then we adjust to algo behavior and it all becomes somewhat predictable.

The shitstorm is on the fundamentals side. The 2020-2021 newer idea of "fundamentals be damned, buy at any cost!" That is going to end badly, especially in certain sectors and speculative growth. This is the far greater risk to market vs widely acceptabe (over decades now) technical analysis.
 

Shonuff

Mr. Poopybutthole
5,538
790
When I was in B-school, we visited mutual funds that preached fundamentals. Every last one of them said fundamentals > than all. But when we walked around their offices, every last one of the Employees was looking at technicals. It was up on every computer screen.

YMMV
 

Jysin

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
6,276
4,031
When I was in B-school, we visited mutual funds that preached fundamentals. Every last one of them said fundamentals > than all. But when we walked around their offices, every last one of the Employees was looking at technicals. It was up on every computer screen.

YMMV
In a normal market, they shouldn't be exclusive of one another. Basically what Sanrith Descartes Sanrith Descartes has been preaching for ages in this thread. Find a company that is solid in their balance sheets (Fundamental Analysis), then using Technical Analysis to identify your ideal entries. Pullbacks to 100D / 200D support, etc.

Even those big hedgefunds are rarely ever just executing block orders at all time highs on specific names. They are looking for better entries as well, even if it's simply near vwap on a certain day.
 

Blazin

Creative Title
<Nazi Janitors>
6,412
33,663
When I was in B-school, we visited mutual funds that preached fundamentals. Every last one of them said fundamentals > than all. But when we walked around their offices, every last one of the Employees was looking at technicals. It was up on every computer screen.

YMMV
They are separate issues. Fundaments are the destinations, technicals are the various rules and roads that gets the stock to the destination. They are not competing.
 
  • 2Solidarity
Reactions: 1 users

Sanrith Descartes

Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
41,519
107,590
Okay. This makes a lot of sense. I also like the idea that the SMA's become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

So, then, what does it mean when stocks hit the 100 DMA or the 200 DMA if the algorithms are programmed to buy at the 50?
Ahh you need to go with the concept that this isnt single variable algebra. The algos are written with bazillions of variables. DMAs exvist for pretty much every whole number. The finance community tends to focus on 10, 20, 50, 100 and 200 but there is a moving average for every whole number of days you want to chart.
 

Sanrith Descartes

Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
41,519
107,590
Not exactly. It's just a self fulfilling prophecy of which day traders have trade around chart patterns. Algos are programmed based on the human behavior, then we adjust to algo behavior and it all becomes somewhat predictable.

The shitstorm is on the fundamentals side. The 2020-2021 newer idea of "fundamentals be damned, buy at any cost!" That is going to end badly, especially in certain sectors and speculative growth. This is the far greater risk to market vs widely acceptabe (over decades now) technical analysis.
We are already seeing this in the rotation out of high growth no revenue/profit companies. The days of ignoring EPS might be coming to a close.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Sanrith Descartes

Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
41,519
107,590
In a normal market, they shouldn't be exclusive of one another. Find a company that is solid in their balance sheets (Fundamental Analysis), then using Technical Analysis to identify your ideal entries. Pullbacks to 100D / 200D support, etc.


youre right GIF
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Sanrith Descartes

Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
41,519
107,590
For those playing at home, the QQQ bottomed in the pre-market at 8am at $374.54 (down 1.4%). That is above the 200-DMA and about 2% above its intermediate line of support at $367.73

My guess is we see a test of the 200-DMA if not today than probably this week. The 200-DMA and intermediate support should intersect in the very near future (possibly this week). If it fails to hold then things get fun. A continued drop to $350 would be the next logical attempt to regroup. $350 would be an 8% drop form Friday's close and just under a 15% drop from the 52 high.

1641822237665.png
 
  • 2Like
Reactions: 1 users

Jysin

Ahn'Qiraj Raider
6,276
4,031
To further validate technical analysis: For those of you watching technicals, the premarket QQQ hit (to the penny) the longstanding Ascending Support trend line from Oct 2020 . Every QQQ pullback of any significance over this entire period has exactly held this support level. This is fairly critical and if we give it up, I expect we magnet straight to the 200DMA as Sanrith pointed out.

Daily View:
qqq.jpg


Premarket this AM (same dashed blue line):
qqq2.jpg
 
  • 1Like
Reactions: 1 user

Sanrith Descartes

Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
41,519
107,590
Because it excludes Comms companies like GOOG and FB, FTEC tracks a little differently than QQQ. We closed just above the 100-DMA on Friday. The 200-DMA and intermediate support line have already intersected. We have about a 5.6% drop to that intersection (around $121.23). That is about a 12% drop from the 52-high. A failure there is a path down to around $117.50. I won't be surprised to see a quick drop down to $126 at/near the open. From there its sort of in no man's land between the 100 and 200. I added at the 100 on Friday and if we test the 200 I will add again heavier. Tech hasn't breached the 200 since Black Monday.

1641822725570.png
 

Sanrith Descartes

Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
41,519
107,590
To further validate technical analysis: For those of you watching technicals, the premarket QQQ hit (to the penny) the longstanding Ascending Support trend line from Oct 2020 . Every QQQ pullback of any significance over this entire period has exactly held this support level. This is fairly critical and if we give it up, I expect we magnet straight to the 200DMA as Sanrith pointed out.

Daily View:
View attachment 392240

Premarket this AM (same dashed blue line):
View attachment 392241
For non-day traders this is important stuff. Long term buy/hold investors should be looking at the next few days as places to drop some cash in the indexes. I still firmly believe the indexes should be account for at minimum 40-50% of your entire portfolio. The 100 DMA is a strong entry point. The 200 is a back the truck type of entry point. It doesn't mean we dont breach and continue to fall, but it means historically that its an entry point we dont see but once every few years in a strong market.
 
  • 3Like
  • 1Solidarity
Reactions: 3 users

Shonuff

Mr. Poopybutthole
5,538
790
They are separate issues. Fundaments are the destinations, technicals are the various rules and roads that gets the stock to the destination. They are not competing.
I'm old. I remember when they used to teach Capital Asset Pricing Model and ignored everything else. My first degree was in the early 90s from Penn State. Technicals weren't even an issue. All the Profs did was talk about CAPM until your ears bled. How boring.

Later, if you mentioned technicals, they laughed you out of the room. I used to tell people they didn't know jack using that technical voodoo. But things have changed.

The technicals vs fundamentals issue used to make for a pretty big argument among Finance types. In the early 2000s, if you wanted to start a no-holds barred argument, say one was better than the other and run.
 

Shonuff

Mr. Poopybutthole
5,538
790
Best performing sectors this year are energy and banks. I loaded up on those at the end of the year last year, in anticipation. XLE is up about 10% and XLI 6 in just a few weeks. Energy just dropped way too low.
 

Sanrith Descartes

Veteran of a thousand threadban wars
<Aristocrat╭ರ_•́>
41,519
107,590
Something that bears consideration in all convos is AAPL. It had such a parabolic run up in Dec that it has contorted its moving averages. By virtue of its weight in the indexes, its movement really is key to watch. It is a full 10% above its 100 DMA while QQQ and FTEC are sitting at their 100 DMAs. AAPL letting air out of its Dec run could force the indexes down further than their support by virtue of AAPL's outsized influence.

edit: forgot to add it is still over 4% above its 50 DMA.
 

Gravel

Mr. Poopybutthole
36,509
116,179
I'm old. I remember when they used to teach Capital Asset Pricing Model and ignored everything else. My first degree was in the early 90s from Penn State. Technicals weren't even an issue. All the Profs did was talk about CAPM until your ears bled. How boring.

Later, if you mentioned technicals, they laughed you out of the room. I used to tell people they didn't know jack using that technical voodoo. But things have changed.

The technicals vs fundamentals issue used to make for a pretty big argument among Finance types. In the early 2000s, if you wanted to start a no-holds barred argument, say one was better than the other and run.
All they talked about was CAPM in 2009 when I went, too. Although I didn't go to a fancy T1 business school like you, so that could account for that.