I guess there’s lots of ways you can define being right or wrong too.
I’ve thought the market shouldn’t be this expensive for well over a year but I’ve bought and sold a bunch since then.
I’m technically still wrong I guess? But I’ve bought a bunch of stocks since I made the prediction and made money.
I’m right about 50% of the time tbh. My planned R/R is usually barely better than 1:1 but never crazy. My realized R/R however is usually a quite a bit more than 1:1.
One of my tricks is I always scale into my trades starting with half risk, and most of my long term trades are value or mean reversion based; meaning it’s a better opportunity by definition after it’s gone against me.
So a lot of the time I’ll finish scaling into a losing trade and the trade will bounce get back to breakeven, and I’ll just take the whole thing off if I don’t like it anymore.
So technically I was wrong, but I still get to breakeven.
Sometimes I give it even more space and can be wrong and actually make money because the bulk of my trade was entered way past where I thought it might turn.
@xMcQuaidx I had similar experiences in 2021, and to a lesser extent early last year before the April crash.
Nothing like a chatroom with a thousand people being down to a dozen though, that’s crazy.
@devahaz Anyone taking financial advice from someone named “Peepeepoopoo” on the internet needs to follow these steps:
1. Go to a mirror.
2. Look at yourself in the eyes.
3. Say that out loud.
The point is the market adopts narratives and continues to sell stocks past the point that the narrative is obviously wrong.
They are similar in that the narratives are verifiably wrong, but the stocks are still selling anyways.
Not that the narratives themselves are the same.
Maybe if I use different wording you’ll get it. The narrative was that AI would make GOOGL search obsolete, and they would lose their search platform/revenue.
Was objectively wrong in the same way Meta becoming a VR company was objectively wrong in the same way that ADBE software can be replaced by AI is objectively wrong.
@WillCJohns@DeepDishEnjoyer Google search didn’t get replaced by AI. They literally embedded AI into search, and the AI is summarizing THEIR search results.
$ADBE I bought a half size position after last earnings drop around $240, and have now doubled down at $200.
Anyone who actually understands AI or Adobe suite knows the idea that they can be coded away by AI is objectively nonsense.
However as traders we understand price narrative and momentum can bring things way lower than they should be.
Can definitely go into the 100's, but I have to back up the truck here. No price stoploss on this one. Would need a fundamental change in the actual company or products for me to stop out.
@DeepDishEnjoyer I bought before you in March the nanosecond it gapped down last earnings.
Early bird gets the wasted allocation.
That is the saying isn’t it? Or something about worms? Idk this whole thing makes me feel like I have worms.
@DeepDishEnjoyer Also literally talk to ANYBODY in either cohort of:
1. SWE who actually use AI to code and aren’t grifter “AI devs.”
Or
2. People who use ADBE suite daily.
And they will tell you how ridiculous the idea is.