Old School Wisdom Isn't Always So Wise ...

When I first got interested in trading, I relied on traditional sources and old-school market wisdom. For example, I studied the Stock Trader’s Almanac.

While there is some real wisdom in some of those sources, most might as well be horoscopes or Nostradamus-level predictions. Throw enough darts, and one might hit the bullseye.

Traders love patterns ... from head-and-shoulders, to Fibonacci sequences, and even Elliot Wave Theory.

Here’s an example from Samuel Benner, an Ohio farmer. In 1875, he released a book titled “Benner’s Prophecies: Future Ups and Downs in Prices,” where he shared the often-referenced chart called the Benner Cycle. Some claim it’s been accurately predicting market fluctuations for over 100 years. Let’s check it out.

 

 

Here’s what it gets right ... markets go up and down ... and that cycle continues. Consequently, if you want to make money, you should buy low and sell high ... It’s hard to call that a competitive advantage.

Mostly, you’re looking at vague predictions with +/- 2-year error bars on a 10-year cycle.

However, it was close to the dotcom bust and the 2008 crash ... so even if you sold a little early, you’d have been reasonably happy with your decision to follow the cycle.

We use a form of cycle analysis in our models … but it’s more rigorous, nuanced, and scientific than the Benner Cycle. The trick is figuring out what to focus on – and what to ignore.

Just as humans are good at seeing patterns, even where there are none ... they tend to see cycles that aren’t anything but coincidences.

In trading, “alpha” measures the excess return created by manager skill rather than luck or movement of the underlying market. As you might guess, both “art” and “science” are involved in that calculation. Profitable traders want to believe it’s a sign of their skill, while losing traders prefer to blame luck.

Nicholas Nassim Taleb pointed out in “Fooled by Randomness” that many successful traders, even those with decades-long careers, were likely more lucky than skillful. They just happened to be at the right firm, on the right trading desk, at the right time.

That said, I believe technology, algorithms, and AI are evolving into Amplified Intelligence - the ability to make better decisions, take smarter actions, and continually improve performance. We’re about to experience a huge asymmetric advantage ... those who understand technology and science (math, statistics, game theory, etc.) will have a real edge over those relying on more primitive techniques or gut instinct.

In a sense, this is another type of cycle.

The best traders I know believe that “smart money” takes “dumb money”. While it may sound harsh, this cycle has played out repeatedly over time. Cutting-edge science can seem like magic to those who don’t understand it. However, these capabilities give a significant advantage to those who possess and use them.

I believe the gap between smart and dumb money is widening. That represents a massive opportunity for those who recognize what’s coming.

This is a reminder that just because an AI chat service recommended something that made money, doesn’t make it a good recommendation. Those models may do some things well ... but they also might just have made a lucky prediction at an opportune time. Making scientific or mathematically rigorous market predictions probably isn’t an area to trust ChatGPT or one of its rivals (at least if you don’t understand how to ask AI to do something that you understand and believe gives you a real edge).

If you don’t know what your edge is, then you don’t really have one. This becomes even more important in the age of AI. It doesn’t matter if AI does what it’s supposed to unless you believe it is doing what you want. 

Be careful out there.