个人中心 - 老虎社区

stinger77

IP属地：未知

帖子 · 58帖子 · 58
关注 · 0关注 · 0
粉丝 · 0粉丝 · 0

- stinger77stinger77
  ·2021-09-29
  Until the sharks have enough
  Technically Speaking: Is The Market "Melting-Up?"<blockquote>从技术上讲：市场正在“融化”吗？</blockquote>
  Summary Given the Fed’s ongoing balance sheet operations, investors fully believe they have protect
  Technically Speaking: Is The Market "Melting-Up?"<blockquote>从技术上讲：市场正在“融化”吗？</blockquote>
  2,923 2
  13
  分享
  举报
- stinger77stinger77
  ·2021-09-19
  Heavily protected by parents. Just lift up your hands and ola.... Problems solve...
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  2,360 1
  5
  分享
  举报
- stinger77stinger77
  ·2021-06-19
  Slowly but surely
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  3,487 评论
  8
  分享
  举报
- stinger77stinger77
  ·2021-06-13
  Good move
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,586 评论
  4
  分享
  举报
- stinger77stinger77
  ·2021-06-13
  I still think it's better to work in the office
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  2,179 3
  3
  分享
  举报
- stinger77stinger77
  ·2021-06-12
  I'm a speculating investor
  Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote>
  Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless ris
  Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote>
  2,472 2
  2
  分享
  举报
- stinger77stinger77
  ·2021-06-10
  Good info
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  2,028 1
  3
  分享
  举报
- stinger77stinger77
  ·2021-06-10
  My guess is Someone is going to start a short video apps in US soon before the ban on tik Tok.
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,644 2
  3
  分享
  举报
- stinger77stinger77
  ·2021-06-09
  Go play with your coin
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  3,326 1
  3
  分享
  举报
- stinger77stinger77
  ·2021-06-09
  Let's start moving it
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,115 评论
  2
  分享
  举报

热议股票

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"isCurrentUser":false,"userPageInfo":{"id":"3581827070600518","uuid":"3581827070600518","gmtCreate":1618736577776,"gmtModify":1620095863352,"name":"stinger77","pinyin":"stinger77","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33e3edb314faaaee38948d48aeb4e3d3","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":36,"headSize":372,"tweetSize":58,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":0,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-2","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"资深虎友","description":"加入老虎社区1000天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0063fb68ea29c9ae6858c58630e182d5","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/96c699a93be4214d4b49aea6a5a5d1a4","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/35b0e542a9ff77046ed69ef602bc105d","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2024.01.14","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001},{"badgeId":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969-3","templateUuid":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969","name":"传说交易员","description":"证券或期货账户累计交易次数达到300次","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.02.15","exceedPercentage":"93.52%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100},{"badgeId":"228c86a078844d74991fff2b7ab2428d-2","templateUuid":"228c86a078844d74991fff2b7ab2428d","name":"投资总监虎","description":"证券账户累计交易金额达到30万美元","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9d20b23f1b6335407f882bc5c2ad12c0","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ada3b4533518ace8404a3f6dd192bd29","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/177f283ba21d1c077054dac07f88f3bd","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.28","exceedPercentage":"80.39%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101},{"badgeId":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37-1","templateUuid":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37","name":"博闻投资者","description":"累计交易超过10只正股","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLink":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100}],"userBadgeCount":5,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"page":1,"watchlist":null,"tweetList":[{"id":862717943,"gmtCreate":1632913714849,"gmtModify":1632913715447,"author":{"id":"3581827070600518","authorId":"3581827070600518","name":"stinger77","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33e3edb314faaaee38948d48aeb4e3d3","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581827070600518","authorIdStr":"3581827070600518"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Until the sharks have enough","listText":"Until the sharks have enough","text":"Until the sharks have enough","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":13,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/862717943","repostId":"1198528044","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1198528044","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1632882697,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1198528044?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-09-29 10:31","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Technically Speaking: Is The Market \"Melting-Up?\"<blockquote>从技术上讲：市场正在“融化”吗？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1198528044","media":"seekingalpha","summary":"Summary\n\nGiven the Fed’s ongoing balance sheet operations, investors fully believe they have protect","content":"<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Given the Fed’s ongoing balance sheet operations, investors fully believe they have protection from a decline.</li>  <li>As is always the case, the investing public believes future earnings will justify higher prices during a melt-up. It just never works out that way.</li>  <li>While it is essential to take advantage of the melt-up while it lasts, just don’t become overly complacent “this time is different”.</li> </ul> Is the<i>“market melting-up?”</i>Such was the question I received from my colleague at<i>Cut The Crap Investing.</i>It is an excellent question given the relentless increase in what investors believe is a<i>“no risk”</i>market.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>鉴于美联储正在进行的资产负债表操作，投资者完全相信他们有能力免受经济衰退的影响。</li><li>与往常一样，投资大众相信未来的收益将证明在融化期间价格上涨是合理的。从来都不是那样的。</li><li>虽然在融化持续期间利用它是至关重要的，但不要过于自满“这次不同了”。</li></ul>是<i>“市场融化？”</i>这是我从我的同事那里收到的问题<i>少废话投资。</i>考虑到投资者认为的持续增长，这是一个很好的问题<i>“没有风险”</i>市场。</blockquote></p><p> Of course, we need a definition of precisely what constitutes a melt-up.</p><p><blockquote>当然，我们需要一个准确定义什么是融化。</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“A melt-up is a sustained and often unexpected improvement in the investment performance of an asset or asset class, driven partly</i>  <i><b>by a stampede of investors who don’t want to miss out on its rise,</b></i>  <i>rather than by fundamental improvements in the economy.“</i>–  <i>Investopedia</i>  Currently, there is sufficient evidence to support the idea of an exuberant market.<b><i>As noted previously:</i></b></p><p><blockquote><i>他说：“熔断是指一项资产或资产类别的投资表现持续且往往出乎意料的改善，部分原因是</i><i><b>不想错过其上涨机会的投资者蜂拥而至，</b></i><i>而不是经济的根本改善。”</i>–<i>投资百科</i>目前，有足够的证据支持市场繁荣的观点。<b><i>如前所述：</i></b></blockquote></p><p>   <i>“Near peaks of market cycles, investors become swept up by the underlying exuberance. That exuberance breeds the “rationalization” that “this time is different.” So how do you know the market is exuberant currently? Via Sentiment Trader:”</i>    <i>‘This type of market activity is an indication that markets have returned their ‘enthusiasm’ stage. Such is characterized by:’</i>  <ul>  <li><b><i>High optimism</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>Easy credit (too easy, with loose terms)</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>A rush of initial and secondary offerings</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>Risky stocks outperforming</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>Stretched valuations</i></b></li> </ul> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ff8de3a84084162ca86b415584bbf793\" tg-width=\"731\" tg-height=\"468\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote><i>“在市场周期接近顶峰时，投资者会被潜在的繁荣所席卷。这种繁荣滋生了“合理化”，即“这次不同了”。那么，你如何知道市场目前是繁荣的呢？通过情绪交易者：”</i><i>这种类型的市场活动表明市场已经回到了“热情”阶段。其特征在于：</i><ul><li><b><i>高度乐观</i></b></li><li><b><i>宽松信贷（太宽松，条款宽松）</i></b></li><li><b><i>首次和二次发行热潮</i></b></li><li><b><i>风险股跑赢大盘</i></b></li><li><b><i>估值过高</i></b></li></ul></blockquote></p><p> However, while one would expect individuals to exhibit caution in such an environment, the opposite is true. Given the Fed’s ongoing balance sheet operations, investors fully believe they have protection from a decline.</p><p><blockquote>然而，虽然人们会期望个人在这样的环境中表现出谨慎，但事实恰恰相反。鉴于美联储正在进行的资产负债表操作，投资者完全相信他们有能力免受经济衰退的影响。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A Visualization Of A Market Melting-Up</b></p><p><blockquote><b>市场融化的可视化</b></blockquote></p><p> It is often easier to visualize something rather than explain it.<b>Since 1900, only two previous market periods qualify as a melt-up: 1920-1929 and 1995-2000.</b>The chart below shows both periods in terms of price.</p><p><blockquote>想象某事通常比解释它更容易。<b>自1900年以来，只有两个市场时期符合熔化的条件：1920-1929年和1995-2000年。</b>下图显示了这两个时期的价格。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a218c7efe2ebd874d05c9ff7dd564436\" tg-width=\"797\" tg-height=\"437\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9f193c9c32d55747bf7ff511c2f9fd53\" tg-width=\"793\" tg-height=\"439\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> However, the melt-up is also visually represented by the incredibly sharp rise in valuations. Such is essential because earnings are not rising at a fast enough clip to support higher prices.<b>As is always the case, the investing public believes future earnings will justify higher prices during a melt-up. It just never works out that way.</b></p><p><blockquote>然而，估值的大幅上涨也直观地体现了这种融化。这一点至关重要，因为盈利增长速度不足以支撑价格上涨。<b>与往常一样，投资大众相信未来的收益将证明在融化期间价格上涨是合理的。从来都不是那样的。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c69e418d5a19d6fd03b305ab111e3be3\" tg-width=\"794\" tg-height=\"440\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/af03d3bbd071b8edfdf3a19e2c7b0bcd\" tg-width=\"796\" tg-height=\"437\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> We can compare those two previous periods with the current advance from the March 2020 lows. Again, we see a very similar sharp advance in price combined with a surge in valuations. As expected, investors are currently hoping that future earnings will rise sharply enough to justify current prices. However, the justification for paying high prices is the Federal Reserve’s ongoing balance sheet expansion.</p><p><blockquote>我们可以将前两个时期与当前从2020年3月低点的上涨进行比较。我们再次看到非常相似的价格大幅上涨和估值飙升。正如预期的那样，投资者目前希望未来收益将大幅上涨，足以证明当前价格的合理性。然而，支付高价的理由是美联储持续的资产负债表扩张。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f3562aea27b24ad4921d0f5cd497e072\" tg-width=\"804\" tg-height=\"444\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The following chart looks that the price advance and valuation measures a little differently. It shows the current deviation from the long-term exponential growth trend. Not surprisingly, during a market<i>“melt-up,”</i>there is a rapid deviation from the growth trend matching the acceleration in valuations.</p><p><blockquote>下图显示，价格上涨和估值指标略有不同。它显示了当前与长期指数增长趋势的背离。毫不奇怪，在市场期间<i>“融化。”</i>与估值加速相匹配的增长趋势出现了快速背离。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1419cf4b2afdcdc0f61e0cad862f498d\" tg-width=\"836\" tg-height=\"460\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The problem with market<i>“melt-ups”</i>is not the melt-up itself but what always follows.</p><p><blockquote>市场的问题<i>“融化”</i>不是融化本身，而是随之而来的一切。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Melting-Up Leads To Melting-Down</b></p><p><blockquote><b>熔化导致熔化</b></blockquote></p><p> A market melting-up is exciting while it lasts. During melt-ups, investors begin to rationalize why<i>“this time is different.”</i>They start taking on excess leverage to try and capitalize on the rapid advance in prices, and fundamentals take a back seat to price momentum.</p><p><blockquote>市场融化持续下去是令人兴奋的。在熔断期间，投资者开始合理化原因<i>“这次不一样。”</i>他们开始过度杠杆，试图利用价格的快速上涨，基本面让位于价格动能。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Market melt-ups are all about<i>“psychology.”</i><b>Historically, whatever has been the catalyst to spark the disregard of risk is readily witnessed in the corresponding surge in price and valuations.</b>The chart below shows the long-term deviations in relative strength, deviations, and valuations. The previous<i>‘melt-up”</i>periods should be easy to spot when compared with the advance currently.</p><p><blockquote>市场融化都是关于<i>“心理学。”</i><b>从历史上看，无论引发忽视风险的催化剂是什么，都很容易在价格和估值的相应飙升中看到。</b>下图显示了相对强度、偏差和估值的长期偏差。上一篇<i>“融化”</i>与目前的进展相比，时期应该很容易发现。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bc04cb25c0199dd17475a551a5dd7ec1\" tg-width=\"869\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Given that current extensions match only a few rare periods in history, a couple of points should be readily apparent.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于目前的延期仅与历史上少数罕见的时期相匹配，有几点应该是显而易见的。</blockquote></p><p> <ol>  <li><b><i>Melt-ups can longer than logic would predict.</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>The prevailing psychology is always “this time is different.”</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>Valuations are dismissed in exchange for measures of momentum and forward expectations.</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>Investors take on excess leverage and risk in order to participate in a seemingly “can’t lose” market.</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>Lastly, and inevitably, “melt-ups” end and always in the worst possible outcomes.</i></b></li> </ol> It is essential to recognize the markets are in a<i>“melt-up,</i>” and the duration of that event is unknowable. Therefore, investors need a strategy to participate in the advance and mitigate the damage from the eventual<i>“melting-down.”</i></p><p><blockquote><ol><li><b><i>融化的时间可能比逻辑预测的要长。</i></b></li><li><b><i>普遍的心理总是“这次不一样了”。</i></b></li><li><b><i>估值被驳回，以换取动量和前瞻性预期的衡量标准。</i></b></li><li><b><i>投资者为了参与一个看似“输不起”的市场，承担了过多的杠杆和风险。</i></b></li><li><b><i>最后，不可避免的是，“融化”以最糟糕的结果告终。</i></b></li></ol>必须认识到市场正处于<i>“融化，</i>“而且该事件的持续时间是未知的。因此，投资者需要一种策略来参与提前并减轻最终的损失<i>“熔化。”</i></blockquote></p><p> <b>Surviving The Melt-Up</b></p><p><blockquote><b>在融化中幸存下来</b></blockquote></p><p> <b>As noted, none of this means the next</b><b><i>“bear market”</i></b><b>is lurking.</b>Given that a market melting-up is a function of psychology, they can last longer and go further than logic would predict. What is required to “<i>end”</i>a melt-up is an unanticipated exogenous event that changes psychology from bullish to bearish. Such is when the stampede for the exits occurs, and prices decline very quickly.</p><p><blockquote><b>如上所述，这些都不意味着下一个</b><b><i>“熊市”</i></b><b>正在潜伏。</b>鉴于市场融化是心理作用，它们可以持续更长时间，走得比逻辑预测的更远。需要什么“<i>结束“</i>融化是一种意想不到的外生事件，它将心理从看涨转变为看跌。这就是人们蜂拥退出的时候，价格会迅速下跌。</blockquote></p><p> As such, investors need a set of guidelines to participate in the market advance. But, of course, the hard part is keeping those gains when corrections inevitably occur.</p><p><blockquote>因此，投资者需要一套指导方针来参与市场上涨。但是，当然，困难的部分是在不可避免地发生调整时保持这些收益。</blockquote></p><p> As portfolio managers for our clients, such is precisely the approach we must take. Accordingly, I have provided a general overview of the process that we employ.</p><p><blockquote>作为客户的投资组合经理，这正是我们必须采取的方法。因此，我提供了我们采用的流程的总体概述。</blockquote></p><p> <ol>  <li><i><b>Tighten up stop-loss levels</b></i><i>to current support levels for each position.(Provides identifiable exit points when the market reverses.)</i></li>  <li><i><b>Hedge portfolios</b></i><i>against major market declines.(Non-correlated assets, short-market positions, index put options)</i></li>  <li><i><b>Take profits</b></i><i>in positions that have been big winners(Rebalancing overbought or extended positions to capture gains but continue to participate in the advance.)</i></li>  <li><i><b>Sell laggards</b></i><i>and losers</i>.<i>(If something isn’t working in a market melt-up, it most likely won’t work during a broad decline. Better to eliminate the risk early.)</i></li>  <li><i><b>Raise cash</b></i><i>and rebalance portfolios to target weightings.(Rebalancing risk on a regular basis keeps hidden risks somewhat mitigated.)</i></li> </ol> <b>Notice, nothing in there says,</b><b><i>“sell everything and go to cash.”</i></b></p><p><blockquote><ol><li><i><b>收紧止损水平</b></i><i>每个头寸的当前支撑位。（当市场反转时提供可识别的退出点。）</i></li><li><i><b>对冲投资组合</b></i><i>（非相关资产、空头市场头寸、指数看跌期权）</i></li><li><i><b>获利了结</b></i><i>在已经成为大赢家的头寸中（重新平衡超买或扩展头寸以获取收益，但继续参与上涨。）</i></li><li><i><b>出售落后者</b></i><i>和失败者</i>.<i>（如果某些东西在市场融化时不起作用，那么在广泛下跌时很可能也不会起作用。最好尽早消除风险。）</i></li><li><i><b>筹集现金</b></i><i>并重新平衡投资组合以达到目标权重。（定期重新平衡风险可以在一定程度上减轻隐藏的风险。）</i></li></ol><b>注意，里面没有任何东西说，</b><b><i>“卖掉所有东西，去兑现。”</i></b></blockquote></p><p> There will be a time to raise significant levels of cash. A good portfolio management strategy will automatically ensure that<i>“stop-loss”</i>levels get triggered, exposure decreases, and cash levels rise when the selling begins.</p><p><blockquote>将会有一段时间来筹集大量现金。一个好的投资组合管理策略会自动确保<i>“止损”</i>当出售开始时，水平被触发，风险减少，现金水平上升。</blockquote></p><p> While it is essential to take advantage of the melt-up while it lasts, just don’t become overly complacent<i>“this time is different.”</i></p><p><blockquote>虽然有必要在融化持续期间利用它，但不要过于自满<i>“这次不一样。”</i></blockquote></p><p> It likely isn’t.</p><p><blockquote>很可能不是。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Technically Speaking: Is The Market \"Melting-Up?\"<blockquote>从技术上讲：市场正在“融化”吗？</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nTechnically Speaking: Is The Market \"Melting-Up?\"<blockquote>从技术上讲：市场正在“融化”吗？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">seekingalpha</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-09-29 10:31</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p><b>Summary</b></p><p><blockquote><b>总结</b></blockquote></p><p> <ul>  <li>Given the Fed’s ongoing balance sheet operations, investors fully believe they have protection from a decline.</li>  <li>As is always the case, the investing public believes future earnings will justify higher prices during a melt-up. It just never works out that way.</li>  <li>While it is essential to take advantage of the melt-up while it lasts, just don’t become overly complacent “this time is different”.</li> </ul> Is the<i>“market melting-up?”</i>Such was the question I received from my colleague at<i>Cut The Crap Investing.</i>It is an excellent question given the relentless increase in what investors believe is a<i>“no risk”</i>market.</p><p><blockquote><ul><li>鉴于美联储正在进行的资产负债表操作，投资者完全相信他们有能力免受经济衰退的影响。</li><li>与往常一样，投资大众相信未来的收益将证明在融化期间价格上涨是合理的。从来都不是那样的。</li><li>虽然在融化持续期间利用它是至关重要的，但不要过于自满“这次不同了”。</li></ul>是<i>“市场融化？”</i>这是我从我的同事那里收到的问题<i>少废话投资。</i>考虑到投资者认为的持续增长，这是一个很好的问题<i>“没有风险”</i>市场。</blockquote></p><p> Of course, we need a definition of precisely what constitutes a melt-up.</p><p><blockquote>当然，我们需要一个准确定义什么是融化。</blockquote></p><p>   <i>“A melt-up is a sustained and often unexpected improvement in the investment performance of an asset or asset class, driven partly</i>  <i><b>by a stampede of investors who don’t want to miss out on its rise,</b></i>  <i>rather than by fundamental improvements in the economy.“</i>–  <i>Investopedia</i>  Currently, there is sufficient evidence to support the idea of an exuberant market.<b><i>As noted previously:</i></b></p><p><blockquote><i>他说：“熔断是指一项资产或资产类别的投资表现持续且往往出乎意料的改善，部分原因是</i><i><b>不想错过其上涨机会的投资者蜂拥而至，</b></i><i>而不是经济的根本改善。”</i>–<i>投资百科</i>目前，有足够的证据支持市场繁荣的观点。<b><i>如前所述：</i></b></blockquote></p><p>   <i>“Near peaks of market cycles, investors become swept up by the underlying exuberance. That exuberance breeds the “rationalization” that “this time is different.” So how do you know the market is exuberant currently? Via Sentiment Trader:”</i>    <i>‘This type of market activity is an indication that markets have returned their ‘enthusiasm’ stage. Such is characterized by:’</i>  <ul>  <li><b><i>High optimism</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>Easy credit (too easy, with loose terms)</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>A rush of initial and secondary offerings</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>Risky stocks outperforming</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>Stretched valuations</i></b></li> </ul> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/ff8de3a84084162ca86b415584bbf793\" tg-width=\"731\" tg-height=\"468\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote><i>“在市场周期接近顶峰时，投资者会被潜在的繁荣所席卷。这种繁荣滋生了“合理化”，即“这次不同了”。那么，你如何知道市场目前是繁荣的呢？通过情绪交易者：”</i><i>这种类型的市场活动表明市场已经回到了“热情”阶段。其特征在于：</i><ul><li><b><i>高度乐观</i></b></li><li><b><i>宽松信贷（太宽松，条款宽松）</i></b></li><li><b><i>首次和二次发行热潮</i></b></li><li><b><i>风险股跑赢大盘</i></b></li><li><b><i>估值过高</i></b></li></ul></blockquote></p><p> However, while one would expect individuals to exhibit caution in such an environment, the opposite is true. Given the Fed’s ongoing balance sheet operations, investors fully believe they have protection from a decline.</p><p><blockquote>然而，虽然人们会期望个人在这样的环境中表现出谨慎，但事实恰恰相反。鉴于美联储正在进行的资产负债表操作，投资者完全相信他们有能力免受经济衰退的影响。</blockquote></p><p> <b>A Visualization Of A Market Melting-Up</b></p><p><blockquote><b>市场融化的可视化</b></blockquote></p><p> It is often easier to visualize something rather than explain it.<b>Since 1900, only two previous market periods qualify as a melt-up: 1920-1929 and 1995-2000.</b>The chart below shows both periods in terms of price.</p><p><blockquote>想象某事通常比解释它更容易。<b>自1900年以来，只有两个市场时期符合熔化的条件：1920-1929年和1995-2000年。</b>下图显示了这两个时期的价格。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/a218c7efe2ebd874d05c9ff7dd564436\" tg-width=\"797\" tg-height=\"437\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/9f193c9c32d55747bf7ff511c2f9fd53\" tg-width=\"793\" tg-height=\"439\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> However, the melt-up is also visually represented by the incredibly sharp rise in valuations. Such is essential because earnings are not rising at a fast enough clip to support higher prices.<b>As is always the case, the investing public believes future earnings will justify higher prices during a melt-up. It just never works out that way.</b></p><p><blockquote>然而，估值的大幅上涨也直观地体现了这种融化。这一点至关重要，因为盈利增长速度不足以支撑价格上涨。<b>与往常一样，投资大众相信未来的收益将证明在融化期间价格上涨是合理的。从来都不是那样的。</b></blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c69e418d5a19d6fd03b305ab111e3be3\" tg-width=\"794\" tg-height=\"440\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/af03d3bbd071b8edfdf3a19e2c7b0bcd\" tg-width=\"796\" tg-height=\"437\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> We can compare those two previous periods with the current advance from the March 2020 lows. Again, we see a very similar sharp advance in price combined with a surge in valuations. As expected, investors are currently hoping that future earnings will rise sharply enough to justify current prices. However, the justification for paying high prices is the Federal Reserve’s ongoing balance sheet expansion.</p><p><blockquote>我们可以将前两个时期与当前从2020年3月低点的上涨进行比较。我们再次看到非常相似的价格大幅上涨和估值飙升。正如预期的那样，投资者目前希望未来收益将大幅上涨，足以证明当前价格的合理性。然而，支付高价的理由是美联储持续的资产负债表扩张。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/f3562aea27b24ad4921d0f5cd497e072\" tg-width=\"804\" tg-height=\"444\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The following chart looks that the price advance and valuation measures a little differently. It shows the current deviation from the long-term exponential growth trend. Not surprisingly, during a market<i>“melt-up,”</i>there is a rapid deviation from the growth trend matching the acceleration in valuations.</p><p><blockquote>下图显示，价格上涨和估值指标略有不同。它显示了当前与长期指数增长趋势的背离。毫不奇怪，在市场期间<i>“融化。”</i>与估值加速相匹配的增长趋势出现了快速背离。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/1419cf4b2afdcdc0f61e0cad862f498d\" tg-width=\"836\" tg-height=\"460\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The problem with market<i>“melt-ups”</i>is not the melt-up itself but what always follows.</p><p><blockquote>市场的问题<i>“融化”</i>不是融化本身，而是随之而来的一切。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Melting-Up Leads To Melting-Down</b></p><p><blockquote><b>熔化导致熔化</b></blockquote></p><p> A market melting-up is exciting while it lasts. During melt-ups, investors begin to rationalize why<i>“this time is different.”</i>They start taking on excess leverage to try and capitalize on the rapid advance in prices, and fundamentals take a back seat to price momentum.</p><p><blockquote>市场融化持续下去是令人兴奋的。在熔断期间，投资者开始合理化原因<i>“这次不一样。”</i>他们开始过度杠杆，试图利用价格的快速上涨，基本面让位于价格动能。</blockquote></p><p></p><p> Market melt-ups are all about<i>“psychology.”</i><b>Historically, whatever has been the catalyst to spark the disregard of risk is readily witnessed in the corresponding surge in price and valuations.</b>The chart below shows the long-term deviations in relative strength, deviations, and valuations. The previous<i>‘melt-up”</i>periods should be easy to spot when compared with the advance currently.</p><p><blockquote>市场融化都是关于<i>“心理学。”</i><b>从历史上看，无论引发忽视风险的催化剂是什么，都很容易在价格和估值的相应飙升中看到。</b>下图显示了相对强度、偏差和估值的长期偏差。上一篇<i>“融化”</i>与目前的进展相比，时期应该很容易发现。</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/bc04cb25c0199dd17475a551a5dd7ec1\" tg-width=\"869\" tg-height=\"1024\" referrerpolicy=\"no-referrer\" width=\"100%\" height=\"auto\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> Given that current extensions match only a few rare periods in history, a couple of points should be readily apparent.</p><p><blockquote>鉴于目前的延期仅与历史上少数罕见的时期相匹配，有几点应该是显而易见的。</blockquote></p><p> <ol>  <li><b><i>Melt-ups can longer than logic would predict.</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>The prevailing psychology is always “this time is different.”</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>Valuations are dismissed in exchange for measures of momentum and forward expectations.</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>Investors take on excess leverage and risk in order to participate in a seemingly “can’t lose” market.</i></b></li>  <li><b><i>Lastly, and inevitably, “melt-ups” end and always in the worst possible outcomes.</i></b></li> </ol> It is essential to recognize the markets are in a<i>“melt-up,</i>” and the duration of that event is unknowable. Therefore, investors need a strategy to participate in the advance and mitigate the damage from the eventual<i>“melting-down.”</i></p><p><blockquote><ol><li><b><i>融化的时间可能比逻辑预测的要长。</i></b></li><li><b><i>普遍的心理总是“这次不一样了”。</i></b></li><li><b><i>估值被驳回，以换取动量和前瞻性预期的衡量标准。</i></b></li><li><b><i>投资者为了参与一个看似“输不起”的市场，承担了过多的杠杆和风险。</i></b></li><li><b><i>最后，不可避免的是，“融化”以最糟糕的结果告终。</i></b></li></ol>必须认识到市场正处于<i>“融化，</i>“而且该事件的持续时间是未知的。因此，投资者需要一种策略来参与提前并减轻最终的损失<i>“熔化。”</i></blockquote></p><p> <b>Surviving The Melt-Up</b></p><p><blockquote><b>在融化中幸存下来</b></blockquote></p><p> <b>As noted, none of this means the next</b><b><i>“bear market”</i></b><b>is lurking.</b>Given that a market melting-up is a function of psychology, they can last longer and go further than logic would predict. What is required to “<i>end”</i>a melt-up is an unanticipated exogenous event that changes psychology from bullish to bearish. Such is when the stampede for the exits occurs, and prices decline very quickly.</p><p><blockquote><b>如上所述，这些都不意味着下一个</b><b><i>“熊市”</i></b><b>正在潜伏。</b>鉴于市场融化是心理作用，它们可以持续更长时间，走得比逻辑预测的更远。需要什么“<i>结束“</i>融化是一种意想不到的外生事件，它将心理从看涨转变为看跌。这就是人们蜂拥退出的时候，价格会迅速下跌。</blockquote></p><p> As such, investors need a set of guidelines to participate in the market advance. But, of course, the hard part is keeping those gains when corrections inevitably occur.</p><p><blockquote>因此，投资者需要一套指导方针来参与市场上涨。但是，当然，困难的部分是在不可避免地发生调整时保持这些收益。</blockquote></p><p> As portfolio managers for our clients, such is precisely the approach we must take. Accordingly, I have provided a general overview of the process that we employ.</p><p><blockquote>作为客户的投资组合经理，这正是我们必须采取的方法。因此，我提供了我们采用的流程的总体概述。</blockquote></p><p> <ol>  <li><i><b>Tighten up stop-loss levels</b></i><i>to current support levels for each position.(Provides identifiable exit points when the market reverses.)</i></li>  <li><i><b>Hedge portfolios</b></i><i>against major market declines.(Non-correlated assets, short-market positions, index put options)</i></li>  <li><i><b>Take profits</b></i><i>in positions that have been big winners(Rebalancing overbought or extended positions to capture gains but continue to participate in the advance.)</i></li>  <li><i><b>Sell laggards</b></i><i>and losers</i>.<i>(If something isn’t working in a market melt-up, it most likely won’t work during a broad decline. Better to eliminate the risk early.)</i></li>  <li><i><b>Raise cash</b></i><i>and rebalance portfolios to target weightings.(Rebalancing risk on a regular basis keeps hidden risks somewhat mitigated.)</i></li> </ol> <b>Notice, nothing in there says,</b><b><i>“sell everything and go to cash.”</i></b></p><p><blockquote><ol><li><i><b>收紧止损水平</b></i><i>每个头寸的当前支撑位。（当市场反转时提供可识别的退出点。）</i></li><li><i><b>对冲投资组合</b></i><i>（非相关资产、空头市场头寸、指数看跌期权）</i></li><li><i><b>获利了结</b></i><i>在已经成为大赢家的头寸中（重新平衡超买或扩展头寸以获取收益，但继续参与上涨。）</i></li><li><i><b>出售落后者</b></i><i>和失败者</i>.<i>（如果某些东西在市场融化时不起作用，那么在广泛下跌时很可能也不会起作用。最好尽早消除风险。）</i></li><li><i><b>筹集现金</b></i><i>并重新平衡投资组合以达到目标权重。（定期重新平衡风险可以在一定程度上减轻隐藏的风险。）</i></li></ol><b>注意，里面没有任何东西说，</b><b><i>“卖掉所有东西，去兑现。”</i></b></blockquote></p><p> There will be a time to raise significant levels of cash. A good portfolio management strategy will automatically ensure that<i>“stop-loss”</i>levels get triggered, exposure decreases, and cash levels rise when the selling begins.</p><p><blockquote>将会有一段时间来筹集大量现金。一个好的投资组合管理策略会自动确保<i>“止损”</i>当出售开始时，水平被触发，风险减少，现金水平上升。</blockquote></p><p> While it is essential to take advantage of the melt-up while it lasts, just don’t become overly complacent<i>“this time is different.”</i></p><p><blockquote>虽然有必要在融化持续期间利用它，但不要过于自满<i>“这次不一样。”</i></blockquote></p><p> It likely isn’t.</p><p><blockquote>很可能不是。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4457469-technically-speaking-is-the-market-melting-up\">seekingalpha</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"SPY":"标普500ETF",".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯"},"source_url":"https://seekingalpha.com/article/4457469-technically-speaking-is-the-market-melting-up","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1198528044","content_text":"Summary\n\nGiven the Fed’s ongoing balance sheet operations, investors fully believe they have protection from a decline.\nAs is always the case, the investing public believes future earnings will justify higher prices during a melt-up. It just never works out that way.\nWhile it is essential to take advantage of the melt-up while it lasts, just don’t become overly complacent “this time is different”.\n\nIs the“market melting-up?”Such was the question I received from my colleague atCut The Crap Investing.It is an excellent question given the relentless increase in what investors believe is a“no risk”market.\nOf course, we need a definition of precisely what constitutes a melt-up.\n\n“A melt-up is a sustained and often unexpected improvement in the investment performance of an asset or asset class, driven partly\nby a stampede of investors who don’t want to miss out on its rise,\nrather than by fundamental improvements in the economy.“–\n Investopedia\n\nCurrently, there is sufficient evidence to support the idea of an exuberant market.As noted previously:\n\n“Near peaks of market cycles, investors become swept up by the underlying exuberance. That exuberance breeds the “rationalization” that “this time is different.” So how do you know the market is exuberant currently? Via Sentiment Trader:”\n\n\n‘This type of market activity is an indication that markets have returned their ‘enthusiasm’ stage. Such is characterized by:’\n\n\nHigh optimism\nEasy credit (too easy, with loose terms)\nA rush of initial and secondary offerings\nRisky stocks outperforming\nStretched valuations\n\n\nHowever, while one would expect individuals to exhibit caution in such an environment, the opposite is true. Given the Fed’s ongoing balance sheet operations, investors fully believe they have protection from a decline.\nA Visualization Of A Market Melting-Up\nIt is often easier to visualize something rather than explain it.Since 1900, only two previous market periods qualify as a melt-up: 1920-1929 and 1995-2000.The chart below shows both periods in terms of price.\n\nHowever, the melt-up is also visually represented by the incredibly sharp rise in valuations. Such is essential because earnings are not rising at a fast enough clip to support higher prices.As is always the case, the investing public believes future earnings will justify higher prices during a melt-up. It just never works out that way.\n\nWe can compare those two previous periods with the current advance from the March 2020 lows. Again, we see a very similar sharp advance in price combined with a surge in valuations. As expected, investors are currently hoping that future earnings will rise sharply enough to justify current prices. However, the justification for paying high prices is the Federal Reserve’s ongoing balance sheet expansion.\n\nThe following chart looks that the price advance and valuation measures a little differently. It shows the current deviation from the long-term exponential growth trend. Not surprisingly, during a market“melt-up,”there is a rapid deviation from the growth trend matching the acceleration in valuations.\n\nThe problem with market“melt-ups”is not the melt-up itself but what always follows.\nMelting-Up Leads To Melting-Down\nA market melting-up is exciting while it lasts. During melt-ups, investors begin to rationalize why“this time is different.”They start taking on excess leverage to try and capitalize on the rapid advance in prices, and fundamentals take a back seat to price momentum.\nMarket melt-ups are all about“psychology.”Historically, whatever has been the catalyst to spark the disregard of risk is readily witnessed in the corresponding surge in price and valuations.The chart below shows the long-term deviations in relative strength, deviations, and valuations. The previous‘melt-up”periods should be easy to spot when compared with the advance currently.\n\nGiven that current extensions match only a few rare periods in history, a couple of points should be readily apparent.\n\nMelt-ups can longer than logic would predict.\nThe prevailing psychology is always “this time is different.”\nValuations are dismissed in exchange for measures of momentum and forward expectations.\nInvestors take on excess leverage and risk in order to participate in a seemingly “can’t lose” market.\nLastly, and inevitably, “melt-ups” end and always in the worst possible outcomes.\n\nIt is essential to recognize the markets are in a“melt-up,” and the duration of that event is unknowable. Therefore, investors need a strategy to participate in the advance and mitigate the damage from the eventual“melting-down.”\nSurviving The Melt-Up\nAs noted, none of this means the next“bear market”is lurking.Given that a market melting-up is a function of psychology, they can last longer and go further than logic would predict. What is required to “end”a melt-up is an unanticipated exogenous event that changes psychology from bullish to bearish. Such is when the stampede for the exits occurs, and prices decline very quickly.\nAs such, investors need a set of guidelines to participate in the market advance. But, of course, the hard part is keeping those gains when corrections inevitably occur.\nAs portfolio managers for our clients, such is precisely the approach we must take. Accordingly, I have provided a general overview of the process that we employ.\n\nTighten up stop-loss levelsto current support levels for each position.(Provides identifiable exit points when the market reverses.)\nHedge portfoliosagainst major market declines.(Non-correlated assets, short-market positions, index put options)\nTake profitsin positions that have been big winners(Rebalancing overbought or extended positions to capture gains but continue to participate in the advance.)\nSell laggardsand losers.(If something isn’t working in a market melt-up, it most likely won’t work during a broad decline. Better to eliminate the risk early.)\nRaise cashand rebalance portfolios to target weightings.(Rebalancing risk on a regular basis keeps hidden risks somewhat mitigated.)\n\nNotice, nothing in there says,“sell everything and go to cash.”\nThere will be a time to raise significant levels of cash. A good portfolio management strategy will automatically ensure that“stop-loss”levels get triggered, exposure decreases, and cash levels rise when the selling begins.\nWhile it is essential to take advantage of the melt-up while it lasts, just don’t become overly complacent“this time is different.”\nIt likely isn’t.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{".IXIC":0.9,"SPY":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".SPX":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2923,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"CN","totalScore":0},{"id":887248581,"gmtCreate":1632054315243,"gmtModify":1632803112502,"author":{"id":"3581827070600518","authorId":"3581827070600518","name":"stinger77","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33e3edb314faaaee38948d48aeb4e3d3","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581827070600518","authorIdStr":"3581827070600518"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Heavily protected by parents. Just lift up your hands and ola.... Problems solve...&nbsp;","listText":"Heavily protected by parents. Just lift up your hands and ola.... Problems solve...&nbsp;","text":"Heavily protected by parents. Just lift up your hands and ola.... Problems solve...","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":5,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/887248581","repostId":"2168508161","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2360,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":165083701,"gmtCreate":1624080994903,"gmtModify":1634010908551,"author":{"id":"3581827070600518","authorId":"3581827070600518","name":"stinger77","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33e3edb314faaaee38948d48aeb4e3d3","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581827070600518","authorIdStr":"3581827070600518"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Slowly but surely&nbsp;","listText":"Slowly but surely&nbsp;","text":"Slowly but surely","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":8,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/165083701","repostId":"1192473918","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3487,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":182631538,"gmtCreate":1623567274624,"gmtModify":1634031566019,"author":{"id":"3581827070600518","authorId":"3581827070600518","name":"stinger77","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33e3edb314faaaee38948d48aeb4e3d3","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581827070600518","authorIdStr":"3581827070600518"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good move","listText":"Good move","text":"Good move","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":4,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/182631538","repostId":"2142788912","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1586,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":182690792,"gmtCreate":1623566358716,"gmtModify":1634031576229,"author":{"id":"3581827070600518","authorId":"3581827070600518","name":"stinger77","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33e3edb314faaaee38948d48aeb4e3d3","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581827070600518","authorIdStr":"3581827070600518"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"I still think it's better to work in the office","listText":"I still think it's better to work in the office","text":"I still think it's better to work in the office","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":3,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/182690792","repostId":"2143788707","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2179,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":186669167,"gmtCreate":1623492771859,"gmtModify":1634032392432,"author":{"id":"3581827070600518","authorId":"3581827070600518","name":"stinger77","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33e3edb314faaaee38948d48aeb4e3d3","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581827070600518","authorIdStr":"3581827070600518"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"I'm a speculating investor","listText":"I'm a speculating investor","text":"I'm a speculating investor","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/186669167","repostId":"1147474880","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1147474880","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1623470168,"share":"https://www.laohu8.com/m/news/1147474880?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-06-12 11:56","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1147474880","media":"The Wall Street Journal","summary":"Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless ris","content":"<p>  Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.  I’ve had it.</p><p><blockquote>了解投机和投资之间的区别对于避免鲁莽风险至关重要。我受够了。</blockquote></p><p> The Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.</p><p><blockquote>关于金融最基本的区别之一，《华尔街日报》是错误的，而且几十年来一直是错误的。我再也受不了了。</blockquote></p><p> If you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.</p><p><blockquote>如果你购买一只股票纯粹是因为它上涨了很多，而没有对其进行任何研究，那么你就不是——正如《华尔街日报》及其编辑奇怪地坚持这样称呼你的那样——“投资者”。如果你购买加密货币是因为，嘿，这听起来很有趣，你也不是投资者。</blockquote></p><p> Whenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.</p><p><blockquote>每当你购买任何金融资产是因为你有一个只是为了好玩，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传它，而其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。</blockquote></p><p> You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.</p><p><blockquote>你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你付出更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> Of course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%<i>are</i>investors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.</p><p><blockquote>当然，有些人购买像GameStopCorp.GME 5.88%这样的模因股票<i>是</i>投资者。他们阅读公司的财务报表，研究基础业务的健康状况，并了解还有谁在做空股票。同样，许多数字硬币的买家也投入了时间和精力来了解加密货币的工作原理以及它如何重塑金融。</blockquote></p><p> An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.</p><p><blockquote>投资者依赖于内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。</blockquote></p><p> The word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.</p><p><blockquote>投资者这个词来自拉丁语“investire”，意思是穿着或打扮自己，包围或包围。你永远不会在不知道衣服是什么颜色或由什么材料制成的情况下穿衣服。同样，你不能投资你一无所知的资产。</blockquote></p><p> Nevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，《华尔街日报》及其编辑长期以来一直将几乎所有购买任何东西的人称为“投资者”。1962年7月12日，《华尔街日报》发表了经典著作《证券分析》和《聪明的投资者》的作者本杰明·格雷厄姆写给编辑的一封信。格雷厄姆抱怨说，那年6月，《华尔街日报》发表了一篇文章，标题是“许多小投资者押注进一步下跌，卖空零星股票”。</blockquote></p><p> He wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)</p><p><blockquote>他写道：“根据‘投资’的什么定义，人们可以给那些通过卖空零头在股市上下注的小人物起‘投资者’这个名字呢？”（做空奇数手就是借入并卖出少于100股的股票，押注股票会下跌——无论在当时还是现在，这都是一个昂贵且有风险的赌注。）</blockquote></p><p> “If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”</p><p><blockquote>“如果这些人是投资者，”格雷厄姆问道，“我们应该如何定义‘投机’和‘投机者’？难道目前未能区分投资和投机的做法，不仅会对个人，而且会对整个金融界造成严重伤害吗——就像20世纪20年代末那样？”</blockquote></p><p> Graham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆并不是一个认为市场应该是富人专属游乐场的势利小人。他写了《聪明的投资者》，明确的目的是帮助不太富裕的人明智地参与股市。</blockquote></p><p> In that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆在那本书（本专栏就是以其命名的）中说：“彻头彻尾的投机既不违法、不道德，也（对大多数人来说）不会让钱包发胖。”</blockquote></p><p> However, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，他警告说，这会带来三种危险：“（1）当你认为自己在投资时进行投机；（2）当你缺乏适当的知识和技能时，认真地投机而不是作为一种消遣；以及（3）冒更多钱的风险投机超出了你的承受能力。”</blockquote></p><p> Most investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.</p><p><blockquote>大多数投资者每隔一段时间就会投机一点。就像彩票或偶尔去赛马场或赌场一样，一点点是无害的乐趣。很多都不是。</blockquote></p><p> If you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.</p><p><blockquote>如果你认为你在投机时是在投资，你会将哪怕是短暂的成功归因于技能，即使运气是最可能的解释。这会导致你冒鲁莽的风险。</blockquote></p><p> Take speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.</p><p><blockquote>把投机看得太重，它会变成一种痴迷和上瘾。你变得无法接受你的损失，也无法关注未来超过几分钟。接下来你知道的是，你在篝火上投入了更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> I think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.</p><p><blockquote>我认为，将交易者和投机者称为“投资者”会将许多新来者推向他们不应该承担的风险和他们无法承受的损失的滑坡。我热切地希望《华尔街日报》及其编辑最终不再使用“投资者”作为任何进行交易的人的默认术语。</blockquote></p><p> “ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”</p><p><blockquote>“‘投资者’在英语中作为一个包罗万象的术语有着悠久的历史，指的是那些投入资本并期望回报的人，无论时间长短，无论他们阅读的投资专栏有多少，”《华尔街日报》财经编辑查尔斯·福雷尔在回应我的投诉时说道。“至少可以追溯到19世纪中叶，‘投资’甚至被用来描述赌马——这种活动与基本面分析的脱节程度肯定不亚于购买狗狗币。”</blockquote></p><p></p><p> I hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.</p><p><blockquote>我听到了，老板，但我还是认为你错了。《华尔街日报》不可能仅仅因为字典上说我们可以，就说一个休闲赌徒在赛马场“投资”。</blockquote></p><p> Calling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.</p><p><blockquote>将新手投机者称为“投资者”是营销人员助长过度交易的最有力方式之一。</blockquote></p><p> Ina recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”</p><p><blockquote>在最近的Instagram帖子中，一位名叫拉娜·罗迪斯(Lana Rhoades)的前色情明星穿着——嗯，大部分是穿着——比基尼，举着似乎是格雷厄姆的《聪明的投资者》。据IMDb.com报道，她主演了《Tushy》和《Make Me Meow》等视频。</blockquote></p><p> In her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.</p><p><blockquote>在她被近180万人“点赞”的帖子中，罗迪斯宣布她将推广一种名为PAWGCoin的加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> The currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)</p><p><blockquote>该货币的网站称，这枚硬币是为“那些向发达的后躯致敬的人”准备的。（我得到可靠消息，PAWG代表胖屁股白人女孩。）</blockquote></p><p> PAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.</p><p><blockquote>据追踪此类数字货币的网站Poocoin.io称，自Rhoades女士6月初开始推广PAWGcoin以来，PAWGcoin已上涨约900%。</blockquote></p><p> Ms. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”</p><p><blockquote>罗迪斯女士在推特上写道“我每天早上也阅读《华尔街日报》”，但记者无法联系到她置评。PAWGcoin的网站鼓励访问者“立即投资”。</blockquote></p><p> In Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.</p><p><blockquote>在罗迪斯的Instagram帖子中，她举着一本打开的《聪明的投资者》，封面是颠倒的。她似乎是闭着眼睛读的。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Investor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nInvestor, Trader, Speculator: Which One Are You?<blockquote>投资者、交易者、投机者：你是哪一个？</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">The Wall Street Journal</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-06-12 11:56</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>  Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.  I’ve had it.</p><p><blockquote>了解投机和投资之间的区别对于避免鲁莽风险至关重要。我受够了。</blockquote></p><p> The Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.</p><p><blockquote>关于金融最基本的区别之一，《华尔街日报》是错误的，而且几十年来一直是错误的。我再也受不了了。</blockquote></p><p> If you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.</p><p><blockquote>如果你购买一只股票纯粹是因为它上涨了很多，而没有对其进行任何研究，那么你就不是——正如《华尔街日报》及其编辑奇怪地坚持这样称呼你的那样——“投资者”。如果你购买加密货币是因为，嘿，这听起来很有趣，你也不是投资者。</blockquote></p><p> Whenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.</p><p><blockquote>每当你购买任何金融资产是因为你有一个只是为了好玩，或者因为某个名人正在大肆宣传它，而其他人似乎也在购买它，你就不是在投资。</blockquote></p><p> You’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.</p><p><blockquote>你绝对是一个交易者：刚刚购买了一项资产的人。你可能是一个投机者：认为其他人会比你付出更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> Of course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%<i>are</i>investors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.</p><p><blockquote>当然，有些人购买像GameStopCorp.GME 5.88%这样的模因股票<i>是</i>投资者。他们阅读公司的财务报表，研究基础业务的健康状况，并了解还有谁在做空股票。同样，许多数字硬币的买家也投入了时间和精力来了解加密货币的工作原理以及它如何重塑金融。</blockquote></p><p> An investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.</p><p><blockquote>投资者依赖于内部回报来源：收益、收入、资产价值的增长。投机者依赖外部回报来源：主要是其他人是否会支付更多，而不考虑基本价值。</blockquote></p><p> The word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.</p><p><blockquote>投资者这个词来自拉丁语“investire”，意思是穿着或打扮自己，包围或包围。你永远不会在不知道衣服是什么颜色或由什么材料制成的情况下穿衣服。同样，你不能投资你一无所知的资产。</blockquote></p><p> Nevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，《华尔街日报》及其编辑长期以来一直将几乎所有购买任何东西的人称为“投资者”。1962年7月12日，《华尔街日报》发表了经典著作《证券分析》和《聪明的投资者》的作者本杰明·格雷厄姆写给编辑的一封信。格雷厄姆抱怨说，那年6月，《华尔街日报》发表了一篇文章，标题是“许多小投资者押注进一步下跌，卖空零星股票”。</blockquote></p><p> He wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)</p><p><blockquote>他写道：“根据‘投资’的什么定义，人们可以给那些通过卖空零头在股市上下注的小人物起‘投资者’这个名字呢？”（做空奇数手就是借入并卖出少于100股的股票，押注股票会下跌——无论在当时还是现在，这都是一个昂贵且有风险的赌注。）</blockquote></p><p> “If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”</p><p><blockquote>“如果这些人是投资者，”格雷厄姆问道，“我们应该如何定义‘投机’和‘投机者’？难道目前未能区分投资和投机的做法，不仅会对个人，而且会对整个金融界造成严重伤害吗——就像20世纪20年代末那样？”</blockquote></p><p> Graham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆并不是一个认为市场应该是富人专属游乐场的势利小人。他写了《聪明的投资者》，明确的目的是帮助不太富裕的人明智地参与股市。</blockquote></p><p> In that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”</p><p><blockquote>格雷厄姆在那本书（本专栏就是以其命名的）中说：“彻头彻尾的投机既不违法、不道德，也（对大多数人来说）不会让钱包发胖。”</blockquote></p><p> However, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”</p><p><blockquote>然而，他警告说，这会带来三种危险：“（1）当你认为自己在投资时进行投机；（2）当你缺乏适当的知识和技能时，认真地投机而不是作为一种消遣；以及（3）冒更多钱的风险投机超出了你的承受能力。”</blockquote></p><p> Most investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.</p><p><blockquote>大多数投资者每隔一段时间就会投机一点。就像彩票或偶尔去赛马场或赌场一样，一点点是无害的乐趣。很多都不是。</blockquote></p><p> If you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.</p><p><blockquote>如果你认为你在投机时是在投资，你会将哪怕是短暂的成功归因于技能，即使运气是最可能的解释。这会导致你冒鲁莽的风险。</blockquote></p><p> Take speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.</p><p><blockquote>把投机看得太重，它会变成一种痴迷和上瘾。你变得无法接受你的损失，也无法关注未来超过几分钟。接下来你知道的是，你在篝火上投入了更多的钱。</blockquote></p><p> I think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.</p><p><blockquote>我认为，将交易者和投机者称为“投资者”会将许多新来者推向他们不应该承担的风险和他们无法承受的损失的滑坡。我热切地希望《华尔街日报》及其编辑最终不再使用“投资者”作为任何进行交易的人的默认术语。</blockquote></p><p> “ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”</p><p><blockquote>“‘投资者’在英语中作为一个包罗万象的术语有着悠久的历史，指的是那些投入资本并期望回报的人，无论时间长短，无论他们阅读的投资专栏有多少，”《华尔街日报》财经编辑查尔斯·福雷尔在回应我的投诉时说道。“至少可以追溯到19世纪中叶，‘投资’甚至被用来描述赌马——这种活动与基本面分析的脱节程度肯定不亚于购买狗狗币。”</blockquote></p><p></p><p> I hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.</p><p><blockquote>我听到了，老板，但我还是认为你错了。《华尔街日报》不可能仅仅因为字典上说我们可以，就说一个休闲赌徒在赛马场“投资”。</blockquote></p><p> Calling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.</p><p><blockquote>将新手投机者称为“投资者”是营销人员助长过度交易的最有力方式之一。</blockquote></p><p> Ina recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”</p><p><blockquote>在最近的Instagram帖子中，一位名叫拉娜·罗迪斯(Lana Rhoades)的前色情明星穿着——嗯，大部分是穿着——比基尼，举着似乎是格雷厄姆的《聪明的投资者》。据IMDb.com报道，她主演了《Tushy》和《Make Me Meow》等视频。</blockquote></p><p> In her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.</p><p><blockquote>在她被近180万人“点赞”的帖子中，罗迪斯宣布她将推广一种名为PAWGCoin的加密货币。</blockquote></p><p> The currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)</p><p><blockquote>该货币的网站称，这枚硬币是为“那些向发达的后躯致敬的人”准备的。（我得到可靠消息，PAWG代表胖屁股白人女孩。）</blockquote></p><p> PAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.</p><p><blockquote>据追踪此类数字货币的网站Poocoin.io称，自Rhoades女士6月初开始推广PAWGcoin以来，PAWGcoin已上涨约900%。</blockquote></p><p> Ms. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”</p><p><blockquote>罗迪斯女士在推特上写道“我每天早上也阅读《华尔街日报》”，但记者无法联系到她置评。PAWGcoin的网站鼓励访问者“立即投资”。</blockquote></p><p> In Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.</p><p><blockquote>在罗迪斯的Instagram帖子中，她举着一本打开的《聪明的投资者》，封面是颠倒的。她似乎是闭着眼睛读的。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5\">The Wall Street Journal</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{".SPX":"S&P 500 Index",".IXIC":"NASDAQ Composite",".DJI":"道琼斯","SPY":"标普500ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.wsj.com/articles/you-cant-invest-without-trading-you-can-trade-without-investing-11623426213?mod=markets_lead_pos5","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1147474880","content_text":"Understanding the difference between speculation and investing is essential to avoiding reckless risk.\n\nI’ve had it.\nThe Wall Street Journal is wrong, and has remained wrong for decades, about one of the most basic distinctions in finance. And I can’t stand it anymore.\nIf you buy a stock purely because it’s gone up a lot, without doing any research on it whatsoever, you are not—as the Journal and its editors bizarrely insist on calling you—an “investor.” If you buy a cryptocurrency because, hey, that sounds like fun, you aren’t an investor either.\nWhenever you buy any financial asset becauseyou have a hunchorjust for kicks, or becausesomebody famous is hyping the heck out of itoreverybody else seems to be buying it too, you aren’t investing.\nYou’re definitely a trader: someone who has just bought an asset. And you may bea speculator: someone who thinks other people will pay more for it than you did.\nOf course,some folkswho buy meme stocks likeGameStopCorp.GME5.88%areinvestors. They read the companies’ financial statements, study the health of the underlying businesses and learn who else is betting on or against the shares. Likewise, many buyers of digital coins have put in the time and effort to understand how cryptocurrency works and how it could reshape finance.\nAn investor relies on internal sources of return: earnings, income, growth in the value of assets. A speculator counts on external sources of return: primarilywhether somebody else will pay more, regardless of fundamental value.\nThe word investor comes from the Latin “investire,” to dress in or clothe oneself, surround or envelop. You would never wear clothes without knowing what color they are or what material they’re made of. Likewise, you can’t invest in an asset you know nothing about.\nNevertheless, the Journal and its editors have long called almost everybody who buys just about anything an “investor.” On July 12, 1962, the Journal publisheda letter to the editorfrom Benjamin Graham, author of the classic books “Security Analysis” and “The Intelligent Investor.” That June, complained Graham, the Journal had run an article headlined “Many Small Investors Bet on Further Drops, Sell Odd Lots Short.”\nHe wrote: “By what definition of ‘investment’ can one give the name ‘investors’ to small people who make bets on the stock market by selling odd lots short?” (To short an odd lot is to borrow and sell fewer than 100 shares in a wager that a stock will fall—an expensive and risky bet, then and now.)\n“If these people are investors,” asked Graham, “how should one define ‘speculation’ and ‘speculators’? Isn’t it possible that the currentfailure to distinguishbetweeninvestment and speculationmay do grave harm not only to individuals but to the whole financial community—as it did in the late 1920s?”\nGraham wasn’t a snob who thought that the markets should be the exclusive playground of the rich. He wrote “The Intelligent Investor” with the express purpose of helping less-wealthy people participate wisely in the stock market.\nIn that book, after which this column is named, Graham said, “Outright speculation is neither illegal, immoral, nor (for most people) fattening to the pocketbook.”\nHowever, he warned, it creates three dangers: “(1) speculating when you think you are investing; (2) speculating seriously instead of as a pastime, when you lack proper knowledge and skill for it; and (3) risking more money in speculation than you can afford to lose.”\nMost investors speculate a bit every once in a while. Like a lottery ticket or an occasional visit to the racetrack or casino, a little is harmless fun. A lot isn’t.\nIf you think you’re investing when you’re speculating, you’ll attribute even momentary success to skill even thoughluck is the likeliest explanation. That can lead you to take reckless risks.\nTake speculating too seriously, and it turns intoan obsessionandan addiction. You become incapable of accepting your losses or focusing on the future more than a few minutes ahead. Next thing you know, you’re throwing even more money onto the bonfire.\nI think calling traders and speculators “investors” shoves many newcomers farther down the slippery slope toward risks they shouldn’t take and losses they can’t afford. I fervently hope the Journal and its editors will finally stop using “investor” as the default term for anyone who makes a trade.\n“ ‘Investor’ has a long history in the English language as a catch-all term denoting people who commit capital with the expectation of a return, no matter how long or short, no matter how many or how few investing columns they read,” WSJ Financial Editor Charles Forelle said in response to my complaints. “Back at least to the mid-19th century, ‘invest’ has even been used to describe a wager on horses—an activity surely no less divorced from fundamental analysis than a purchase of dogecoin.”\nI hear you, Boss, but I still think you’re wrong. There’s no way the Journal would say a recreational gambler is “investing” at the racetrack just because a dictionary says we can.\nCalling novice speculators “investors” is one of the most powerful ways marketers fuel excessive trading.\nIna recent Instagram post, a former porn star who goes by the name Lana Rhoades posed in—well, mostly in—a bikini, as she held up what appears to be Graham’s “The Intelligent Investor.” According to IMDb.com, she starred in such videos as “Tushy” and “Make Me Meow.”\nIn her post, which was “liked” by nearly 1.8 million people, Ms. Rhoades announced that she will be promoting a cryptocurrency calledPAWGcoin.\nThe currency’s website says the coin is meant for “those who pay homage to developed posteriors.” (PAWG, I’ve been reliably informed, stands for Phat Ass White Girl.)\nPAWGcoin is up roughly 900% since Ms. Rhoades began promoting it in early June, according to Poocoin.io, a website that tracks such digital currencies.\nMs. Rhoades, who has tweeted “I also read the WSJ every morning,” couldn’t be reached for comment. PAWGcoin’s website encourages visitors to “invest now.”\nIn Ms. Rhoades’s Instagram post, she is holding up an open copy of the “The Intelligent Investor,” whose cover is reversed. She appears to be reading it with her eyes closed.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"SPY":0.9,".SPX":0.9,".DJI":0.9,".IXIC":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2472,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":183000373,"gmtCreate":1623291585692,"gmtModify":1634034896981,"author":{"id":"3581827070600518","authorId":"3581827070600518","name":"stinger77","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33e3edb314faaaee38948d48aeb4e3d3","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581827070600518","authorIdStr":"3581827070600518"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Good info","listText":"Good info","text":"Good info","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/183000373","repostId":"1114317619","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2028,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":189755437,"gmtCreate":1623290548829,"gmtModify":1634034912353,"author":{"id":"3581827070600518","authorId":"3581827070600518","name":"stinger77","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33e3edb314faaaee38948d48aeb4e3d3","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581827070600518","authorIdStr":"3581827070600518"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"My guess is&nbsp;Someone is going to start a short video apps in US soon before the ban on tik Tok.&nbsp;","listText":"My guess is&nbsp;Someone is going to start a short video apps in US soon before the ban on tik Tok.&nbsp;","text":"My guess is Someone is going to start a short video apps in US soon before the ban on tik Tok.","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":2,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/189755437","repostId":"2142824312","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1644,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":180275798,"gmtCreate":1623209549914,"gmtModify":1634035769694,"author":{"id":"3581827070600518","authorId":"3581827070600518","name":"stinger77","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33e3edb314faaaee38948d48aeb4e3d3","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581827070600518","authorIdStr":"3581827070600518"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Go play with&nbsp;your coin","listText":"Go play with&nbsp;your coin","text":"Go play with your coin","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":3,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/180275798","repostId":"1103709050","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":3326,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":180271465,"gmtCreate":1623209321457,"gmtModify":1634035772765,"author":{"id":"3581827070600518","authorId":"3581827070600518","name":"stinger77","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/33e3edb314faaaee38948d48aeb4e3d3","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"idStr":"3581827070600518","authorIdStr":"3581827070600518"},"themes":[],"htmlText":"Let's start moving it","listText":"Let's start moving it","text":"Let's start moving it","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/180271465","repostId":"1125424012","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1115,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"defaultTab":"posts","isTTM":false}