Economic theory that asset prices fully reflect all available information
POPULARITY
13 episodes with efficient market hypothesis
5 episodes with efficient market hypothesis
4 episodes with efficient market hypothesis
2 episodes with efficient market hypothesis
2 episodes with efficient market hypothesis
2 episodes with efficient market hypothesis
3 episodes with efficient market hypothesis
3 episodes with efficient market hypothesis
2 episodes with efficient market hypothesis
A jam-packed January full of news also brought DeepSeek into the future of A.I. conversation, deep-seating Nvidia as the world's most valuable company, and calling into question the hundreds of billions of dollars of spending by Big Tech on semiconductors to control the future. The Fed punted on interest rates, as expected, but now new tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China threaten to upend the effects of monetary policy and bring more inflation to our doorsteps. Plus, scholars take shots at the Efficient Market Hypothesis, and ask whether passive investing has actually made the stock market inefficient. LINKS FOR SHOW NOTES https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/imposing-duties-to-address-the-flow-of-illicit-drugs-across-our-national-border/ https://www.investopedia.com/trump-tariffs-enacted-saturday-what-you-need-to-know-8783771 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3821263 https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/efficientmarkethypothesis.asp https://www.investopedia.com/what-to-expect-in-the-markets-this-week-8783286 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
A jam-packed January full of news also brought DeepSeek into the future of A.I. conversation, deep-seating Nvidia as the world's most valuable company, and calling into question the hundreds of billions of dollars of spending by Big Tech on semiconductors to control the future. The Fed punted on interest rates, as expected, but now new tariffs on Canada, Mexico and China threaten to upend the effects of monetary policy and bring more inflation to our doorsteps. Plus, scholars take shots at the Efficient Market Hypothesis, and ask whether passive investing has actually made the stock market inefficient. LINKS FOR SHOW NOTES https://www.whitehouse.gov/presidential-actions/2025/02/imposing-duties-to-address-the-flow-of-illicit-drugs-across-our-national-border/ https://www.investopedia.com/trump-tariffs-enacted-saturday-what-you-need-to-know-8783771 https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3821263 https://www.investopedia.com/terms/e/efficientmarkethypothesis.asp https://www.investopedia.com/what-to-expect-in-the-markets-this-week-8783286 Learn more about your ad choices. Visit podcastchoices.com/adchoices
In December 2024, Bitcoin, one of the earliest cryptocurrencies and undoubtedly the most famous, hit $2 trillion in market capitalization, bigger than Tesla, Meta, and Saudi Aramco. In this episode, Nobel Prize-winning economist and Chicago Booth finance professor Eugene Fama—widely considered the “Father of Modern Finance”—predicts it will go to zero within ten years.Legendary investor Ray Dalio called crypto a bubble a decade ago; now, he calls it “one hell of an invention.” Larry Fink of BlackRock previously referred to Bitcoin as an index of money laundering. Today, he sees it as “a legitimate financial instrument.” Less than 36 hours after launching his own cryptocurrency before his second inauguration, United States President Donald Trump appeared to have made more than $50 billion on paper for himself and his companies. (During his first term, Trump called crypto “not money, whose value is highly volatile and based on thin air.”) Amidst this noise of crypto doubters changing tune, Fama joins Bethany and Luigi to discuss why he remains dubious about Bitcoin's ambitions.Bitcoin uses more electricity than many countries—around 91 terawatt-hours annually. Is this amount unsustainable? What makes its value so volatile, and what are the implications for the banking sector and our economy? If cryptocurrencies' purpose is a reaction to an underlying distrust in financial institutions, can decentralized blockchain, the technological ledger that enables anonymous crypto exchange, fix it? Last but not least, why do supporters of a decentralized service, whose value lies in its existence outside traditional government structures, need to spend billions in lobbying to convince politicians, including the president, of its utility?Show Notes:Read ProMarket's archives on Bitcoin and cryptocurrency.Revisit our prior Capitalisn't episode with author Zeke Faux, The Capitalisn't of Crypto: SBF and Beyond.
In this episode of Excess Returns, we sit down with AQR founder Cliff Asness for a fascinating discussion about market efficiency, behavioral finance, and the future of quantitative investing. In this wide-ranging conversation, we explore Cliff's recent paper "The Less Efficient Market Hypothesis" and discuss why markets might actually be becoming less efficient over time, despite advances in technology – a counterintuitive but compelling argument. We dig into how social media and constant connectivity might be making markets more prone to extremes, the real impact of passive investing, and why periods of market irrationality might last longer than ever before. Cliff shares his perspective on the current market concentration in the Magnificent Seven stocks and offers insights on high-volatility alternatives from his latest paper. The conversation also covers the role of intuition in factor investing, inflation's impact on markets, and ends with Cliff's essential advice for the average investor. Throughout the discussion, Cliff brings his characteristic mix of academic rigor and practical wisdom, peppered with his unique brand of humor. Whether you're a quant enthusiast, professional investor, or just interested in understanding today's markets better, this conversation offers valuable insights from one of the industry's most influential voices. SEE LATEST EPISODES https://excessreturnspod.com FIND OUT MORE ABOUT VALIDEA https://www.validea.com FIND OUT MORE ABOUT VALIDEA CAPITAL https://www.valideacapital.com FOLLOW JACK Twitter: https://twitter.com/practicalquant LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jack-forehand-8015094 FOLLOW JUSTIN Twitter: https://twitter.com/jjcarbonneau LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jcarbonneau
Have you ever wondered how the world's top financial thinkers shaped the way we invest today? In this episode, Ben and Cameron sit down with Professor Stephen Foerster from the Ivey Business School to explore the evolution of modern investing. As a distinguished financial expert and co-author of In Pursuit of the Perfect Portfolio, Professor Foerster dives into the groundbreaking work of financial pioneers like Harry Markowitz, Bill Sharpe, Gene Fama, and others, unpacking their remarkable contributions to portfolio management, risk assessment, and market efficiency as we know it today. Tuning in, you'll gain a deeper understanding of Markowitz's revolutionary diversification theory, Sharpe's introduction of beta as a risk measure, and Fama's Efficient Market Hypothesis, as well as each of their perspectives on the “perfect portfolio,” tying together the history, theory, and practical application of modern investment strategies. Whether you're looking to sharpen your strategy or build your investment knowledge from the ground up, this conversation with Professor Foerster is packed with actionable takeaways and fascinating stories that could change the way you approach your financial future. Don't miss this opportunity to learn from the thought leaders who shaped the market! Key Points From This Episode: (0:03:29) Contrasting the historical art of investing with the modern science of investing. (0:04:44) Markowitz's diversification theory and the importance of balancing risk and return. (0:09:39) Sharpe's capital asset pricing model (CAPM) and his contribution to measuring risk. (0:16:13) Insight into Fama's Efficient Markets Hypothesis and the joint hypothesis problem. (0:19:13) The rise of factor investing and the significance of Fama-French's three-factor model. (0:23:26) Unpacking Shiller and Fama's main point of disagreement on bubbles. (0:26:50) Bogle's perfect portfolio and persistence about the index fund, despite resistance. (0:29:37) How the Black-Scholes-Merton (BSM) option pricing formula changed the world. (0:34:37) Ways that Merton contributed to portfolio theory and his take on TIPS. (0:36:20) Key takeaways from talks with Martin Leibowitz, Charlie Ellis, and Jeremy Siegel. (0:37:35) An interesting analogy for Professor Foerster's take on the “perfect portfolio.” (0:40:53) Correlation vs. causation in stock pricing and how it applies to factor investing. (0:46:38) Examples of masterly inactivity and investor lessons from Madoff's Ponzi scheme. (0:52:07) The dangers of FOMO, a SPACs cautionary tale, and lessons from value investors. (1:00:43) Winning at tennis vs. investing and risks of over-reliance on automated decisions. (1:06:02) Long-term lessons from pioneers in finance to improve investment strategies today. Links From Today's Episode: Meet with PWL Capital: https://calendly.com/d/3vm-t2j-h3p Rational Reminder on iTunes — https://itunes.apple.com/ca/podcast/the-rational-reminder-podcast/id1426530582. Rational Reminder Website — https://rationalreminder.ca/ Rational Reminder on Instagram — https://www.instagram.com/rationalreminder/ Rational Reminder on X — https://x.com/RationalRemindRational Reminder on TikTok — https://www.tiktok.com/@rationalreminder Rational Reminder on YouTube — https://www.youtube.com/channel/ Rational Reminder Email — info@rationalreminder.caBenjamin Felix — https://pwlcapital.com/our-team/ Benjamin on X — https://x.com/benjaminwfelix Benjamin on LinkedIn — https://www.linkedin.com/in/benjaminwfelix/ Cameron Passmore — https://pwlcapital.com/our-team/ Cameron on X — https://x.com/CameronPassmore Cameron on LinkedIn — https://www.linkedin.com/in/cameronpassmore/ Professor Stephen Foerster — https://stephenrfoerster.com/ Ivey Business School — https://www.ivey.uwo.ca/ Stephen Foerster on LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/in/stephen-foerster-26b85319/ Stephen Foerster on X – https://x.com/profsfoerster Stephen Foerster Books — https://www.amazon.com/stores/author/B001KDO1L0 ‘Cristiano Ronaldo snubbed Coca-Cola. The company's market value fell $4 billion.' — https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2021/06/16/cristiano-ronaldo-coca-cola/ Books From Today's Episode: In Pursuit of the Perfect Portfolio: The Stories, Voices, and Key Insights of the Pioneers Who Shaped the Way We Invest — https://www.amazon.com/dp/0691229880 Trailblazers, Heroes, and Crooks: Stories to Make You a Smarter Investor — https://www.amazon.com/dp/B0DHLVYK1Q In Pursuit of the Unknown: 17 Equations That Changed the World — https://www.amazon.com/dp/0465085989 A History of Interest Rates — https://www.amazon.com/dp/0471732834 Winning the Loser's Game: Timeless Strategies for Successful Investing — https://www.amazon.com/dp/0071813659 Stocks for the Long Run — https://www.amazon.com/dp/1264269803/ Extraordinary Tennis For The Ordinary Player — https://www.amazon.com/dp/0517511991 Papers From Today's Episode: ‘Efficient Capital Markets: A Review of Theory and Empirical Work' — https://doi.org/10.2307/2325486 ‘The Loser's Game' — https://doi.org/10.2469/faj.v31.n4.19 'The Pricing of Options and Corporate Liabilities' — https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814759588_0001
In a positive sign for investors, Tesla's return on capital employed (ROCE) has shown significant improvement, climbing to 8.4% over the past five years.(This increase indicates that the company is generating more profit from its investments. As Tesla continues to expand its capital base, understanding these trends could provide valuable insights into its future growth potential.)Also in this podcast: MCHP - Microchip Technology Inc. (NAS); DVN - Devon Energy Corp. (NYS); TEX - Terex Corp. (NYS); STWD - Starwood Property Trust Inc. (NYS); PYPL - PayPal Holdings Inc. (NAS); and a caller question on Options; also, Justin's MARKET WRAP UP, plus his topic talking points: "Efficient Market Hypothesis" and "Fed Meeting-Basis Point Cut?".Our Sponsors:* Check out Fabric: fabric.com/INVESTTALK* Check out Moorings: moorings.com* Check out eBay Auto: www.ebay.comAdvertising Inquiries: https://redcircle.com/brandsPrivacy & Opt-Out: https://redcircle.com/privacy
This week, Byrne and Erik discuss the efficiency of market hypothesis, explores the complexities of breaking up big tech companies, unpacks the intriguing dynamics of currencies from nations to video game gems and more.
Wes Gray, founder of Alpha Architect, joins the show to explore the evolution from traditional stock picking to data-driven quantitative investing. Listen now and learn: Why even a perfect stock-picking strategy can still fail during market downturns The power of factor investing and how it systematically enhances portfolio returns A critical perspective on investing in emerging markets and private equity Visit www.TheLongTermInvestor.com for show notes, free resources, and a place to submit questions. [0:30] From Stock Picker to Quant: Wes Gray's Investing Journey [8:39] The Efficient Market Hypothesis and the Reality of Active Investing [12:29] Factor Investing Explained [19:31] Why Value Investing Has Struggled [29:54] The Role of Momentum in a Portfolio [33:36] A Critical Look at Emerging Markets and Private Equity
Apr 9, 2024 – FS Insider speaks with cognitive economist Patrick Schotanus to discuss the contrast between the conventional economic view of markets (embodied by the Efficient Market Hypothesis) vs. the post-cognitive view informed by...
Dr. Burton Malkiel, author of the influential book, "A Random Walk Down Wall Street," which revolutionized how people approach investing, joined Julia La Roche on episode 142. Link: https://www.amazon.com/Random-Walk-Down-Wall-Street/dp/1324051132 0:00 Intro and welcome Dr. Burton Malkiel 1:30 Writing ‘A Random Walk Down Wall Street' 4:30 Reaction to ‘A Random Walk' 5:30 90% of active managers do worse than the index 8:14 Investing in the first index fund, and its returns 12:48 This is the way to invest 19:30 Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) 22:29 Bitcoin spot ETF, bubbles 27:18 Debunking that ETFs distort financial markets, fuel a passive investing bubble 33:40 Efficient Market Hypothesis and what the media gets wrong 38:20 View of the markets, macroeconomics 43:50 Retirement crisis ahead? 48:48 Background 50:38 Parting thoughts
The podcast team is excited to announce the McGill Artificial Intelligence Society's 3rd podcast episode of the 2023-2024 school year featuring Yves Hilpisch. Yves is the founder and CEO of The Python Quants and has written several books, including Python for Finance. In recent years, AI has been in the forefront of computational finance and algorithmic trading. As the accessibility of AI increases, building our own financial models has become easier with programming languages like Python and the support of various available libraries.In this episode, we examine AI's rise in the world of finance, exploring its applications across various facets of financial analysis. We discuss the possibility of AI models predicting market movement and what this means in terms of the Efficient Market Hypothesis. Yves also talks about the implications of AI for smaller companies as they try to compete with the bigger players in the industry, as well as impacts of the growing accessibility of individual finance and trading. The McGill AI podcast is available on Apple Podcast and Spotify.
During Preston Pysh's discussion with Allen Farrington, Allen provides critical thought experiments and challenges to many of the ideas that plague Wall Street and business schools.IN THIS EPISODE, YOU'LL LEARN:00:00 - Intro04:56 - What does the UFC have to do with economics and money?08:28 - The Efficient Market Hypothesis.19:18 - Is risk volatility?19:18 - The Capital Asset Pricing Model.31:10 - This is NOT capitalism.34:49 - The flaws in using GDP.44:21 - Thoughts on Bitcoin and derivative markets.44:21 - The societal implications of Bitcoin and beyond it's economic value.BOOKS AND RESOURCESAllen Farrington's Twitter.Allen's Website.Allen's book, Bitcoin is Venice.NEW TO THE SHOW?Check out our We Study Billionaires Starter Packs.Browse through all our episodes (complete with transcripts) here.Try our tool for picking stock winners and managing our portfolios: TIP Finance Tool.Enjoy exclusive perks from our favorite Apps and Services.Stay up-to-date on financial markets and investing strategies through our daily newsletter, We Study Markets.Learn how to better start, manage, and grow your business with the best business podcasts.Help us understand our audience better so we can create a more intentional user experience by answering this survey!SPONSORSInvest in Bitcoin with confidence. Get $5 in Bitcoin when you invest $100 with River.Invest in some of the top private, pre-IPO companies in the world with Fundrise.Reach the world's largest audience with Linkedin, the place to B2B. Plus, enjoy a $100 credit on your next ad campaign!Learn how Principal Financial can help you find the right benefits and retirement plan for your team today.Experience real language learning for real conversations with Babbel. Get 55% off your Babbel subscription today.Beat FOMO and move faster than the market with AlphaSense.Choose Toyota for your next vehicle - SUVs that are known for their reliability and longevity, making them a great investment. Plus, Toyotas now have more advanced technology than ever before, maximizing that investment with a comfortable and connected drive.Be confident that you'll be small businessing at your best with support designed to help you reach your goals. Book an appointment with a TD Small Business Specialist today.Get a customized solution for all of your KPIs in one efficient system with one source of truth. Download NetSuite's popular KPI Checklist, designed to give you consistently excellent performance for free.Start, run, and grow your business without the struggle. Be in control of every sales channel with Shopify. Sign up for a $1 per month trial period today.Reach the world's largest audience with Linkedin, the place to B2B. Plus, enjoy a $100 credit on your next ad campaign!Send, spend, and receive money around the world easily with Wise.Feed your body the nutrients it craves with Ka'Chava, an all-in-one, plant-based superblend made up of superfoods, greens, plant proteins, antioxidants, adaptogens, and probiotics! Get 10% off on your first order today!Support our free podcast by supporting our sponsors.See Privacy Policy at https://art19.com/privacy and California Privacy Notice at https://art19.com/privacy#do-not-sell-my-info.
The debate over whether or not the stock market is efficient has raged on for years. On this episode, Karl Eggerss explains what the Efficient Market Hypothesis is and whether or not it actually exists in today's stock market. Karl gives a real example that proves his case. Topics discussed on this podcast: Efficient Market Hypothesis (EMH) Stocks Real Estate Investment Trusts (REITs) IPOs For more information, go to https://www.creatingricherlives.com For suggestions or questions regarding the podcast, email info@creatingricherlives.com #efficientmarkethypothesis #EMH #stocks #investments @CAPTRUST
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Covid 12/15/22: China's Wave Begins, published by Zvi on December 15, 2022 on LessWrong. Cases increased this week, as expected. Deaths also increased, which I did not expect so soon, indicating a bigger and faster winter wave. That was not the big event in the West this week with respect to Covid. The big event this week in the West's Covid experience was a memory of events past. Patrick McKenzie wrote a very long and very worthwhile magnum opus about his efforts in VaccinateCA to get vaccine shots into arms, and what he learned about our government and public health systems along the way. If you read one thing this week, read his story. You can also read my key facts and takeaways post, and this thread with another person's remembrances (here are Patrick's takes on that). Patrick also offers his thoughts on implications for charitable efforts at the EA Forum, which includes this gem: If I had to point at any one artifact in particular, Inadequate Equilibria is a good articulation of a larger memeplex that made me comfortable with “If the evidence of a system's operation contradicts what the Efficient Market Hypothesis counsels is the probable functioning of the system, trust the evidence. Thousands of lives savable by one dedicated team of non-specialists is actually not all that low probability.” Yes. What else happened recently? China stopped attempting to contain Covid-19. They have accepted that the costs of continuing to do this are unacceptably high. Instead, they have decided they are content to contain official case numbers while they brace for the impact of the Covid surge they have successfully put off for three years. It is their turn to have trouble staffing hospitals, to have panic buying and shortages and voluntarily deserted streets. I wish them the best of luck in getting through this as best they can. Executive Summary Patrick McKenzie wrote about VaccineCA. You should read it, and remember. China is finally experiencing the Covid wave they have postponed for three years. Cases and deaths are on the rise, the winter wave is looking a bit larger. Let's run the numbers. The Numbers Predictions Predictions from Last Week: 371k cases (+5%) and 2,240 deaths (-6%). Results: 391k cases (+10%) and 2,610 deaths (+9%). Predictions for Next Week: 435k cases (+10%) and 2,900 deaths (+10%). (Note: North Dakota dumped a lot of deaths on us after reporting no deaths at all for months, so I reduced that number to something high but not impossible.) Case number came in modestly higher than expected. Compounding the expectation there makes things likely to get substantially worse than previously expected, yet still nothing at all like what we saw last winter. Deaths being up again rather than down (despite the ND adjustment), in a way I did not expect, since the timing on it seems premature, makes it that much more clear this is a real and large winter wave, and indicates that cases have likely gone up a bunch more than the numbers show, with the extra cases not being reported. Deaths Cases Physical World Modeling and Long Covid Observational study on Paxlovid in age 50+ population (paper). Results: During the study period, 12 541 (28.1%) patients were prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir, and 32 010 (71.9%) were not. Patients prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir were more likely to be older, have more comorbidities, and be vaccinated. The composite outcome of hospitalization or death occurred in 69 (0.55%) patients who were prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir and 310 (0.97%) who were not (adjusted risk ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.75]). Recipients of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir had lower risk for hospitalization (adjusted risk ratio, 0.60 [CI, 0.44 to 0.81]) and death (adjusted risk ratio, 0.29 [CI, 0.12 to 0.71]). Strange to say this might be not worth th...
Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Covid 12/15/22: China's Wave Begins, published by Zvi on December 15, 2022 on LessWrong. Cases increased this week, as expected. Deaths also increased, which I did not expect so soon, indicating a bigger and faster winter wave. That was not the big event in the West this week with respect to Covid. The big event this week in the West's Covid experience was a memory of events past. Patrick McKenzie wrote a very long and very worthwhile magnum opus about his efforts in VaccinateCA to get vaccine shots into arms, and what he learned about our government and public health systems along the way. If you read one thing this week, read his story. You can also read my key facts and takeaways post, and this thread with another person's remembrances (here are Patrick's takes on that). Patrick also offers his thoughts on implications for charitable efforts at the EA Forum, which includes this gem: If I had to point at any one artifact in particular, Inadequate Equilibria is a good articulation of a larger memeplex that made me comfortable with “If the evidence of a system's operation contradicts what the Efficient Market Hypothesis counsels is the probable functioning of the system, trust the evidence. Thousands of lives savable by one dedicated team of non-specialists is actually not all that low probability.” Yes. What else happened recently? China stopped attempting to contain Covid-19. They have accepted that the costs of continuing to do this are unacceptably high. Instead, they have decided they are content to contain official case numbers while they brace for the impact of the Covid surge they have successfully put off for three years. It is their turn to have trouble staffing hospitals, to have panic buying and shortages and voluntarily deserted streets. I wish them the best of luck in getting through this as best they can. Executive Summary Patrick McKenzie wrote about VaccineCA. You should read it, and remember. China is finally experiencing the Covid wave they have postponed for three years. Cases and deaths are on the rise, the winter wave is looking a bit larger. Let's run the numbers. The Numbers Predictions Predictions from Last Week: 371k cases (+5%) and 2,240 deaths (-6%). Results: 391k cases (+10%) and 2,610 deaths (+9%). Predictions for Next Week: 435k cases (+10%) and 2,900 deaths (+10%). (Note: North Dakota dumped a lot of deaths on us after reporting no deaths at all for months, so I reduced that number to something high but not impossible.) Case number came in modestly higher than expected. Compounding the expectation there makes things likely to get substantially worse than previously expected, yet still nothing at all like what we saw last winter. Deaths being up again rather than down (despite the ND adjustment), in a way I did not expect, since the timing on it seems premature, makes it that much more clear this is a real and large winter wave, and indicates that cases have likely gone up a bunch more than the numbers show, with the extra cases not being reported. Deaths Cases Physical World Modeling and Long Covid Observational study on Paxlovid in age 50+ population (paper). Results: During the study period, 12 541 (28.1%) patients were prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir, and 32 010 (71.9%) were not. Patients prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir were more likely to be older, have more comorbidities, and be vaccinated. The composite outcome of hospitalization or death occurred in 69 (0.55%) patients who were prescribed nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir and 310 (0.97%) who were not (adjusted risk ratio, 0.56 [95% CI, 0.42 to 0.75]). Recipients of nirmatrelvir plus ritonavir had lower risk for hospitalization (adjusted risk ratio, 0.60 [CI, 0.44 to 0.81]) and death (adjusted risk ratio, 0.29 [CI, 0.12 to 0.71]). Strange to say this might be not worth th...
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: patio11's "Observations from an EA-adjacent (?) charitable effort", published by RobertM on December 10, 2022 on LessWrong. patio11, following up on his longer-form article detailing the story of VaccinateCA (linked on LW) posts some observations of interest to the EA community, with some nods at the rationality community. Hiya folks! I'm Patrick McKenzie, better known on the Internets as patio11. (Proof.) Long-time-listener, first-time-caller; I don't think I would consider myself an EA but I've been reading y'all, and adjacent intellectual spaces, for some time now. I have minimal background in policy and public health. (The closest professionally relevant experience, and it is a stretch, is that I was the HIPAA Compliance Officer at a two person software company, so that we could sell our things to doctors/dentists as well as other businesses.) We ended up with a team of perhaps two dozen core members, and of that I would say one person had material policy experience and perhaps 2-3 had substantial professional experience adjacent to healthcare. I am unaware of anyone who worked on pandemics or public health prior to working with us. And yet we were, by a fairly considerable margin, much more effective than many similarly situated charitable and public initiatives which appear to have people who put their skill points into getting good at public health and/or policy engagement. VaccinateCA was not explicitly an EA project. I believe a few volunteers consider themselves members of your movement/community; I do not consider myself a member and do not know that to be true of any of our organizers. None of our funders, to my knowledge, would be broadly acknowledged as an "EA funder." But recent events have not been particularly kind to the brand perception of EA, and as someone who cares no small amount about brand perception but a much larger amount for the truth, I think that VaccinateCA would have been unlikely to happen but for the work of this community and some of your one-hop-out intellectual peers. (If I had to point at any one artifact in particular, Inadequate Equilibria is a good articulation of a larger memeplex that made me comfortable with "If the evidence of a system's operation contradicts what the Efficient Market Hypothesis counsels is the probable functioning of the system, trust the evidence. Thousands of lives savable by one dedicated team of non-specialists is actually not all that low probability.") Highly recommend reading the article in full, as well as the EA forum post. Thanks for listening. To help us out with The Nonlinear Library or to learn more, please visit nonlinear.org.
Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: patio11's "Observations from an EA-adjacent (?) charitable effort", published by RobertM on December 10, 2022 on LessWrong. patio11, following up on his longer-form article detailing the story of VaccinateCA (linked on LW) posts some observations of interest to the EA community, with some nods at the rationality community. Hiya folks! I'm Patrick McKenzie, better known on the Internets as patio11. (Proof.) Long-time-listener, first-time-caller; I don't think I would consider myself an EA but I've been reading y'all, and adjacent intellectual spaces, for some time now. I have minimal background in policy and public health. (The closest professionally relevant experience, and it is a stretch, is that I was the HIPAA Compliance Officer at a two person software company, so that we could sell our things to doctors/dentists as well as other businesses.) We ended up with a team of perhaps two dozen core members, and of that I would say one person had material policy experience and perhaps 2-3 had substantial professional experience adjacent to healthcare. I am unaware of anyone who worked on pandemics or public health prior to working with us. And yet we were, by a fairly considerable margin, much more effective than many similarly situated charitable and public initiatives which appear to have people who put their skill points into getting good at public health and/or policy engagement. VaccinateCA was not explicitly an EA project. I believe a few volunteers consider themselves members of your movement/community; I do not consider myself a member and do not know that to be true of any of our organizers. None of our funders, to my knowledge, would be broadly acknowledged as an "EA funder." But recent events have not been particularly kind to the brand perception of EA, and as someone who cares no small amount about brand perception but a much larger amount for the truth, I think that VaccinateCA would have been unlikely to happen but for the work of this community and some of your one-hop-out intellectual peers. (If I had to point at any one artifact in particular, Inadequate Equilibria is a good articulation of a larger memeplex that made me comfortable with "If the evidence of a system's operation contradicts what the Efficient Market Hypothesis counsels is the probable functioning of the system, trust the evidence. Thousands of lives savable by one dedicated team of non-specialists is actually not all that low probability.") Highly recommend reading the article in full, as well as the EA forum post. Thanks for listening. To help us out with The Nonlinear Library or to learn more, please visit nonlinear.org.
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: What's the Deal with Elon Musk and Twitter?, published by Zvi on November 7, 2022 on LessWrong. At the end of long saga well-covered in hilarious fashion by Matt Levine, Elon Musk has purchased Twitter. He then began doing things. One of them was to tweet ‘fresh baked bread and pastries are some of the great joys of life.' On that I hope we can all agree. His other decisions were less obviously great. More of a mixed bag. The response by many news sources and also individuals has been that everything is The Worst and a giant dumpster fire and what he has done will destroy Twitter, and is so much worse than we expected, oh no. While it is true that the details have not exactly covered Musk in glory, it all also seems like the kind of thing those same sources would say no matter what. One can assume that everything that happens is being intentionally framed to make it look as bad as possible for Twitter and Musk. Any blame that can be assigned will be, etc. While looking at what is happening, one can also usefully look at the coverage of what is happening. Notice how media sources describe events. That tells you how they describe events in these spots, and how you should expect them to in the future. So I decided to gather up the things I've seen since Elon bought the place, and my thoughts on them, and try to put them into a semi-coherent format. Here you go. Oh Elon One of Musk's first actions was to fire a bunch of top Twitter executives ‘for cause' which if it stuck (which it won't) would allow him to avoid tens of millions in severance payments. And by some weird coincidence Musk finished the transaction exactly in time to fire a bunch of Twitter employees right before a bunch of their stock options trigger. If anyone involved was surprised by these moves, that is on them. By now, it should be clear that Musk has zero interest in honoring laws or norms or contracts when dealing with people unless he likes them, and that his approach to the law is ‘make me.' It also should be clear Musk has zero interest in stopping, before showing zero interest in honoring norms or his contracts or laws, to ask what would happen next, or wonder whether he will inevitably lose the resulting lawsuits. He did not ‘think things through' when trying to get out of buying Twitter. He is not about to start now. That is not how this type of thinking works. People are rightly drawing parallels to Trump's ‘blatantly violate contracts and no-pay people all the time and dare them to sue you' except they think that ‘do it to rich people who will obviously sue you' makes it somehow different. Trump also gets sued all the time and has for decades. Sometimes it is a surprise – he thought this person would not sue and they sued anyway. Sometimes it is very much not a surprise. Doesn't matter. Once you have the ‘do it anyway' algorithm running, it does not get a filter for ‘they will sue you and win in this case.' I have known about this phenomenon for a long time because my father once worked for such a person, who would never pay their bills because what are you going to do, sue me? Worst case you force me to pay the bill. I have since encountered others. It is unfortunate that such systems often succeed in business. It is clear that they often do. Firing the Rest of the Staff Elon wants to reduce Twitter's head count a lot. This has highlighted that a lot of SV/VC types have the thesis that headcounts in tech companies are drastically too high. For example, here's Paul Graham: A common response is that this violates the Efficient Market Hypothesis or other versions of ‘corporations wouldn't be systematically making big mistakes.' Which to me is Obvious Nonsense, of course they would if there are dynamics leading to that and it is the default path. That doesn't make it easy to do something about i...
Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: What's the Deal with Elon Musk and Twitter?, published by Zvi on November 7, 2022 on LessWrong. At the end of long saga well-covered in hilarious fashion by Matt Levine, Elon Musk has purchased Twitter. He then began doing things. One of them was to tweet ‘fresh baked bread and pastries are some of the great joys of life.' On that I hope we can all agree. His other decisions were less obviously great. More of a mixed bag. The response by many news sources and also individuals has been that everything is The Worst and a giant dumpster fire and what he has done will destroy Twitter, and is so much worse than we expected, oh no. While it is true that the details have not exactly covered Musk in glory, it all also seems like the kind of thing those same sources would say no matter what. One can assume that everything that happens is being intentionally framed to make it look as bad as possible for Twitter and Musk. Any blame that can be assigned will be, etc. While looking at what is happening, one can also usefully look at the coverage of what is happening. Notice how media sources describe events. That tells you how they describe events in these spots, and how you should expect them to in the future. So I decided to gather up the things I've seen since Elon bought the place, and my thoughts on them, and try to put them into a semi-coherent format. Here you go. Oh Elon One of Musk's first actions was to fire a bunch of top Twitter executives ‘for cause' which if it stuck (which it won't) would allow him to avoid tens of millions in severance payments. And by some weird coincidence Musk finished the transaction exactly in time to fire a bunch of Twitter employees right before a bunch of their stock options trigger. If anyone involved was surprised by these moves, that is on them. By now, it should be clear that Musk has zero interest in honoring laws or norms or contracts when dealing with people unless he likes them, and that his approach to the law is ‘make me.' It also should be clear Musk has zero interest in stopping, before showing zero interest in honoring norms or his contracts or laws, to ask what would happen next, or wonder whether he will inevitably lose the resulting lawsuits. He did not ‘think things through' when trying to get out of buying Twitter. He is not about to start now. That is not how this type of thinking works. People are rightly drawing parallels to Trump's ‘blatantly violate contracts and no-pay people all the time and dare them to sue you' except they think that ‘do it to rich people who will obviously sue you' makes it somehow different. Trump also gets sued all the time and has for decades. Sometimes it is a surprise – he thought this person would not sue and they sued anyway. Sometimes it is very much not a surprise. Doesn't matter. Once you have the ‘do it anyway' algorithm running, it does not get a filter for ‘they will sue you and win in this case.' I have known about this phenomenon for a long time because my father once worked for such a person, who would never pay their bills because what are you going to do, sue me? Worst case you force me to pay the bill. I have since encountered others. It is unfortunate that such systems often succeed in business. It is clear that they often do. Firing the Rest of the Staff Elon wants to reduce Twitter's head count a lot. This has highlighted that a lot of SV/VC types have the thesis that headcounts in tech companies are drastically too high. For example, here's Paul Graham: A common response is that this violates the Efficient Market Hypothesis or other versions of ‘corporations wouldn't be systematically making big mistakes.' Which to me is Obvious Nonsense, of course they would if there are dynamics leading to that and it is the default path. That doesn't make it easy to do something about i...
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: All the posts I will never write, published by Self-Embedded Agent on August 14, 2022 on LessWrong. This post has been written for the first Refine blog post day, at the end of the week of readings, dicussions, and exercises about epistomology for doing good conceptual research. (/with courtesy to Adam Shimi who suggested the title and idea. ) Rationality, Probability, Uncertainty, Reasoning Failures of The Aumann Agreement Theorem The famous Aumann Agreement Theorem states that rational reasoners can never agree-to-disagree. In day-to-day life we clearly have many situations where rational reasoners cannot agree-to-disagree. Are people just bad rationalist or are there more fundamental reasons that the Aumann Agreement Theorem can fail. I review all the ways in which the Aumann Agreement Theorem can fail that I know of - including failures based on indexical information, computational-complexity obstacles, divergent-interpretations-of-evidence, Hansonian non-truth-seeking and more. Warren Buffet: The Alpha of Wall Street If we observe a trader that consistenly beat the market that should be evidence against the Efficient Market Hypothesis. A trader could also just have been lucky. How much should we update against the EMH and how much should we expect the trader to beat the market in the future? Can we quantify how much information the market absorbed? This is very reminiscent of Wows Bayesian surprise in Bayesian statistics. The Bid-Ask Spread and Epistemic Uncertainty/ Prediction Markets as Epistemic Fog of War If you know A will resolve you should buy shares on A, if you know not A will happen you should buy shares on not A. If you think A will not resolve you should sell shares on A. The Bid-ask Spread measures bet resolution uncertainty Suppose an adversary has an interest in showing you A and t. There is a -> selective reporting When an earnings call come in.. bid-ask spread increases. Where Forecasting goes Wrong... Forecasting is now a big deal in the rationalist community. I argue that a slavish adherence to Bayesian Orthodoxy leads to missing most of the value of prediction markets. What do we mean when we talk about Probability? Possibility theory is prior to Probability Theory. Probability theory is possibility theory + Cournot's principle. Cournot's principle that an epsilon/zero probability possible event will never happen is the fundamental principle of probability theory. cf Shafer on history of Cournot's principle. But what happens when we observe a epsilon/zero probability event? We obtain a contradiction requiring belief revision. Wow!1! I made a productive mistake An exposition of 'Bayesian Surprise attract Human Attention', focused on the notion of 'Bayesian surprisal' measured in wows. There has been a ton of interest in Predictive Processing and Friston's Free Energy Principle. The discussion is often hampered by equivocation between different quantitites that are the log of something. This post will try to clearly disambiguate between these notions and give both mathematical and intuitive explanations. I argue that the notion of a 'productive mistake' can be formalized as the choice to engage with a high wow high entropy source. Compare risk-seeking behaviour in MaxCausalEnt and Schmidthuber's Artificial Curiosity? Foundations of Reasoning Atocha Aliseda's Axioms of Abduction A book review of Aliseda's underappreciated 'Abductive Reasoning'. From SEP: In the philosophical literature, the term “abduction” is used in two related but different senses. In both senses, the term refers to some form of explanatory reasoning. However, in the historically first sense, it refers to the place of explanatory reasoning in generating hypotheses, while in the sense in which it is used most frequently in the modern literature it refers to the place of explan...
Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: All the posts I will never write, published by Self-Embedded Agent on August 14, 2022 on LessWrong. This post has been written for the first Refine blog post day, at the end of the week of readings, dicussions, and exercises about epistomology for doing good conceptual research. (/with courtesy to Adam Shimi who suggested the title and idea. ) Rationality, Probability, Uncertainty, Reasoning Failures of The Aumann Agreement Theorem The famous Aumann Agreement Theorem states that rational reasoners can never agree-to-disagree. In day-to-day life we clearly have many situations where rational reasoners cannot agree-to-disagree. Are people just bad rationalist or are there more fundamental reasons that the Aumann Agreement Theorem can fail. I review all the ways in which the Aumann Agreement Theorem can fail that I know of - including failures based on indexical information, computational-complexity obstacles, divergent-interpretations-of-evidence, Hansonian non-truth-seeking and more. Warren Buffet: The Alpha of Wall Street If we observe a trader that consistenly beat the market that should be evidence against the Efficient Market Hypothesis. A trader could also just have been lucky. How much should we update against the EMH and how much should we expect the trader to beat the market in the future? Can we quantify how much information the market absorbed? This is very reminiscent of Wows Bayesian surprise in Bayesian statistics. The Bid-Ask Spread and Epistemic Uncertainty/ Prediction Markets as Epistemic Fog of War If you know A will resolve you should buy shares on A, if you know not A will happen you should buy shares on not A. If you think A will not resolve you should sell shares on A. The Bid-ask Spread measures bet resolution uncertainty Suppose an adversary has an interest in showing you A and t. There is a -> selective reporting When an earnings call come in.. bid-ask spread increases. Where Forecasting goes Wrong... Forecasting is now a big deal in the rationalist community. I argue that a slavish adherence to Bayesian Orthodoxy leads to missing most of the value of prediction markets. What do we mean when we talk about Probability? Possibility theory is prior to Probability Theory. Probability theory is possibility theory + Cournot's principle. Cournot's principle that an epsilon/zero probability possible event will never happen is the fundamental principle of probability theory. cf Shafer on history of Cournot's principle. But what happens when we observe a epsilon/zero probability event? We obtain a contradiction requiring belief revision. Wow!1! I made a productive mistake An exposition of 'Bayesian Surprise attract Human Attention', focused on the notion of 'Bayesian surprisal' measured in wows. There has been a ton of interest in Predictive Processing and Friston's Free Energy Principle. The discussion is often hampered by equivocation between different quantitites that are the log of something. This post will try to clearly disambiguate between these notions and give both mathematical and intuitive explanations. I argue that the notion of a 'productive mistake' can be formalized as the choice to engage with a high wow high entropy source. Compare risk-seeking behaviour in MaxCausalEnt and Schmidthuber's Artificial Curiosity? Foundations of Reasoning Atocha Aliseda's Axioms of Abduction A book review of Aliseda's underappreciated 'Abductive Reasoning'. From SEP: In the philosophical literature, the term “abduction” is used in two related but different senses. In both senses, the term refers to some form of explanatory reasoning. However, in the historically first sense, it refers to the place of explanatory reasoning in generating hypotheses, while in the sense in which it is used most frequently in the modern literature it refers to the place of explan...
BRT Rebalance w/ Barry Ritholtz: Best of Investing 2022 - BRT S03 EP29 (128) 7-3-2022 Things We Learned This Week Masters of Business Podcast Qs - Who are your mentors? Philosophy? What books are you reading? Advice to graduates? What do you wish you knew 30 years ago? Three Keys to Being an Investor: Process, Behavior, Humility Recession Signs to look For – States Expanding or Detracting, Sahm Rule on unemployment uptick, Yield Curve – is it inverted? Guest: Barry Ritholtz ABOUT BARRY RITHOLTZ & MASTERS IN BUSINESS Bloomberg Opinion columnist Barry Ritholtz looks at the people and ideas that shape markets, investing and business. Barry Ritholtz has spent his career helping people spot their own investment errors and to learn how to better manage their own financial behaviors. He is the creator of The Big Picture, often ranked as the number one financial blog to follow by The Wall Street Journal, New York Times, and others. Barry is the creator and host of Bloomberg's Masters in Business radio podcast, and a featured columnist at the Washington Post. He is the author of Bailout Nation: How Greed and Easy Money Corrupted Wall Street and Shook the World Economy (Wiley, 2009). In addition to serving as Chairman and Chief Investment Officer of Ritholtz Wealth Management, he is also on the advisory boards of Riskalyze, and Peer Street, two leading financial technology startups bringing transparency and analytics to the investment business. Barry has named one of the "15 Most Important Economic Journalists" in the United States, and has been called one of The 25 Most Dangerous People in Financial Media. When not working, he can be found with his wife and their two dogs on the north shore of Long Island. https://www.bloomberg.com/podcasts/series/master-in-business https://ritholtzwealth.com/ NOTES: Masters of Business podcast inspiration – On a plane watching finance news, interview of reclusive Hedge Fund Manager. Who are your mentors? Philosophy? What books are you reading? Advice to graduates? What do you wish you knew 30 years ago? Three key things Process – ability to distinguish between skill and luck. Like in sports at high levels in investment industry – differences are minimal. ARK Cathy Wood in 2020. Behavior – how to manage and stay calm, control limbic system, work through bad market. Humility – acknowledge serendipity and luck in life, could have worked differently. Gates not the first to be offered IBM deal. Other tech entrepreneurs visited Xerox Parq Jobs master of design, even on back of machine where no one looks. Inflation Hawks screaming for 15 years, finally right Three signs of Recession – good indicators: States – amount in expansion or contraction . Number of states growing or declining - % all 50 expanding. Philly Federal – State Coincident Indexes (get ink) hard to have recession when all states doing well. Sahm Rule – unemployment uptick .75 basis points in three month period from prior lows, unemployment mid 2022 is good. FRED – St. Louis Fed monitors indicator (get ink) Yield Curve – is it inverted? How long, how deep, careful for false positive data. Bonds interest rates long term higher than short term bonds, inverted when S/T rates higher than L/T. Six months is forever in economy, recession looks unlikely. 2023 – all bets off. Never know what disruption can occur, like Russia invading Ukraine. Outlook for the Knicks to make the Playoffs? Knicks will be good when they get new ownership who invests in the product. Need good quantitative analysis like how they acquired players in the heyday of the 1990s. Look at the turnaround of the NY Mets with Steve Cohen buying the team recently. Best of Investing 2022 Seg. 2 of BRT S03 EP03 (102) 1-16-2022 – BRT - Retirement & Income Planning from SEP IRA, 401K, to Roth IRA + Tax Brackets to Buckets Retirement & Income Planning Qualified Plans: ie - 401K & Roth IRA SEP IRA for business owners, can defer 25% of income if setup correctly Tax Brackets - tiered system of 10%, then 12%, 22% up to 35% - with more income, pushed into higher bracket and you pay more Tax Buckets (3) - Taxed (W2 income), Tax Deferred (401K, IRA), Tax Free (Roth IRA, Life Insurance) Denver Nowicz, President - Wealth For Life http://wealthforlife.net/ https://twitter.com/denvernowicz Denver is an advisor with nearly 20 years experience working with clients in investments and insurance, designing retirement plans with a combo of both. He takes us through different strategies for clients to get the best allocations for their money over the long term. It is the Combo Strategy of both Offense and Defense, the synergy of the mix, not ‘All or Nothing'. FULL SHOW: HERE More Info on WFL and Tax Free Matching: HERE Wealth For Life Topic: https://brt-show.libsyn.com/category/Wealth+For+Life Link to Taxes Show on 10/31/2021 w/ Denver: Here https://brt-show.libsyn.com/category/Wealth+For+Life+ Seg. 2 of BRT S03 EP07 (106) 2-13-2022 – The Science of Hitting (TSOH) & Investing w/ Alex Morris FULL SHOW: HERE https://brt-show.libsyn.com/brt-s03-ep07-106-2-13-2022-the-science-of-hitting-tsoh-investing-w-alex-morris The Science of Hitting (TSOH) comes from the Ted Williams baseball book on batting and strike zone observations: ie – he tracked his average in each zone of the batter box, and had a higher average when he swung at pitches in a certain zone TSOH Investment Philosophy is Value Investing, classic Graham / Buffet style – buy high quality co's w/ good mgmt, L/T trends, and a Moat - Buffet quote: Investing is a game with no called strikes…can just wait for your pitch Long Term Investment Horizon – looking 5 to even 10 years out, for earnings and sales growth Key Value Drivers for a stock - Earnings Growth & quality of earnings, Price & Sale increases, ‘volume growth' P/E Type Metrics & GAAP Accounting is helpful but may not be useful with R&D, future sales, and volume growth. Example: Netflix – analyze cash expenditures vs. financials which have improved , what are the L/T – trends Guest: Alex Morris, TSOH Investment Research Blog - https://thescienceofhitting.com/p/my-investment-philosophy LKIN - https://www.linkedin.com/in/alex-morris-cfa-47b87027/ Twitter - https://twitter.com/TSOH_Investing Alex Morris, CFA publishes equities research through the TSOH Investment Research Service on Substack. He has written investment related articles on Gurufocus and worked in the finance industry (RIA's) for the past 10+ years. He is a CFA® charterholder and graduated with my MBA from the University of Florida in April 2015. Prior to starting his TSOH service, he spent ten years as an Equity Analysts at financial firms. Seg. 2 of BRT S03 EP17 (116) 4-24-2022 – Money for the Rest of Us w/ David Stein FULL SHOW: HERE https://brt-show.libsyn.com/brt-s03-ep17-115-4-24-2022-money-for-the-rest-of-us-w-david-stein Investment vs. Speculation vs. Gambling: You must understand the difference and recognize which camp the product you're considering is in The three drivers of asset class performance: These all relate to cash and earnings, cash flow, cash flow growth and change in valuation, and how each impacts the future price of an asset class The Efficient Market Hypothesis vs Adaptive Market Hypothesis: which combines behavioral finance w/ EMH Wayfinding: An alternative to traditional rebalancing of asset allocation - use current market conditions to help evaluate where you should increase / decrease your exposure, depending on how the asset is doing currently Modern Portfolio Theory vs. The Asset Garden Approach when adjusting asset allocation, focused on diversification between return drivers - Like landscaping, there are rules of thumb, but there's freedom to create and build the portfolio. And it's much easier to make changes. Guest: David Stein, Money for the Rest of Us https://www.linkedin.com/in/jdstein/ https://moneyfortherestofus.com/ https://moneyfortherestofus.com/about/ Book: https://moneyfortherestofus.com/how-to-invest-book/ David Stein's Bio: David helps individuals become better and more confident investors through his writing, audio, and video. He hosts the personal finance podcast Money For the Rest of Us. The show reaches more than 40,000 listeners per episode and has over 10 million downloads. The podcast has received mention from The New York Times, Forbes, The Chicago Tribune, and the U.S. News and World Report. David also provides investment insights and model portfolios to 1,000 members of the Money For the Rest of Us Plus community. David Stein author of Money for the Rest of Us 10 Questions to Master Successful Investing Prior to launching the podcast, David was Chief Investment Strategist and Chief Portfolio Strategist at Fund Evaluation Group, LLC, a $33 billion investment advisory firm. Seg. 2 of 4/3/2022 – Options vs Stocks & Trading vs Investing w Tom Sosnoff of tastytrade FULL SHOW: HERE https://brt-show.libsyn.com/brt-s03-ep14-113-4-3-2022-options-vs-stocks-trading-vs-investing-w-tom-sosnoff-of-tastytrade Implied Volatility & Time Decay – options begins with volatility, on a clock so Mechanics (forget mind set) on how to setup a trade is key tastytrade is a media network based on Math (Probability & Statistics - Look at the Math), trading & focus on markets Limited Profitability & Unlimited Risk when you Sell Puts w/ 80% chance of success - Be a Seller of Options – let Market beat you, slight edge Trade Small, Trade Often - Law of Large Numbers w/ 45 DTE Strike Price of 1 SD – Exit or Roll at 21 DTE Options Trading Teaches Life Lessons – Important to: take risks, learn to take risks, make quick decisions, be decisive about those decisions. Guest: Tom Sosnoff of tastytrade https://www.tastytrade.com/ https://twitter.com/tastytrade Tom Sosnoff, founder and co-CEO of tastytrade Tom Sosnoff is an online brokerage innovator and financial educator. Tom is a serial entrepreneur who co-founded thinkorswim in 1999, tastytrade in 2011, tastyworks in 2017, helped to launch the award- winning Luckbox Magazine in 2019, and in 2020 he created the first new futures exchange in 20 years, The Small Exchange. Leveraging over 20 years of experience as a CBOE market maker, Tom is driven by the passion to educate self-directed investors. A true visionary, after his years on the floor he saw the need to build and design superior software platforms and brokerage firms that specialized in complex financial strategies. Seg.2 of BRT S03 EP22 (122) 5-29-2022 – The One Thing w/ Jay Papasan of Keller Williams Realty FULL SHOW: HERE https://brt-show.libsyn.com/brt-s03-ep22-122-5-29-2022-the-one-thing-w-jay-papasan-of-keller-williams-realty The One Thing – Power of Focus, Find your 1 thing - Live Purposefully & be Accountable Dominos - Priority in Latin = First, what is your first Domino? knock it down and all others lined up will fall Time Block - Focus Time the first few hours of each day, 'Battleground' - fight to block out this time Success has a Roadmap – it leaves clues, Modeling & Develop Habits in Life, Bus & Real Estate Investing Productivity Thieves - Learn to Say No, pick tasks carefully, Multitasking is a Waste of Time Guest: Jay Papsan, VP of Keller Williams Realty https://the1thing.com/ https://www.jaypapasan.com/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/jaypapasan/ https://twitter.com/jaypapasan https://kw.com/ Jay Papasan is a bestselling author and serves as vice president and executive editor at Keller Williams Realty Inc, the world's largest real estate company. He is also co-owner and co-founder of several successful businesses, including Keller INK, Keller Capital, and, alongside his wife Wendy, Papasan Properties Group in Austin, Texas. When Jay first moved to Austin, he joined Keller Williams Realty Inc, and soon began working directly with the founder, Gary Keller. In 2003, he co-authored The Millionaire Real Estate Agent alongside Gary Keller and Dave Jenks. Clips from BRT S03 EP11 (110) 3-13-2022 – 401K – Turns Spenders into Savers w/ Jean Smart of Penelope & Ted Benna ‘Father of the 401K' FULL SHOW: HERE https://brt-show.libsyn.com/brt-s03-ep11-110-3-13-2022-401k-turns-spenders-into-savers-w-jean-smart-of-penelope-ted-benna-father-of-the-401k 401K turns Spenders into Savers 401K provides Tax Deferral now, lowers Taxable Income Penelope serves Microbiz, business of 5 – 50 employees who are underserved by major financial institutions Simplify choices, and streamline the 401K process, reduce fees so all size business can participate Ted Benna – Father of the 401K, 401K may not be appropriate to all people or business, choose 401K or IRA based on needs & size of business Guests: Jean Smart, Founder of Penelope https://www.penelope.co/ https://www.linkedin.com/company/penelopeco Jean Smart is the Founder/CEO. She has overseen the building of a cloud based recordkeeping system from scratch and they have begun to take on clients. I have helped them shape what they are offering using what I have learned working with small businesses. Their goal is to help micro female and minority owned businesses pick the right plan - not just a plan. Guests: Ted Benna, Benna 401K http://benna401k.com Ted Benna, Father of the 401K, has worked in pension and retirement benefits industry for 60 years, and literally wrote the book on the 401K. He was a pioneer in the early 80s in designing the early 401K Plans, and then getting them approved by the IRS to be the model still used today. Books: 401K Forty Years Later (2018) – history of the 401K 401K & IRA for Dummies Updated Version (2021) Ted Benna 1st appearance on BRT Podcast in 8/2021 Topic: Ted Benna, the Father of the 401k Covers It All, History, pensions, Fees & More Full Show: HERE ‘Best Of' Topic: https://brt-show.libsyn.com/category/Best+of+BRT Investing Topic: https://brt-show.libsyn.com/category/Investing-Stocks-Bonds-Retirement More 'Best of Investing': Here Thanks for Listening. Please Subscribe to the BRT Podcast. Business Roundtable with Matt Battaglia The show where Entrepreneurs, High Level Executives, Business Owners, and Investors come to share insight and ideas about the future of business. BRT 2.0 looks at the new trends in business, and how classic industries are evolving. Common Topics Discussed: Business, Entrepreneurship, Investing, Stocks, Cannabis, Tech, Blockchain / Crypto, Real Estate, Legal, Sales, Charity, and more… BRT Podcast Home Page: https://brt-show.libsyn.com/ ‘Best Of' BRT Podcast: Click Here BRT Podcast on Google: Click Here BRT Podcast on Spotify: Click Here More Info: https://www.economicknight.com/podcast-brt-home/ KFNX Info: https://1100kfnx.com/weekend-featured-shows/ Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed in this program are those of the Hosts, Guests and Speakers, and do not necessarily reflect the views or positions of any entities they represent (or affiliates, members, managers, employees or partners), or any Station, Podcast Platform, Website or Social Media that this show may air on. All information provided is for educational and entertainment purposes. Nothing said on this program should be considered advice or recommendations in: business, legal, real estate, crypto, tax accounting, investment, etc. Always seek the advice of a professional in all business ventures, including but not limited to: investments, tax, loans, legal, accounting, real estate, crypto, contracts, sales, marketing, other business arrangements, etc.
While many are only hearing about prediction markets for the first time, for near a decade, anonymous trader Domer (@Domahhhh) has been at the frontier of profiting from outcomes of unknown future events. Political and economic matters are Domer's specialty, although he doesn't shy away from the rather abstract events either—for example; trading on the outcome of Britney Spear's conservatorship and the Suez Canal obstruction! Now at a point where he's netting PnL of several hundred thousand dollars a year (across multiple exchanges), much of Domer's winnings are due to his ability to garner an information edge and rejection of the Efficient Market Hypothesis. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
Our guest this week is Dr. Andrew Lo. Dr. Lo is the Charles E. & Susan T. Harris Professor, a professor of finance, and the director of the Laboratory for Financial Engineering at the MIT Sloan School of Management. His current research spans five areas, including evolutionary models of investor behavior and adaptive markets, systemic risk, and financial regulation, among others. Dr. Lo has published extensively in academic journals and authored a number of books including In Pursuit of the Perfect Portfolio, which he cowrote with Stephen Foerster. He has received numerous awards for his work and contributions to modern finance research throughout his career. He holds a bachelor's in economics from Yale University and an AM and Ph.D. in economics from Harvard University.BackgroundBioIn Pursuit of the Perfect Portfolio: The Stories, Voices, and Key Insights of the Pioneers Who Shaped the Way We Invest, by Andrew W. Lo and Stephen R. FoersterAdaptive Markets: Financial Evolution at the Speed of Thought, by Andrew W. LoHistory“Thirty Maidens of Geneva,” the Tontine Coffee-House, thetch.blog.com, Aug. 5, 2019.“Why 18th Century Swiss Bankers Bet on the Lives of Young Girls,” by Stephen Foerster, sfoerster-5338.medium.com, Sept. 2, 2021.John Maynard KeynesBenjamin GrahamHarry MarkowitzHarry MarkowitzModern Portfolio TheoryWhat Is a Gunslinger? William F. SharpeWilliam F. SharpeWhat Is the Sharpe Ratio?Capital Asset Pricing Model (CAPM)“Keynes the Stock Market Investor: A Quantitative Analysis,” by David Chambers, Elroy Dimson, and Justin Foo, papers.ssrn.com, Sept. 26, 2013.Eugene F. FamaEugene FamaWhat Is the Efficient Market Hypothesis?“Algorithmic Models of Investor Behavior,” by Andrew Lo and Alexander Remorov, eqderivatives.com, 2021.“In Pursuit of the Perfect Portfolio: Eugene Fama,” Interview with Andrew Lo and Eugene Fama, youtube.com, Dec. 15, 2016.“Why Artificial Intelligence May Not Be as Useful or as Challenging as Artificial Stupidity,” by Andrew Lo, hdsr.mitpress.mit.edu, July 1, 2019.John C. Bogle John Bogle Cost Matters HypothesisCharles D. EllisCharley EllisGreenwich Associates“Charley Ellis: Why Active Investing Is Still a Loser's Game,” The Long View podcast, Morningstar.com, May 27, 2020.Other“7 Principles to Help You Create Your Perfect Portfolio,” by Robert Powell, marketwatch.com, Nov. 10, 2021.
Patrick Ruffini has been on the cutting edge of politics for 20+ years, as one of the first wave of operatives working in the tech and digital political space. After working at the RNC in 2004, he started an early political tech firm and then formed Echelon Insights to merge political data and tech. In this conversation, Patrick talks his career trajectory, the advancement of digital political tools, and how American politics has evolved in the age of Donald Trump.IN THIS EPISODE…Patrick's unusual bi-national upbringing…Patrick starts following politics at a very early age…A young Patrick on the cutting edge of the political boom on the internet…Patrick's 1998 correspondence with Karl Rove…Patrick's stint at the RNC in 2004….Patrick breaks down the tech impact of the Obama 2008 campaign…Patrick starts his own digital firm Engage…The importance of the 2012 GOP “autopsy” report on Patrick's career…Patrick starts Echelon Insights with GOP pollster Kristen Soltis Anderson…Patrick's advice on how to balance reliance on polling vs analytics…What Patrick has learned about social media listening…Patrick's dissection about the recent populist direction of the Republican Party…Patrick talks of Glenn Youngkin-type candidates as the future of the GOP…Patrick's take on the recent reduced racial polarization in the electorate…Patrick previews a book he's working on that outlines a rising cross-racial coalition of the Republican Party…Patrick talks some of the new measurement tools he's excited about…AND base politics, Joe Biden, blaming the internet, Blue State Digital, Scott Brown, George H.W. Bush, George W. Bush, Eric Cantor, the center-right blogosphere, Mike Connell, Howard Dean, Chuck DeFeo, Becki Donatelli, Efficient Market Hypothesis, Facebook, Mindy Finn, governing agendas, Don Green, Mickey Kaus, John Kerry, Josh Marshall, John McCain, mybarackobama.com , RCTs, relational organizing, Mitt Romney, snake oil, Andrew Sullivan, the War on Terror, & more!
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is The Methods of Rationality, Part 1: Chapter 4: The Efficient Market Hypothesis, published by Eliezer Yudkowsky. Disclaimer: J. K. Rowling is watching you from where she waits, eternally in the void between worlds. A/N: As others have noted, the novels seem inconsistent in the apparent purchasing power of a Galleon; I'm picking a consistent value and sticking with it. Five pounds sterling to the Galleon doesn't square with seven Galleons for a wand and children using hand-me-down wands. "World domination is such an ugly phrase. I prefer to call it world optimisation." Heaps of gold Galleons. Stacks of silver Sickles. Piles of bronze Knuts. Harry stood there, and stared with his mouth open at the family vault. He had so many questions he didn't know where to start. From just outside the door of the vault, Professor McGonagall watched him, seeming to lean casually against the wall, but her eyes intent. Well, that made sense. Being plopped in front of a giant heap of gold coins was a test of character so pure it was archetypal. "Are these coins the pure metal?" Harry said finally. "What?" hissed the goblin Griphook, who was waiting near the door. "Are you questioning the integrity of Gringotts, Mr. Potter-Evans-Verres?" "No," said Harry absently, "not at all, sorry if that came out wrong, sir. I just have no idea at all how your financial system works. I'm asking if Galleons in general are made of pure gold." "Of course," said Griphook. "And can anyone coin them, or are they issued by a monopoly that thereby collects seigniorage?" "What?" said Professor McGonagall. Griphook grinned, showing sharp teeth. "Only a fool would trust any but goblin coin!" "In other words," Harry said, "the coins aren't supposed to be worth any more than the metal making them up?" Griphook stared at Harry. Professor McGonagall looked bemused. "I mean, suppose I came in here with a ton of silver. Could I get a ton of Sickles made from it?" "For a fee, Mr. Potter-Evans-Verres." The goblin watched him with glittering eyes. "For a certain fee. Where would you find a ton of silver, I wonder?" "I was speaking hypothetically," Harry said. For now, at any rate. "So... how much would you charge in fees, as a fraction of the whole weight?" Griphook's eyes were intent. "I would have to consult my superiors..." "Give me a wild guess. I won't hold Gringotts to it." "A twentieth part of the metal would well pay for the coining." Harry nodded. "Thank you very much, Mr. Griphook." So not only is the wizarding economy almost completely decoupled from the Muggle economy, no one here has ever heard of arbitrage. The larger Muggle economy had a fluctuating trading range of gold to silver, so every time the Muggle gold-to-silver ratio got more than 5% away from the weight of seventeen Sickles to one Galleon, either gold or silver should have drained from the wizarding economy until it became impossible to maintain the exchange rate. Bring in a ton of silver, change to Sickles (and pay 5%), change the Sickles for Galleons, take the gold to the Muggle world, exchange it for more silver than you started with, and repeat. Wasn't the Muggle gold to silver ratio somewhere around fifty to one? Harry didn't think it was seventeen, anyway. And it looked like the silver coins were actually smaller than the gold coins. Then again, Harry was standing in a bank that literally stored your money in vaults full of gold coins guarded by dragons, where you had to go in and take coins out of your vault whenever you wanted to spend money. The finer points of arbitraging away market inefficiencies might well be lost on them. He'd been tempted to make snide remarks about the crudity of their financial system... But the sad thing is, their way is probably better. On the other hand, one competent hedge fundie could probably own the whole w...
Link to original articleWelcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is The Methods of Rationality, Part 1: Chapter 4: The Efficient Market Hypothesis, published by Eliezer Yudkowsky. Disclaimer: J. K. Rowling is watching you from where she waits, eternally in the void between worlds. A/N: As others have noted, the novels seem inconsistent in the apparent purchasing power of a Galleon; I'm picking a consistent value and sticking with it. Five pounds sterling to the Galleon doesn't square with seven Galleons for a wand and children using hand-me-down wands. "World domination is such an ugly phrase. I prefer to call it world optimisation." Heaps of gold Galleons. Stacks of silver Sickles. Piles of bronze Knuts. Harry stood there, and stared with his mouth open at the family vault. He had so many questions he didn't know where to start. From just outside the door of the vault, Professor McGonagall watched him, seeming to lean casually against the wall, but her eyes intent. Well, that made sense. Being plopped in front of a giant heap of gold coins was a test of character so pure it was archetypal. "Are these coins the pure metal?" Harry said finally. "What?" hissed the goblin Griphook, who was waiting near the door. "Are you questioning the integrity of Gringotts, Mr. Potter-Evans-Verres?" "No," said Harry absently, "not at all, sorry if that came out wrong, sir. I just have no idea at all how your financial system works. I'm asking if Galleons in general are made of pure gold." "Of course," said Griphook. "And can anyone coin them, or are they issued by a monopoly that thereby collects seigniorage?" "What?" said Professor McGonagall. Griphook grinned, showing sharp teeth. "Only a fool would trust any but goblin coin!" "In other words," Harry said, "the coins aren't supposed to be worth any more than the metal making them up?" Griphook stared at Harry. Professor McGonagall looked bemused. "I mean, suppose I came in here with a ton of silver. Could I get a ton of Sickles made from it?" "For a fee, Mr. Potter-Evans-Verres." The goblin watched him with glittering eyes. "For a certain fee. Where would you find a ton of silver, I wonder?" "I was speaking hypothetically," Harry said. For now, at any rate. "So... how much would you charge in fees, as a fraction of the whole weight?" Griphook's eyes were intent. "I would have to consult my superiors..." "Give me a wild guess. I won't hold Gringotts to it." "A twentieth part of the metal would well pay for the coining." Harry nodded. "Thank you very much, Mr. Griphook." So not only is the wizarding economy almost completely decoupled from the Muggle economy, no one here has ever heard of arbitrage. The larger Muggle economy had a fluctuating trading range of gold to silver, so every time the Muggle gold-to-silver ratio got more than 5% away from the weight of seventeen Sickles to one Galleon, either gold or silver should have drained from the wizarding economy until it became impossible to maintain the exchange rate. Bring in a ton of silver, change to Sickles (and pay 5%), change the Sickles for Galleons, take the gold to the Muggle world, exchange it for more silver than you started with, and repeat. Wasn't the Muggle gold to silver ratio somewhere around fifty to one? Harry didn't think it was seventeen, anyway. And it looked like the silver coins were actually smaller than the gold coins. Then again, Harry was standing in a bank that literally stored your money in vaults full of gold coins guarded by dragons, where you had to go in and take coins out of your vault whenever you wanted to spend money. The finer points of arbitraging away market inefficiencies might well be lost on them. He'd been tempted to make snide remarks about the crudity of their financial system... But the sad thing is, their way is probably better. On the other hand, one competent hedge fundie could probably own the whole w...
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: Limits of Current US Prediction Markets (PredictIt Case Study), published by aphyer on the LessWrong. (Disclaimers: I work in the financial industry, though not in a way related to prediction markets. Anything I write here is my opinion and not that of my employer. This is a US-centric piece based on a case study of PredictIt: as some people have pointed out in the comments below, if you are outside the US you may have substantially better options.) SECTION I: INTRODUCTION So there's an argument that I've seen a lot over the past few years, particularly in LW-adjacent circles, that goes something like this: You say you believe X is likely to happen. But prediction markets say X is likely not to happen. Since markets are efficient, you must be wrong. Or if you do know better than the market, why aren't you rich? Since you haven't bet on that market to make free money, you must be lying. Or stupid. Or both! This post is dedicated to disagreeing with that argument, not from an anti-Efficient-Market Hypothesis position, but from a pro-Efficient-Market Hypothesis position. My position is: The argument above is pretty much sound if we are discussing mainstream financial markets. If someone claims to have better information than a mainstream financial market on the value of Google stock, or of copper, they ought to either use this knowledge to make a huge amount of money or stop talking about it. However, it is not true if we are discussing prediction markets. Current prediction markets are so bad in so many different ways that it simply is not surprising for people to know better than them, and it often is not possible for people to make money from knowing better. I've been meaning to write this for a while, but got tipped over the edge by the recent post here, which talks about the limitation of prediction markets being the correlation of the events they predict to other assets, and their consequent value as hedging instruments. That is...well...it's not wrong exactly, but there are so many other problems that are so much bigger that I felt it was worth laying (some of) them out. Math follows. I will be focusing on PredictIt for this analysis. Other prediction markets may work a bit differently, but similar analysis is applicable to any of them. If you think the math is wrong I am happy to discuss/make changes, but I very much doubt any changes will materially alter the final message. As of this writing PredictIt has Donald Trump at 40% to win the election (or, to put it another way, you can pay 40 cents for a share that pays out $1 if Trump wins). Suppose you think he is more/less likely to win. How likely/unlikely does it need to be for Trump to win for you to make money (in expectation)? Or, to put it another way, what range of probabilities for Trump to win are consistent with the prediction market values? SECTION II: REASONABLY SIMPLE PROBLEMS 1: Spread. This is only a small problem, but it is non-zero. PredictIt will sell me 'Donald Trump wins' shares for 40 cents, but will sell me 'Donald Trump loses' shares for 61 cents (which, from a finance perspective, works out very similarly to letting me sell 'Donald Trump wins' shares for 39 cents). So if I think there is a 39.5% chance of Trump winning, there is no way for me to make money off of it: I can buy 'Trump wins' shares for 40 cents, or sell them for 39 cents, and if the true value is 39.5 cents both of these will lose me money. The range of possible probabilities for which you cannot make money starts at 39-40%. 2: Transaction Fees. PredictIt charges a 10% fee on profits (see). As far as I can tell, it does not net profits against losses before calculating these fees. That is to say, if I make two $100 bets at even odds, win one, and lose the other, PredictIt will charge me a $10 fee on my winnings on the bet I ...
Welcome to The Nonlinear Library, where we use Text-to-Speech software to convert the best writing from the Rationalist and EA communities into audio. This is: The EMH Aten't Dead, published by Richard Meadows on the LessWrong. Cross-posting from my personal blog, but written primarily for Less Wrong after recent discussion here. There are whispers that the Efficient-Market Hypothesis is dead. Eliezer's faith has been shaken. Scott says EMH may have been the real victim of the coronavirus. The EMH states that “asset prices reflect all available information”. The direct implication is that if you don't have any non-available information, you shouldn't expect to be able to beat the market, except by chance. But some people were able to preempt the corona crash, without any special knowledge! Jacob mentioned selling some of his stocks before the market reacted. Wei Dai bought out-of-the-money 'put' options, and took a very handsome profit. Others shorted the market. These people were reading the same news and reports as everyone else. They profited on the basis of public information that should have been priced in. And so, the EMH is dead, or dying, or at the very least, has a very nasty-sounding cough. I think that rumours of the death of efficient markets have been greatly exaggerated. It seems to me the EMH is very much alive-and-kicking, and the recent discussion often involves common misunderstandings that it might be helpful to iron out. This necessarily involves pissing on people's parade, which is not much fun. So it's important to say upfront that although I don't know Wei Dai, he is no doubt a brilliant guy, that Jacob is my favourite blogger in the diaspora, that I would give my left testicle to have Scott's writing talent and ridiculous work ethic, that Eliezer is a legend whose work I have personally benefited from greatly, etc. But in the spirit of the whole rationality thing, I want to gently challenge what looks more like a case of 'back-slaps for the boys' than a death knell for efficient markets. First: how the heck did the market get the coronavirus so wrong? The Great Coronavirus Trade Lots of people initially underreacted to COVID-19. We are only human. But the stockmarket is not only human—it's meant to be better than this. Here's Scott, in A Failure, But Not of Prediction: The stock market is a giant coordinated attempt to predict the economy, and it reached an all-time high on February 12, suggesting that analysts expected the economy to do great over the following few months. On February 20th it fell in a way that suggested a mild inconvenience to the economy, but it didn't really start plummeting until mid-March – the same time the media finally got a clue. These aren't empty suits on cable TV with no skin in the game. These are the best predictive institutions we have, and they got it wrong. But. this isn't how it went down. As AllAmericanBreakfast and others pointed out in the comments, the market started reacting in the last week of February, with news headlines directly linking the decline to the ‘coronavirus'. By the time we get to mid-March, we're not far off the bottom. (You can confirm this for yourself in a few seconds by looking at a chart of the relevant time period.) EDIT: Scott has explained his rationale here. Although I still think his version of events is incorrect as phrased, I want to make it clear I am not accusing him of deliberately massaging the data or any other such shenanigans, and the next paragraph about revisionist history etc was only meant to be a general observation about how people responded. My apologies to Scott for the unclear wording, as well any perceived slight against his very good reputation. For whatever reason, COVID-19 seems to be a magnet for revisionist history and/or wishful thinking. In other comments under the same post, the notion that people from our ‘tribe' did especially well also comes under serious question—in fact, it looks like many of the names ...
A young Harry learns of the Wizarding economy and makes a few withdrawals. Harry Potter and the Methods of Rationality was written by Eliezer Yudkowsky as a work of fan-fiction inspired by J.K. Rowling's Harry Potter series, and as a means to promote rational thinking.
In this episode, Trishul and Aaron discuss the academic research that has informed investing strategies over the past 90 years. Value & Momentum, Modern Portfolio Theory, Efficient Market Hypothesis, Factor Analysis, Asset Allocation, and more. They cover everything you need to know to sound intelligent with your investment club. But the big picture is that all this knowledge won't increase your odds of beating the market. Even though many of these breakthroughs resulted in Nobel Prizes, as more investors flooded to adopt cutting-edge strategies, superlative returns became ever more elusive. It turns out some of these winning approaches do work some of the time, as theory would suggest. However, none of them work with sufficient consistency. Furthermore, it's likely impossible to identify the periods when a strategy will work as intended. In the end, you may be better off finding something better to do with your time and money than trying to outsmart the market.Episode ReferencesMMS #2. Buying stocks can be fun, but don't fall into these common traps.MMS #21. Why the VIX is useless.Investing Forever - Why investing in one thing over another?Investing Forever - Efficient Market HypothesisModern Portfolio TheoryIdiosyncratic RiskBenjamin GrahamCapital Asset Pricing ModelFama French Three-Factor ModelSetting the Record Straight on Asset AllocationMomentum InvestingModern Portfolio Theory vs Behavioral FinanceWarGames (1983)ObsoletedRemain Solvent (Quote)Value and Momentum EverywhereFlash Boys by LewisPodcast Description Welcome to The Mind Money Spectrum Podcast where your hosts Aaron Agte and Trishul Patel go beyond traditional finance questions to help you explore how to use your money to achieve the freedom you want in life. Aaron is a Financial Planner from the Bay Area, and Trishul is a Wealth Manager on the East Coast. For more information about Aaron, check out GraystoneAdvisor.com. And for more information on Trishul check out InvestingForever.com. We thank you all for listening, and stay tuned for our latest episode on our website, MindMoneySpectrum.com.
The Efficient Market Hypothesis argues that stock markets are rational - they take into account all relevant information, and incorporate it in an unbiased way. This talk will present evidence that stock prices are instead driven by human psychology. The market overreacts to some types of information yet underreacts to others; it is driven by emotions rather than purely economic fundamentals. The lecture gives profitable trading strategies that investors can use to exploit these biases.A lecture by Alex Edmans 22 SeptemberThe transcript and downloadable versions of the lecture are available from the Gresham College website: https://www.gresham.ac.uk/lectures-and-events/market-psychologyGresham College has been giving free public lectures since 1597. This tradition continues today with all of our five or so public lectures a week being made available for free download from our website. There are currently over 2,000 lectures free to access or download from the website.Website: http://www.gresham.ac.uk Twitter: http://twitter.com/GreshamCollege Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/greshamcollege Instagram: http://www.instagram.com/greshamcollege
The question is are you a gambler focused on speculation, or are you an investor harnessing the power of the market? In this episode we dig into the question of speculation and link it back to the Efficient Market Hypothesis. Enjoy the show!
"In other words, Bitcoin already has little monetary inflation, which will drop even further." - Dominik Stroukal Because I love discussion of markets, prices, and the EMH, I couldn't avoid one last article before the halving arrives. With another interesting take from the SatoshiLabs blog from first time on the show author, Diminik Stroukal, we get a breakdown of how to think about the halving, the stock to flow model, and predicting the future of Bitcoin. Plus, an unavoidable Guy's Rant to follow
As a follow up to Nic Carter's excellent breakdown of the efficient market hypothesis, and PlanB's piece addressing the market's evaluation of the risks in Bitcoin, I go through the reasons I feel the market both is very unwilling and unconfident about the consequences of the halving, and therefore sees it not as "known information," but more a blind gamble. For diving deeper into the many topics and works that I brought up, here are the links of all those I remembered: • Nic Carter's "Introduction to the Efficient Market Hypothesis" https://anchor.fm/thecryptoconomy/episodes/CryptoQuikRead_343---Introduction-to-the-Efficient-Market-Hypothesis-for-Bitcoiners-Nic-Carter-eac03b • PlanB's "Efficient Markets and Bitcoin's Stock-to-Flow" https://anchor.fm/thecryptoconomy/episodes/CryptoQuikRead_344---Efficient-Markets--Bitcoins-Stock-to-Flow-PlanB-eaco0i • Hayek's "Use of Knowledge in Society" [Part 1 & 2] https://anchor.fm/thecryptoconomy/episodes/CryptoQuikRead_250---Use-of-Knowledge-in-Society-Part-1---F--A--Hayek-e43pfj https://anchor.fm/thecryptoconomy/episodes/CryptoQuikRead_251---Use-of-Knowledge-in-Society-Part-2---F--A--Hayek-e444k0 • Parker Lewis's "Bitcoin is Not Backed by Nothing" https://anchor.fm/thecryptoconomy/episodes/CryptoQuikRead_335---Bitcoin-is-Not-Backed-by-Nothing-Parker-Lewis-e9v1rs • Hoppe's "Yield From Money Held Reconsidered" https://anchor.fm/thecryptoconomy/episodes/CryptoQuikRead_122---The-Yield-From-Money-Held-Reconsidered-e2ndqn • Conner Brown's "Bitcoin Has No Intrinsic Value, & That's Great!" https://anchor.fm/thecryptoconomy/episodes/CryptoQuikRead_249---Bitcoin-Has-No-Intrinsic-Value---Thats-Great--Conner-Brown-e43bcm Don't forget to grab your tickets to BitBlockBoom and use the offer code CC for a 30% discount! https://bitblockboom.com/ --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/bitcoinaudible/message
"So is the halving “priced in” or will it be a catalyst for appreciation? [...] I consider it patently absurd that a change in issuance would have been overlooked by the price-setting entities." - Nic Carter You are definitely gonna want to hear Nic's incredibly thorough argument as to why in this article! Breaking down the EMH, its origins, the many different iterations of the concept, & how best to frame it in the context of a real world market; Nic gives us another excellent work that is a must listen for all Bitcoiners. Don't forget to drop some applause on the original article below, and follow Nic on Twitter! https://medium.com/@nic__carter/an-introduction-to-the-efficient-market-hypothesis-for-bitcoiners-ed7e90be7c0d --- Send in a voice message: https://podcasters.spotify.com/pod/show/bitcoinaudible/message
Hello, welcome to episode 28 of The Bitcoin Game. I'm Rob Mitchell. When I scheduled an interview with CoinCube CEO Robert Allen, I felt pretty skeptical. My gut told me a cloud-based Bitcoin-trading-bot would be something like a cloud-mining Ponzi-scheme on steroids. I wondered, would this interview be my first exposé? Would my "gotcha" questions be too difficult for Robert to field? Listen to find out! 7/19/16 UPDATE: For the sake of being informative, the gains in my CoinCube-traded account to date are about 50% of the gains had I simply bought and hold Bitcoin in this account. CoinCube's Wave algorithm attempts to avoid bear markets by selling BTC, but my sense is it frequently misses price spikes this way. So, this first experimentation with a Bitcoin trading bot has been a disappontment so far. Of course, past performance is never a guarantee of future results (or everyone would be rich). MAGIC WORD Stay tuned for the magic word in this episode, and submit it to your LTB Network account to claim a share of this week's distribution of LTBCoin. Listeners have one week from the release date to claim the magic word credit. The magic word for this episode must be submitted by 3:00 p.m. Pacific time on October 29, 2015. SPONSOR While much of Bitcoiners' time is spent in the world of digital assets, sometimes it's nice to own a physical representation of the virtual things you care about. For just the price of a cup of coffee or two (at Starbucks), you can own your own Classic Bitcoin Keychain or the new Bitcoin Fork Pen. http://bkeychain.com http://bitcoinforks.com SHOW LINKS CoinCube http://coincube.io CoinCube Performance History Chart https://coincube.io/performance Gold Rehypothecation (article) http://www.zerohedge.com/news/2015-04-24/rehypothecation-gold-and-why-it-matters Naked Shorting (Naked Short Selling) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naked_short_selling Trend Following https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trend_following Moving Average https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moving_average Whipsaw Effect http://www.investopedia.com/terms/w/whipsaw.asp Efficient-Market Hypothesis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Efficient-market_hypothesis Edward Thorp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edward_O._Thorp Market Maker https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Market_maker Fooled By Randomness, by Nassim Nicholas Taleb http://amzn.to/1Mc9suV Monte Carlo Simulator https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monte_Carlo_method MUSIC All the music in this episode of The Bitcoin Game was created by me! If you're curious, the music was created in GarageBand (by Apple), Animoog (by Moog Music), and Figure (by Propellerhead). Please contact me if you'd like more info about any music you hear on the podcast. STAY IN TOUCH https://Twitter.com/TheBTCGame http://TheBitcoinGame.com Rob@TheBitcoinGame.com Thanks for listening! Bitcoin tip address: 1G8HDg5EsPQpamKYS2bDya9Riv9xv1nVo5 The Bitcoin Game box art was created from an illustration by Rock Barcellos.
© 2020-2025 Ivy Podcast Discovery LLC
