From ignorance to entry, many retail investors eventually embarked on the route of technical stock trading.
But most people will experience a hurdle, that is, the more technology is learned, the more they lose.
You might have bought the wrong stock and lost 20-30% in a few months, but now you can lose 20-30% in a week.
Of course, technology won't make you lose all at once, and you'll make a little money once in a while.
But overall, on the way to learning, the more you lose, the more you lose, and you will drift farther and farther away.
As a result, some people will feel that learning technology in stocks is too nonsense, as if it is useless at all.
Actually, it's not that technology is useless.
And most retail investors have learned skills, but they don't know how to do it.
The technical theory seems simple, just a few words, but in practice, it is a very tortuous road.
A lot of people learn technology by reading some books, some graphics.
This method is very one-sided, because the excerpts in the book are all successful cases, but there are no failure cases.
In reality, there are not a few cases of technical failure, and many times your buying and selling points are just in the case of technical failure.
In other words, there are some ways for the main force to use technology to defraud other funds to take over.
Technology is a double-edged sword.
Or the truth is that there are also high-level and low-level technologies, and high-level technologies have begun to cut the leeks of low-level technologies.
There are many technical situations, and the technology itself is also a very demanding thing, and many conditions need to be met to show effectiveness.
Let's tell some truth about technology.
First, the larger the amount of funds, the more effective the technical aspects.
The situation of one yang changing three views often happens.
That is, technically, many things will change due to changes in the market in 1-2 days.
However, these cases are limited to the scope of small funds.
For stocks that trade tens of millions of dollars every day, it's normal for anything to happen.
Because a small amount of capital can change the technical form in the short term, the original technical side will naturally become invalid.
But the entire market, such as the index, is very difficult to change, or there is no capital to dare to change.
The index is the result of all funds working together, and funds can only follow the trend of the index.
Therefore, the accuracy of many technologies specializing in the study of indices is significantly greater than that of individual stocks.
Second, technology is subordinated to the market, and money is everything.
There is an Achilles' heel in the use of technology by retail investors, which is to find reasons for technology.
For example, the technology has broken down, but I always feel that the performance is good, and there is a reason to rise.
There is indeed a situation of deception in the breaking of the technology, but if it cannot be recovered in 2-3 days, it is an effective break.
Technology itself must be subordinated to the market, and it is the final choice of funds, not the result of imagination.
For example, a listed company has a thunderous performance, and it is irreversible.
No matter how good the technical form is, it will be changed in an instant and start to go downhill.
Funds are the boss in this market, and technical graphics are drawn by these funds.
Therefore, technology itself is a result, and capital is the original cause that determines everything.
Third, suddenness cannot change the trend.
In technology, there is an absolute focus called trends.
There are some sudden situations that cannot shake the trend.
Because the trend is a large amount of money piled up, overriding the short-term technology.
Unless it is some irreversible bearishness, the main force will not be willing to deliberately change the direction of its trading.
The trend itself is also a trading technique.
It refers to a kind of potential energy formed by funds, which will not change due to short-term fluctuations.
The reason why this potential energy is effective is that the trend itself is the superposition of technology, and it is the direction in which the money is formed after the game.
And suddenness, which means that all the funds are not prepared, and their trading methods, trading methods, are temporary.
The temporary strategy itself, after a brief divergence, will form a unity again and continue to follow the trend.
Fourth, the longer the cycle, the stronger the effectiveness of the technology.
Technology should be matched with the cycle to complement each other.
The shorter the technology, the higher the probability of failure.
Because the longer the cycle, the slower the money will work, and it is unlikely to go the other way.
Breakthroughs at the weekly and monthly levels must be more reliable than breakthroughs at the daily level.
The short-term technology is easy to be deceptive due to unexpected factors and the deliberate washing of the main force.
However, the main washing will not be aimed at long cycles, such as weekly and monthly lines, which will be too difficult and too costly.
Therefore, the uncertainty of short-term technology can be compensated for by extending the cycle.
Or do technical hedging through the law of the cycle to achieve a certain amount of technical arbitrage.
The technology itself is a matter of probability, and looking for the effectiveness of the technology with a high probability is the only thing to do.
Fifth, there must be flaws in the man-made technical side.
Many technical things are artificial, deliberate, and not the combined force of the market.
There must be flaws in this kind of technical stuff.
It's like, if the funds will not be taken at a high level, they must want to distribute at a high level.
It must not only show signs of capital entering the market, but also pull up the stock price, attract followers, and ship.
The main force is so busy, it will definitely be reflected in the technical aspect.
If the amount of energy is insufficient, it will deliberately make up the amount.
If the follower is insufficient, it will oscillate repeatedly, and pull out the long white candlestick to attract.
If no one takes over, they will pull up the first line, and then desperately smash the market, and distribute chips through retail investors.
All kinds of artificial technical aspects will eventually have distortions and deformations, and this is the key to refract the intentions of some funds.
Look at the chart, but also look at the financial intent behind the chart.
The best way and method is to learn technology from practice and summarize technical experience.
The deliberate knowledge in books is not ineffective, but happens in a specific situation.
The stock market repeats many rules, but there are subtle changes between rules and rules.
The graphics are the same, the amount of energy is different, and the situation is different.
The graphics are the same, the amount of energy is the same, but the stages are different, and the results are still different.
If you can't decipher the true intentions of the main force from the technical graphics, then everything is in vain, because what you see is a dead thing.
Any technical graphics are manipulative.
Technology is dead, people are alive, so the outcome is uncertain.
Why is it necessary to divide positions when the amount of funds is large, because there will always be situations beyond cognition.
Risk control is also a very important part of stock trading technology, but retail investors do not have sufficient understanding of it.
With the blessing of half-understood technology, it is almost impossible to go far.
Only after a long period of technical precipitation and market baptism can it be possible to obtain a good return on investment with the assistance of technology.