Stocks are not a math problem.

Recently, someone asked me if it was a science student who had an advantage over a liberal arts student who traded stocks.

For a moment, I really didn't know how to answer.

This question seems to be like that, but it doesn't seem to be like that.

I have been sensitive to numbers since I was a child, and I studied science, but I don't think this is necessarily related to whether I have a talent for stock trading.

I have seen many masters in the stock market, and their logical thinking skills are not strong, and they are not good at calculation, but this does not seem to affect their investment and making money at all.

I have thought about similar problems before, and the conclusion is actually the same, stocks are not math problems.

First of all, many people feel that there are many things in mathematics that explain stocks.

For example, probability.

There are odds for profit and loss, and this bet is the same.

Theoretically, as long as the probability is calculated, through the law of large numbers, and a large number of stocks are bought, you can achieve a profit.

Some quantitative strategies, edited into programmatic transactions, can eventually obtain excess returns through the probability of the model running.

But if it's really a math problem, then there is a standard solution.

Once the capital capacity of a set of strategies is too large, it will eventually become ineffective, and there will be no solution.

Another example is technical indicators.

All the data on the technical indicators are defined by the data and finally converted.

But all technical indicators have loopholes, and there are no tried-and-true technical indicators.

On the one hand, because the technical indicators are backward, on the other hand, because funds can artificially interfere with the technical indicators by making fake K-lines, fake trading volumes, etc.

Therefore, mathematics itself constructs stocks, but there is no way to finally give a standard solution to the direction of stocks.

Because everything is ultimately in the hands of money, not mathematical formulas.

How you want to write the formula here is completely up to the will of the funds.

But the money itself, even if it has absolute control, is careful to write the so-called formula.

Because what is more important in the stock market than control is human nature, that is, opponents.

Stocks are a problem of chips, not a math problem, nor a one-sided funding problem.

Because, it is possible that there is money that cannot buy stocks, and there are also possibilities that there are stocks that cannot be sold.

All transactions require a counterparty.

Stocks are not exactly a zero-sum game, but they are essentially a zero-sum game.

To put it simply, even if the stock goes up and does not fall again, it is because the follow-up funds have redefined the price of the stock after the zero-sum game.

The essence of buying and selling is to pay money with one hand and deliver goods with the other, which is reciprocal.

This means that the essence of stock speculation is to constantly find opponents.

Those who hold stocks for a long time just think that in the future there will be opponents who will continue to buy their shares at higher prices, and that's it.

So, your opponent may not be in the present, but in the future.

This is the essence of stocks, the game of money.

And the essence of the game is human nature.

The problem that money thinks about every day is not a math problem at all.

It is neither a technical indicator, nor a valuation calculation, nor a space calculation, but the reason for others to take over, which is how to buy low and sell high.

Our so-called logic, money is thinking about every day.

They think about how to tell a story realistically, and then be able to attract people to take it.

Even if it is a long-term investment, it is a value investment, and it is also looking for reasons and reasons to tell stories.

Because there are a lot of things you don't talk about, and no one knows about them at all.

No matter how good the performance is, there will be four announcements a year, so how to make money in the rest of the time after more than 240 trading days?

Short-term games, long-term games, and ultimately games.

Technical graphics, technical indicators, performance, orders, all kinds of positive and negative, have finally become tools for the game.

You say, can these things be calculated through mathematics, through numbers?

We all know that the golden section is the most widely used and most effective in the universe.

Why is the golden section so effective in the stock market?

There are some questions that you really have to figure out, but they are actually not that difficult.

We all know that the famous Mona Lisa is painted with the golden ratio, and people will naturally feel that this painting is beautiful.

In the stock market, the same is true for candlestick graphics.

The K-line under the golden ratio has a unique aesthetic magic.

The K-line that conforms to the golden ratio is also the easiest to attract funds to do the game together, or to take over together.

This confirms the saying that the main force will always let you see what he wants you to see.

And the reason why the technology is effective is also because of the capital bureau, so that you can see the signal he sent and help him go to the city together.

When sucking chips at the bottom, the main force will make the graphics as ugly as possible, and the more unexpected the better.

Because his purpose is to take the chips, not to pick up the cheap chips for you, the more hidden the better.

Why are there so few tactics that teach you to copy the bottom?

Why are there so few mathematical formulas for bottom-copying?

A sentence that there is no bottom for the fall, in fact, it is fake, there must be a bottom, but there is no complete law for the fall, and there is no calculation formula, everything depends on the main force to build a position and layout.

In the stock market, many so-called theories just can't be verified and falsified.

Therefore, all kinds of so-called tactics are mostly foolish in the end, and there are very few who can make money in actual combat.

Because a truly excellent method can be implemented into a strategy, and all strategies, once they enter programmatic trading, will fall into the cycle of failure again.

So what is the end point of stock trading?

The end point is actually relatively simple, using the timing of the bottom to defeat the vast majority of games.

The higher the tier, the better the odds of winning.

It may be a mouthful, but it's easy to understand.

The key to making money in stocks is to find a relative low in the market and a relative low in individual stocks, buy it and start waiting.

"If you're lucky", you may buy it and the stock price will start to rise.

If the "luck" is not good, after a while, the stock price will still rise.

The essence of this trading method is that it has given up the game and avoided the sickle of the main force.

The main force will never play with patient capital, because the time period is too long.

More often, the main force welcomes the lock-up of patient capital, which is equivalent to helping him buy a part of the chips and reduce the pressure to pull up.

When you trade in a way that is out of the hands of the main force, you are not far from success.

Of course, there is also a small group of people, there is another way.

He has certain talents for figuring out the main way of trading and completing anti-human trades.

Then through short-term trading, you can achieve quick profits and even get rich.

But the proportion of retail investors is a minority after all, and most retail investors can only follow the first way to make money in the market.