股海一粟的博客
投資是一門藝術，投資是一所永遠的學校。股海一粟第一次接觸到股票還是在1988年，那時候上海隻有老八股，沒有正規的交易所。。。那一年股海一粟隻有10歲。
正文
昨天看CNBC, Maria提到在周二Dow大漲300多點以後，Equity Mutual Funds的Inflow創下近期最高，達到10個多Billion。 想想也真的挺有意思，在一個多月前市場大跌的時候每天都聽說有多少個Billion的 Money Move Out of the Market。幾乎每個投資者都知道Buy Low and Sell High的道理，但到了實際當中很多人的舉動卻恰恰相反。也許這就是股市吧。。。
不少朋友通過Email或通過qqh問我該不該買或是賣某一個股票，要不要在這個價位追等等。我想借這一篇股市人生作一下說明。首先，無論是股票還是其他投資，其實本質上都是一個搏概率的問題。從某種意義上來說，它和賭博當中的博大小沒什麽區別。所以可以說每次我Enter一個Position的時候，我已經有了思想準備，那就是50%的可能性我是錯的。當然如果錯了我會用止損來作保護。其次，沒有什麽人可以對大勢或是某一個股票的短線行為持續的作出準確的預測。注意一點，這裏我強調“持續”二字。什麽叫做持續？一年，兩年都不能算。所以我不是很讚成盲目的Follow別人的Advice。最後一點，每一個人的操作風格都不一樣。拿我自己來說，我很少會在一個價位上全部建倉，而是一般會先試探一下，然後再分批進入。同樣在拋一個股票的時候，我也會分作幾段來操作。而這些操作的Timing很重要，我也不太可能在第一時間馬上通知每一個Follower，所以我在這裏希望這些朋友能夠諒解。
還是回到2003年。這一年的故事有很多，我也就回憶到哪裏就寫到哪裏。這一年的5，6月間我做了一個小的Research，那就是把道瓊斯指數從創立起的1896年到2003年每一天的Daily Movement作一個分析，具體來說就是Focus那些Daily Movement在2%以上的日子，然後找出原因。前後大概整整花了一個月的時間，收獲也頗多。通過這個研究，我得出一個結論，基本上人類曆史上可以發生的事幾乎都發生過了，換句話說將來很難有一個Event能夠真正Shock市場。為什麽這麽說呢？這一百多年Dow的曆史覆蓋了兩次世界大戰，一次長達４０多年的冷戰，一次經濟大蕭條和多次的經濟衰退；另外還包括了很多突發的危機，包括大地震，總統遇刺，古巴導彈危機，恐怖主義襲擊等等。要讓我再想的話，可能也就是核戰爭和外星人入侵還沒有發生過吧。不過那也不是很要緊了，因為真的發生的話估計整個人類文明也就到此為止，也不需要什麽證券市場了。
在０３年結束之前我又接連讀了幾本書。有的時候我在想，可能隨著歲月的增長人是會產生惰性的，我記得當年我可以一周讀一本，然後一年讀十幾本，當然消化的如何那是另外一回事。但現在我卻一年讀不了幾本，而且往往會給自己找各種各樣的借口。 不過即使是在２００３年，有一本書我卻是讀了放下，放下後再讀，前後花了大概３，４個月，最後才勉強翻完，這本書就是Charles R. Geisst的“Wall Street: A History。這本書從１８世紀Hudson River邊上的橡膠樹寫起，一直寫到２０世紀末的八十年代為止。它介紹了美國的資本市場是如何從無到有，從無序到規範。不過這本書
涉及的人物和事件實在太多（也難為了作者要在一本書裏麵講２００年的故事），讀起來實在是非常乏味。所以我隻能說，那些真正有誌於研究華爾街曆史的
人可以找來讀一下。
很多剛開始涉足股票市場的人或遲或早都會經曆過一段崇拜技術分析的歲月。 我可能是一上來受老巴的影響比較深吧，一直到０３年底才開始對技術分析產生興趣。那一段時間我把BigCharts上幾乎每一個技術指標的來龍去脈都研究了一下（它上麵有介紹每一個指標是如何設參數，如何計算出來的，有興趣的朋友可以去做點研究），然後就是BackTesting。幾乎每一個指標我都用１０個以上的個股或是指數來做Test。結論是沒有一個Single指標是Reliable的（說這話可能會得罪一些喜歡TA的朋友，這裏先賠罪了），至少是從統計的角度來說。除此之外，幾乎所有的指標都可以做出來，因為道理很簡單，很多參數還是有辦法人為控製的，隻是對大盤股來說比較困難一點罷了。不過在研究技術分析的時候，我還是注意到了Volume是一個相對來說比較Reliable的指標。而且從每日的Tape當中確實可以感覺到一些價格和量之間的關係。 為了驗證這一說法，我特意去找了一本老古董書，Humphrey Bancroft Neill的Tape Reading and Market Tactics。 這本寫於１９３１年的書堪稱Tape Reading中的經典，讀的時候會有一種曆史的沉重感，因為很多書上列出的股票都已經不存在了。不過讓我感到驚奇的是居然７０多年前的技巧放到今天仍然適用。看來有些東西是永遠不會變的。
２００３年結束的時候，我給自己算了一筆帳，一共盈利６３％多一點。不算太壞－相比大盤的２３％的漲幅而言。但總是覺得自己那一年的操作當中還是有很多不足。所以在０４年的１月我給自己寫了一篇０３年的小節If Only We had Learned these earlier...。到今天看來當中不少
lessons還是適用的。我在此就把原文給登出來和大家Share....(未完待續）
附：
If only we had learned these earlier…
------Jan 25, 2004
Highlights in this special report:
We believe that investing is a life-long journey. No investor can claim that he or she has
mastered everything about investing, not even Warren Buffet, although he is no doubt much more experienced than most of us. Learning lessons and keeping those lessons in mind is certainly a very good way to improve our future performance. Here are some most noticeable
cases in 2003.
Case One:
Claim: if a company performs badly mainly because of its captain, a replacement usually can boost the company and its stock.
Example 1: Time Warner’s
The honeymoon between Time Warner and AOL has finally come to an end. AOL co-founder Steve Case handed out his chairman title, so did company’s vice chairman, Ted Turner( what a sad story, even Fortune magazine wrote an editorial “Gone with the Wind” about this generous gentleman). But investors of TWX probably don’t care that much. Why should they? The company’s stock has risen more than 80% since two co-founders left the company.
Example 2: McDonald’s
You probably still remember those days that you could get a “Big Mac” for $.99. Not any more. The “burger war” among McDonald’s, Wendy’s and Burger King is certainly brutal. Customers might be the only beneficiary from this war. What a turnaround story! Ever since Jim Cantalupo replaced its previous CEO, the company has posted 10 consecutive months of same-store growth in the past 11 months. Stock price? You got it. Even facing possibilities of Mad Cow disease, the company’s stock has more than doubled since its low last March.
Conclusion:
This rule certainly is not a panacea. However, if you have a reason to believe that the original CEO has to go before the company can experience a turnaround, then it may not be a bad bet. IBM’s previous CEO Louis V. Gerstner is another such legend. How about the story in Motorola? We still need more time to see if Edward J. Zander’s replacement of Galvin will work out in a nice way. But it is very possible that once we have figured that out, the stock price has already moved a long way.
Case Two:
Claim: if a company’s stock has been depressed so much because of some external events, the stock price will rebound to its starting point once such events have been solved.
Example 1: American Airlines (AMR)
This is definitely a case that should be written into MBA’s textbook. At the beginning of 2003, the airline industry seemed to be doomed. USA airlines declared bankruptcy. Then came a bigger shock to the industry. The second largest carrier United Airlines also filed for Chapter 11. Almost during the same period, rumours that the biggest airline American Airlines would follow soon could be seen in all kinds of media. The panic investors dumped its stock like crazy. At its lowest level, one share of American Airlines was cheaper than that of a hamburger. Everyone believed that bankruptcy was the only choice for the American Airlines. However, it didn’t happen the way most people thought of. The stock price has shot up by more than 1000% ever since. Isn’t that amazing?
Example 2: Altria Group
This is probably not a familiar name to you. However, if I tell you that the company was formerly known as Philip Morris, you certainly know what I’m going to talk about. Yes. Altria is the biggest tobacco company in the world, with the brand name like Marlboros. It is also the 80% owner of the second largest food company in the world, Kraft. Last April, when the judge ordered Altria to pay $12 billion for a bond that acted as a penalty for tobacco industry, the management declared they had no choice but to file for bankruptcy if they were forced to pay such a huge amount. Guess who won? Altria! The judge made a compromise in the end and the stock recovered all its losses from a low of $27 to its original price of $54 today.
Conclusion:
This rule is definitely much riskier than previous one. However, the return from taking this risk is also much higher. As for Altria, when we look back, we can easily see why the judge would not let it declare bankruptcy. The US government certainly didn’t want to see that they would lose a big taxpayer. The irony is that it is really too difficult for most people to make a correct judgement in the middle of such an event.
Case Three:
Claim: if majority people are leaving the market, more often than not it is a good time for you to enter.
Example 1: War with Iraq
Many of you may still remember the days when US were at odds with UN and Russia, Germany, and France in the issue of attacking Iraq. It made not only Saddam Hussein nervous, but also the majority investors. Billions of dollars were flowing out the equity market and into the so-called safe heaven: bond market. The result? The broad market has rallied up big ever since March 11th , exactly one day before Bush declared that war was beginning.
Conclusion:
This rule is quite reliable, i.e. the majority is wrong in most of time. You certainly remember during the peak of the Internet Bubble, everyone was talking about investing and hoping to retire before 45. You probably still remember right after 9/11, the stock market first dropped more than 20% within one week after the event, but only saw it move back more than 30% later. Maybe most people never learn their previous lessons when they enter the stock market.
不少朋友通過Email或通過qqh問我該不該買或是賣某一個股票，要不要在這個價位追等等。我想借這一篇股市人生作一下說明。首先，無論是股票還是其他投資，其實本質上都是一個搏概率的問題。從某種意義上來說，它和賭博當中的博大小沒什麽區別。所以可以說每次我Enter一個Position的時候，我已經有了思想準備，那就是50%的可能性我是錯的。當然如果錯了我會用止損來作保護。其次，沒有什麽人可以對大勢或是某一個股票的短線行為持續的作出準確的預測。注意一點，這裏我強調“持續”二字。什麽叫做持續？一年，兩年都不能算。所以我不是很讚成盲目的Follow別人的Advice。最後一點，每一個人的操作風格都不一樣。拿我自己來說，我很少會在一個價位上全部建倉，而是一般會先試探一下，然後再分批進入。同樣在拋一個股票的時候，我也會分作幾段來操作。而這些操作的Timing很重要，我也不太可能在第一時間馬上通知每一個Follower，所以我在這裏希望這些朋友能夠諒解。
還是回到2003年。這一年的故事有很多，我也就回憶到哪裏就寫到哪裏。這一年的5，6月間我做了一個小的Research，那就是把道瓊斯指數從創立起的1896年到2003年每一天的Daily Movement作一個分析，具體來說就是Focus那些Daily Movement在2%以上的日子，然後找出原因。前後大概整整花了一個月的時間，收獲也頗多。通過這個研究，我得出一個結論，基本上人類曆史上可以發生的事幾乎都發生過了，換句話說將來很難有一個Event能夠真正Shock市場。為什麽這麽說呢？這一百多年Dow的曆史覆蓋了兩次世界大戰，一次長達４０多年的冷戰，一次經濟大蕭條和多次的經濟衰退；另外還包括了很多突發的危機，包括大地震，總統遇刺，古巴導彈危機，恐怖主義襲擊等等。要讓我再想的話，可能也就是核戰爭和外星人入侵還沒有發生過吧。不過那也不是很要緊了，因為真的發生的話估計整個人類文明也就到此為止，也不需要什麽證券市場了。
在０３年結束之前我又接連讀了幾本書。有的時候我在想，可能隨著歲月的增長人是會產生惰性的，我記得當年我可以一周讀一本，然後一年讀十幾本，當然消化的如何那是另外一回事。但現在我卻一年讀不了幾本，而且往往會給自己找各種各樣的借口。 不過即使是在２００３年，有一本書我卻是讀了放下，放下後再讀，前後花了大概３，４個月，最後才勉強翻完，這本書就是Charles R. Geisst的“Wall Street: A History。這本書從１８世紀Hudson River邊上的橡膠樹寫起，一直寫到２０世紀末的八十年代為止。它介紹了美國的資本市場是如何從無到有，從無序到規範。不過這本書
涉及的人物和事件實在太多（也難為了作者要在一本書裏麵講２００年的故事），讀起來實在是非常乏味。所以我隻能說，那些真正有誌於研究華爾街曆史的
人可以找來讀一下。
很多剛開始涉足股票市場的人或遲或早都會經曆過一段崇拜技術分析的歲月。 我可能是一上來受老巴的影響比較深吧，一直到０３年底才開始對技術分析產生興趣。那一段時間我把BigCharts上幾乎每一個技術指標的來龍去脈都研究了一下（它上麵有介紹每一個指標是如何設參數，如何計算出來的，有興趣的朋友可以去做點研究），然後就是BackTesting。幾乎每一個指標我都用１０個以上的個股或是指數來做Test。結論是沒有一個Single指標是Reliable的（說這話可能會得罪一些喜歡TA的朋友，這裏先賠罪了），至少是從統計的角度來說。除此之外，幾乎所有的指標都可以做出來，因為道理很簡單，很多參數還是有辦法人為控製的，隻是對大盤股來說比較困難一點罷了。不過在研究技術分析的時候，我還是注意到了Volume是一個相對來說比較Reliable的指標。而且從每日的Tape當中確實可以感覺到一些價格和量之間的關係。 為了驗證這一說法，我特意去找了一本老古董書，Humphrey Bancroft Neill的Tape Reading and Market Tactics。 這本寫於１９３１年的書堪稱Tape Reading中的經典，讀的時候會有一種曆史的沉重感，因為很多書上列出的股票都已經不存在了。不過讓我感到驚奇的是居然７０多年前的技巧放到今天仍然適用。看來有些東西是永遠不會變的。
２００３年結束的時候，我給自己算了一筆帳，一共盈利６３％多一點。不算太壞－相比大盤的２３％的漲幅而言。但總是覺得自己那一年的操作當中還是有很多不足。所以在０４年的１月我給自己寫了一篇０３年的小節If Only We had Learned these earlier...。到今天看來當中不少
lessons還是適用的。我在此就把原文給登出來和大家Share....(未完待續）
附：
If only we had learned these earlier…
------Jan 25, 2004
Highlights in this special report:
We believe that investing is a life-long journey. No investor can claim that he or she has
mastered everything about investing, not even Warren Buffet, although he is no doubt much more experienced than most of us. Learning lessons and keeping those lessons in mind is certainly a very good way to improve our future performance. Here are some most noticeable
cases in 2003.
Case One:
Claim: if a company performs badly mainly because of its captain, a replacement usually can boost the company and its stock.
Example 1: Time Warner’s
The honeymoon between Time Warner and AOL has finally come to an end. AOL co-founder Steve Case handed out his chairman title, so did company’s vice chairman, Ted Turner( what a sad story, even Fortune magazine wrote an editorial “Gone with the Wind” about this generous gentleman). But investors of TWX probably don’t care that much. Why should they? The company’s stock has risen more than 80% since two co-founders left the company.
Example 2: McDonald’s
You probably still remember those days that you could get a “Big Mac” for $.99. Not any more. The “burger war” among McDonald’s, Wendy’s and Burger King is certainly brutal. Customers might be the only beneficiary from this war. What a turnaround story! Ever since Jim Cantalupo replaced its previous CEO, the company has posted 10 consecutive months of same-store growth in the past 11 months. Stock price? You got it. Even facing possibilities of Mad Cow disease, the company’s stock has more than doubled since its low last March.
Conclusion:
This rule certainly is not a panacea. However, if you have a reason to believe that the original CEO has to go before the company can experience a turnaround, then it may not be a bad bet. IBM’s previous CEO Louis V. Gerstner is another such legend. How about the story in Motorola? We still need more time to see if Edward J. Zander’s replacement of Galvin will work out in a nice way. But it is very possible that once we have figured that out, the stock price has already moved a long way.
Case Two:
Claim: if a company’s stock has been depressed so much because of some external events, the stock price will rebound to its starting point once such events have been solved.
Example 1: American Airlines (AMR)
This is definitely a case that should be written into MBA’s textbook. At the beginning of 2003, the airline industry seemed to be doomed. USA airlines declared bankruptcy. Then came a bigger shock to the industry. The second largest carrier United Airlines also filed for Chapter 11. Almost during the same period, rumours that the biggest airline American Airlines would follow soon could be seen in all kinds of media. The panic investors dumped its stock like crazy. At its lowest level, one share of American Airlines was cheaper than that of a hamburger. Everyone believed that bankruptcy was the only choice for the American Airlines. However, it didn’t happen the way most people thought of. The stock price has shot up by more than 1000% ever since. Isn’t that amazing?
Example 2: Altria Group
This is probably not a familiar name to you. However, if I tell you that the company was formerly known as Philip Morris, you certainly know what I’m going to talk about. Yes. Altria is the biggest tobacco company in the world, with the brand name like Marlboros. It is also the 80% owner of the second largest food company in the world, Kraft. Last April, when the judge ordered Altria to pay $12 billion for a bond that acted as a penalty for tobacco industry, the management declared they had no choice but to file for bankruptcy if they were forced to pay such a huge amount. Guess who won? Altria! The judge made a compromise in the end and the stock recovered all its losses from a low of $27 to its original price of $54 today.
Conclusion:
This rule is definitely much riskier than previous one. However, the return from taking this risk is also much higher. As for Altria, when we look back, we can easily see why the judge would not let it declare bankruptcy. The US government certainly didn’t want to see that they would lose a big taxpayer. The irony is that it is really too difficult for most people to make a correct judgement in the middle of such an event.
Case Three:
Claim: if majority people are leaving the market, more often than not it is a good time for you to enter.
Example 1: War with Iraq
Many of you may still remember the days when US were at odds with UN and Russia, Germany, and France in the issue of attacking Iraq. It made not only Saddam Hussein nervous, but also the majority investors. Billions of dollars were flowing out the equity market and into the so-called safe heaven: bond market. The result? The broad market has rallied up big ever since March 11th , exactly one day before Bush declared that war was beginning.
Conclusion:
This rule is quite reliable, i.e. the majority is wrong in most of time. You certainly remember during the peak of the Internet Bubble, everyone was talking about investing and hoping to retire before 45. You probably still remember right after 9/11, the stock market first dropped more than 20% within one week after the event, but only saw it move back more than 30% later. Maybe most people never learn their previous lessons when they enter the stock market.
評論
目前還沒有任何評論
登錄後才可評論.
