Skill vs Talent

The Separation between talent and skill is one of the greatest misunderstood concepts. Talent you have naturally. Skill is only developed by hours and hours and hours of beating on your craft. I don’t really view myself as particularly talented. Where I excel is ridiculous, sickening work ethic. While the other guys are sleeping, I am working. While the other guys are eating, I am working.

When you set out to build a wall, you don’t say – I am gonna build the biggest, baddest wall that’s ever been build. You don’t start there. You say – I’m gonna lay this brick as perfectly as a brick can be laid. And you do that every single day, and soon you have a wall.

Will Smith

Those quotes apply to all areas of life, but only partially in trading/investing and this is what makes the latter so difficult.

Yes, you still need to put the hours (years) to understand how the market works and learn to recognize profitable patterns, disregarding if you are a fundamental or technical type.

You still need to look away from the scoring board and focus on the process. No one enters the year by saying I am going to make 100% this year. You just go and give your best today.

Preparation is vital and part of preparation is proper eating, sleeping and exercising. Healthy eating and sleeping are absolutely needed to establish the right frame of mind. Trading/investing is a mental game – the toughest one there is.

A Look at 9 Quotes from George Soros

1. Perceptions affect prices and prices affect perceptions

I believe that market prices are always wrong in the sense that they present a biased view of the future. But distortion works in both directions: not only do market participants operate with a bias, but their bias can also influence the course of events.

For instance, the stock market is generally believed to anticipate recessions, it would be more correct to say that it can help to precipitate them. Thus I replace the assertion that markets are always right with two others: I) Markets are always biased in one direction or another; II) Markets can influence the events that they anticipate.

As long as the bias is self-reinforcing, expectations rise even faster than stock prices.

Nowhere is the role of expectations more clearly visible than in financial markets. Buy and sell decisions are based on expectations about future prices, and future prices, in turn are contingent on present buy and sell decisions.

2. On Reflexivity

Fundamental analysis seeks to establish how underlying values are reflected in stock prices, whereas the theory of reflexivity shows how stock prices can influence underlying values. One provides a static picture, the other a dynamic one.

Sometimes prices change before fundamentals change. Sometimes fundamentals change before prices change. Price is what pays and until expectations change, prices don’t change. What causes expectations to change? – it could be change in fundamentals or change in prices. So what I am saying is that sometimes prices could be manipulated to change expectations, which will fuel further price momentum in a self-reinforcing way.

3. “Once a trend is established it tends to persist and to run it’s full course.” – Sentiment changes slowly in trending markets (up or down) and extremely fast in choppy, range-bound markets.

4. “When a long-term trend loses it’s momentum, short-term volatility tends to rise. It is easy to see why that should be so: the trend-following crowd is disoriented.”

A surprising countertrend pop or drop reminds investors of the risks involved and all of a sudden the fear of losing (giving back gains) becomes bigger than the fear of missing out. This is the beginning of the end of the established trend. It doesn’t end here, but it is a damn good spot to consider closing positions and moving to something else. The distribution/accumulation stage is in full force.

5. Markets are not always right. Market is a good discounting mechanism most of the time, but not always. There are times when animal spirits run supreme and emotions overshadow reason. Market constantly discount events that haven’t happened yet. As a result they will often discount events that will never happen.

How good are markets in predicting real-world developments? Reading the record, it is striking how many calamities that I anticipated did not in fact materialise.

Financial markets constantly anticipate events, both on the positive and on the negative side, which fail to materialise exactly because they have been anticipated.

It is an old joke that the stock market has predicted seven of the last two recessions. Markets are often wrong.

Often? How often? Do you have the balls and more importantly the pockets to fade them. Market could remain irrational longer than most people could remain solvent.

6. It doesn’t hurt you what you don’t know, but what you think you know, when it ain’t so

Participants act not on the basis of their best interests but on their perception of their best interests, and the two are not identical.

7. On Bubbles

“Boom-bust processes are asymmetric in shape: a long, gradually accelerating boom is followed by a short and sharp bust. Consequently, most of the credit contraction can be expected to occur in the near term.”

Currency movements tend to overshoot because of trend-following speculation, and we can observe similar trend-following behaviour in stock, commodity and real estate markets, of which Dutch Tulip Mania was the prototype.

8. On Manipulation

I want to buy $300 million of bonds, so start by selling $50 million. I want to see what the market feels like first.

9. On how to be selectively active

The trouble with you, Byron [Byron Wein – Morgan Stanley], is that you go to work every day [and think] you should do something. I don’t, I only go to work on the days that make sense to go to work. And I really do something on that day. But you go to work and you do something every day and you don’t realise when it’s a special day.

Even the Best Market Methods Don’t Work All the Time

Successful methods are often victims of their own success in short-term perspective. Long-term alpha could be sustained only if it is arbitraged in short-term perspective.

What is an arbitrage in most simple terms? You know how when you are in big traffic, one of the lines next to yours appear to be moving faster. The odds are that you are not the only one on the road that notices that. At the very same moment you decide to switch to the faster line, there will be a bunch of other people who have made the same decision and also move. It is uncanny how similarly we humans think in certain situations. As a consequence, the faster line will lose its edge. The odds are that people who stayed in their original line are likely to progress faster than the ones that switched lines. This is how arbitrage on the road works. It might seem worth it in short-term perspective, but it hardly earns you anything in long-term perspective.

Despite the common human factor, financial markets are way more complicated systems than traffic and often a “line” could remain faster much longer than expected, but not forever or in the words of Keynes – “the market could remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent”. The involvement of money tends to drastically change human behavior.

How does arbitrage work with value market approaches

Let’s say that buying stocks, trading under 10 times last year’s operating profits and with zero LT debt, has proven to be an extremely profitable approach over time. The exceptional return that it has generated will attract more and more capital. It is not hard to realize that if more and more people/funds use this approach, there will be less and less stocks that will meet the criteria – the very moment a stock drops near 10 times operating earnings, it will be snapped back. As a result, the overall alpha of that approach will gradually evaporate. The signals that the system produces will be very few are rare, and only occur after fear-driven forced market liquidations, meaning that those who have to show results in a couple of quarters, might be out of luck, depending on their timing. As more people move to other strategies, that same strategy will go back to its original returns that made it popular at first place. And the cycle will start all over again.

Most people won’t stick to the same method, either because they are impatient themselves or their clients are.

In the first case, “the grass of our neighbors is greener” syndrome plays a huge role. Many investors live with Einstein’s words: “the definition of insanity is trying the same approach over and over again and expecting the same result” and like to constantly switch strategies. Einstein’s thesis is true only if the environment does not change. In reality, if you apply the same approach in the market over and over again, you will get different results for the simple reason that the market environment constantly changes; but note that it changes in repeatable cyclical patterns.

Investors love to send money to work to managers that appear “hot”, despite the extensive evidence that this approach leads to subpar returns. When you deal with other people’s money, you have about two quarters to be right, unless you have earned their trust. There is only way to earn investors’ trust – by initially making them a lot of money. Call it luck, call it proper timing of the fund’s launch, but good initial performance could win you more time to be right before your investors pull their money and go chase someone or something else. Not only do you need to deliver, but you also need to appear busy, because for some peculiar reason inactivity in money management is often associated with laziness.

Or as Joel Greenblat eloquently summarizes:

Value investing doesn’t always work. The market doesn’t always agree with you. Over time, value is roughly the way the market prices stocks, but over the short term, which sometimes can be as long as two or three years, there are periods when it doesn’t work. And that is a very good thing. The fact that our value approach doesn’t work over periods of time is precisely the reason why it continues to work over the long term.

How does the arbitrage process work with momentum approaches

First of all, there are countless ways to integrate momentum in your equity selection approach, but they all fall in one of these two groups:
– making new high of some sort: 52week high, 3yr highs, all-time highs or 50-day high for shorter-term duration.
– Relative strength: it outperformed the the majority of the rest of the stocks over certain period (6 months being the most frequently used)

What happens more and more people notice that buying momentum works. Well, naturally more and more money is attracted to this market approach – more money buys that 52week high and the group of stocks with the highest 6-month RS. Not only the new capital put to work doesn’t arbitrage the gains over time, but it even make them bigger and quicker. Nothing last forever though. When for some reason the “fear of losing” becomes bigger than the fear of missing, a commonplace correction take place. And then all of a sudden, a commonplace market correction comes and not only almost all breakouts to new 52-week highs are faded, but some of the highest RS stocks become juicy short targets and experience deep 40-70% cuts in a few months. Momentum stocks stop to deliver and investors start to question the viability of the approach. After awhile, almost no one wants to touch them anymore and the next “sure” in the market is chased after.

Safety in markets is derived from proper timing. Knowing when your investing approach works best…priceless.

The Power of Relative Strength or How to Spot Future Winners

Today, $PCYC reached another multi-year high, which brought its YTD gain to a little over 300%. Its impressive performance is not what matters here. What is more important is that it left plenty of clues along the way that it was a major winner in the making.

While $SPY and $QQQ were in a free fall in mid-May; while almost every single stock was obliterated, $PCYC stood firm. Not only it stood firm, but on May 16/17 it was literally the only stock that broke out to new 10-year highs on above the average volume. It takes a lot of buying power and conviction to move a stock to major new highs when the indexes are down 2% for the day and the protection of capital is everyone’s main priority. What happened after the market turned back up in June and July? $PCYC doubled.

Another example. On May 3rd, $ELLI broke out to new all-time high after reporting strong earnings. At exactly the same time, the market was rolling over and it went into a 10% deep monthly correction. What did $ELLI do in the meantime? It went sideways, quietly being accumulated while almost everything around it was falling apart. True market leaders form bases during market corrections. Once the market snapped back, $ELLI resumed its upward gallop and went up another 65% in a couple months.

This equity selection method works even better when a whole group of stocks from the same industry exhibit relative strength. For example, take look at the price action in fertilizer stocks near the end of June – the time when the whole country was hit by a record heat and it became clear that the drought will substantially reduce this year’s grain crop. The market, which is a forward looking mechanism most of time, quickly discounted the drought by bidding up fertilizer stocks. Most notable was the relative strength on June 25, Monday: $SPY gaped down and finished the day lower. Fertilizer stocks ($CF, $MOS, $POT…) gaped up and finished the day above their opening print. Most of them went up 15-20% from there.

The above mentioned examples are not isolated cases. They happen all the time, several times a year. Only this summer, we saw similar group price patters in newspapers and refiners stocks. Relative strength is one of the most reliable equity selection methods.

Top 20 Best Performing Liquid Stocks in 2012

What are some of the common features that this year’s current best performers share:

1) 18 had market cap of under $3 billion at the beginning of the year. Don’t be afraid to look beyond the popular names that everyone knows and follows and therefore no one has an edge at.

2) 11 had under 50 million shares in their float. Small float is a huge asset for a stock under accumulation and a huge liability for a stock under distribution as it is a defining element of supply and demand dynamics.

3) 16 of them reached new 52-week high before they had the bulk of their gain.

P.S. By liquid stocks I mean:
– min current volume of 200k shares a day (that doesn’t mean that the daily volume wasn’t lower at the beginning of the year);
– min current price of $10;