Most people who know me in a professional environment would know that I am very technical heavy with my analysis. Not that I have anything against fundamental analysis, it’s simply the fact that I don’t enjoy spending an entire day looking at the accounting figures and growth potential etc. Technical analysis to me is, as Kanye would put it, harder, better, faster, stronger. So if you want to read charts, and you can’t wait much longer, stick with technical analysis, else you can’t get stronger… and this is why I should never write anything while listening to Youtube mixes. Back on topic now!
I suppose since I am going to spend multiple posts diving into the intricacies of TA, I should really start at the… err… start…
TA, from a academic perspective, describes the type of analysis used by market participants who tries to generate abnormal returns using only past information. The ‘blasphemous’ theories implies a complete lack of market efficiency (and thereby pissed off thousands of academics, or so I would like to think) and is pretty much the modern equivalent of witchcraft and alchemy. Many attempt to disprove it via the inclusion of taxation, backtesting different strategies and showing fairly conclusively that they don’t work over the long term, by tossing coins and then spinning in a circle and throwing a dart, by diving into a pool and picking out a random marble hidden at the bottom of every tile (but behind every prime numbered tile, there is a golden one. Also, the latter two may or may not have happened. I can’t prove that they haven’t so……). However, some swear by it and one of the most famous trader of all time, Jesse Lauriston Livermore, the great bear of Wall St, made it big using TA. So why is that? How can something disproved make so much money for some while bankrupting others?
I guess I’ll describe the general logic behind why some believe that TA works before I go into the specifics. The first trader, even if by random chance would buy something because the price went up a little. Soon after, a different participant would look at it and think “Hey, I just saw this, and this is crazy, but I like this stock, so I’ll buy some maybe”. The price would go up further because of additional demand from other technical traders. Finally, the traders who missed the run then looks at the chart and thinks “Hmm… I missed it, I missed it so bad, I missed it so so bad”.
I’m sorry, I’ll turn off the music.
My favourite analogy for TA (I read it on a research paper but I forgot which one… if any of you know where this analogy came from, please refer it to me as I’d like to cite it) is if you throw 10,000 people into a small city and ask them to meet up. You don’t tell them when and where but some may assume that around noon in front of the town hall on a Saturday would be a nice time. In fact, I dare say that more than one would think that. So some people gather, and then the rest looks in awe at a sudden gathering reminiscent of flash dancing. So they group up too. Who knows, maybe they’ll even be starred in a viral Youtube video! Wouldn’t that be neat? Then the crowd attracts others and suddenly it’s massive. This is essentially what will happen in the market. It’s all about the stock price (no, I’m not listening to ‘It’s all about the Bass’) which makes sense as its arguable the most important element for stocks. We quote price before anything else (though the only other thing that comes to mind would be volume) and base a lot of calculations off of it regardless of using TA or FA.
So why does that skewer of demand and supply dictate what traders do? Well, that’s where cognitive dissonance kicks in. That’s where greed and fear kicks in. That’s where the next post in my technical analysis series kicks in.