我的股市人生（Part Nine) by 股海一粟 (原创转贴)

逍遥山人

昨天看CNBC, Maria提到在周二Dow大涨300多点以后，Equity Mutual Funds的Inflow创下近期最高，达到10个多Billion。想想也真的挺有意思，在一个多月前市场大跌的时候每天都听说有多少个Billion 的 Money Move Out of the Market。几乎每个投资者都知道Buy Low and Sell High的道理，但到了实际当中很多人的举动却恰恰相反。也许这就是股市吧。。。

不少朋友通过Email或通过qqh问我该不该买或是卖某一个股票，要不要在这个价位追等等。我想借这一篇股市人生作一下说明。首先，无论是股票还是其他投资，其实本质上都是一个搏概率的问题。从某种意义上来说，它和赌博当中的博大小没什么区别。所以可以说每次我Enter一个Position的时候，我已经有了思想准备，那就是50%的可能性我是错的。当然如果错了我会用止损来作保护。其次，没有什么人可以对大势或是某一个股票的短线行为持续的作出准确的预测。注意一点，这里我强调“持续”二字。什么叫做持续？一年，两年都不能算。所以我不是很赞成盲目的Follow别人的Advice。最后一点，每一个人的操作风格都不一样。拿我自己来说，我很少会在一个价位上全部建仓，而是一般会先试探一下，然后再分批进入。同样在抛一个股票的时候，我也会分作几段来操作。而这些操作的Timing很重要，我也不太可能在第一时间马上通知每一个Follower，所以我在这里希望这些朋友能够谅解。

还是回到2003年。这一年的故事有很多，我也就回忆到哪里就写到哪里。这一年的5，6月间我做了一个小的Research，那就是把道琼斯指数从创立起的 1896年到2003年每一天的Daily Movement作一个分析，具体来说就是Focus那些Daily Movement在2%以上的日子，然后找出原因。前后大概整整花了一个月的时间，收获也颇多。通过这个研究，我得出一个结论，基本上人类历史上可以发生的事几乎都发生过了，换句话说将来很难有一个Event能够真正Shock市场。为什么这么说呢？这一百多年Dow的历史覆盖了两次世界大战，一次长达４０多年的冷战，一次经济大萧条和多次的经济衰退；另外还包括了很多突发的危机，包括大地震，总统遇刺，古巴导弹危机，恐怖主义袭击等等。要让我再想的话，可能也就是核战争和外星人入侵还没有发生过吧。不过那也不是很要紧了，因为真的发生的话估计整个人类文明也就到此为止，也不需要什么证券市场了。

在０３年结束之前我又接连读了几本书。有的时候我在想，可能随着岁月的增长人是会产生惰性的，我记得当年我可以一周读一本，然后一年读十几本，当然消化的如何那是另外一回事。但现在我却一年读不了几本，而且往往会给自己找各种各样的借口。　不过即使是在２００３年，有一本书我却是读了放下，放下后再读，前后花了大概３，４个月，最后才勉强翻完，这本书就是Charles R. Geisst的“Wall Street: A History"。这本书从１８世纪Hudson River边上的橡胶树写起，一直写到２０世纪末的八十年代为止。它介绍了美国的资本市场是如何从无到有，从无序到规范。不过这本书
涉及的人物和事件实在太多（也难为了作者要在一本书里面讲２００年的故事），读起来实在是非常乏味。所以我只能说，那些真正有志于研究华尔街历史的
人可以找来读一下。

很多刚开始涉足股票市场的人或迟或早都会经历过一段崇拜技术分析的岁月。　我可能是一上来受老巴的影响比较深吧，一直到０３年底才开始对技术分析产生兴趣。那一段时间我把BigCharts上几乎每一个技术指标的来龙去脉都研究了一下（它上面有介绍每一个指标是如何设参数，如何计算出来的，有兴趣的朋友可以去做点研究），然后就是BackTesting。几乎每一个指标我都用１０个以上的个股或是指数来做Test。结论是没有一个Single指标是 Reliable的（说这话可能会得罪一些喜欢TA的朋友，这里先赔罪了），至少是从统计的角度来说。除此之外，几乎所有的指标都可以做出来，因为道理很简单，很多参数还是有办法人为控制的，只是对大盘股来说比较困难一点罢了。不过在研究技术分析的时候，我还是注意到了Volume是一个相对来说比较 Reliable的指标。而且从每日的Tape当中确实可以感觉到一些价格和量之间的关系。　为了验证这一说法，我特意去找了一本老古董书，Humphrey Bancroft Neill的"Tape Reading and Market Tactics。　这本写于１９３１年的书堪称Tape Reading中的经典，读的时候会有一种历史的沉重感，因为很多书上列出的股票都已经不存在了。不过让我感到惊奇的是居然７０多年前的技巧放到今天仍然适用。看来有些东西是永远不会变的。

２００３年结束的时候，我给自己算了一笔帐，一共盈利６３％多一点。不算太坏－相比大盘的２３％的涨幅而言。但总是觉得自己那一年的操作当中还是有很多不足。所以在０４年的１月我给自己写了一篇０３年的小节"If Only We had Learned these earlier..."。到今天看来当中不少
lessons还是适用的。我在此就把原文给登出来和大家Share....(未完待续）

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

his 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.

layschips

as an opposite case to your case one, what do you think about Apple's Jobs can do to the stock price, if something bad happens? could it be a good entry point if the price goes down with panic? thanks.

逍遥山人

no idea，到时方知。