the financial system is literally just a scam and it's super lame and depressing

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765113)

I also learned that there are still people who fuck with bonds and dividends. Get paid for someone to hold your cash and then get the principle back. I thought this didn't exist anymore either.

Really blows your mind when you realize there are people who go beyond just parking their money in the S&P. So many juicer asset classes. It's also really crazy how bad an investment real estate is. People complain about home prices, if you invest aggressively you will make way more money than any real estate inflation. Crazy people even complain about high values when they could be aggressively making money instead. Like oh my home went up 7%. OK but some asset somewhere went up like 10x. But muh home! You have to have a home!

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765259)

I never invested in bitcoin because I'm too dumb to understand it and it doesn't appeal to me. Many other people did. A few got rich, most lost their shirt. You just have to find something that works for you. Find something you enjoy. Find an asset that makes you happy and that you care about. I know people who own TSLA just because they like Tesla. Find something to believe in that matters to you imo.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765281)

And some outperform it by a lot. If you put everything you had in the S&P in Nvidia you'd be a lot richer. Like a way lot. Life altering money in many cases. But no one wants to think about it. Everyone is afraid of risk. Everyone is afraid of having a concrete opinion. What if it goes down! Fear holds a lot of people back from taking on the risk of investing in assets with a high potential to grow long term.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765393)

that said, index investing is only about half my portfolio and i have some individual stocks and SMH, VGT, etc. and bitcoin.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765402)

But Nvidia is up 1250% during that same time. And you didn't think to do it. I didn't either. But somebody did. And anyone could have. Somebody could have had the idea and been reading business journals all the time and actually know something concrete and actionable about the industry before it was on the front page of the Wall Street Journal.

I'm just saying that while yes you're right that it's a good idea for most people at the same time if you had done a fuckload of research and made a tough call and been right, you could have 10x'd your entire net worth and your whole life would be different. And you can't say oh well it's all unknowable and it's all luck and no one knows and how could anyone... Yeah, people do. People have an idea sometimes and they're right. They're actually spot on and they can make life changing against when they're right and it pays off. Yes it could go the other way and that's why it's risky. You take on a risk and you get the reward.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765465)

having a "concrete opinion" on something you don't understand isn't an intelligent opinion.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765444)

Also the market read as the index ie S&P (seems to be a lot of slow people around here) is itself comprised of top performers — it's the 500 top companies in America. If your company sucks they drop you from the index. So to beat the market you have to beat the top 500 which has an average annual return of 11% lifetime. So the odds of picking a major mover are way less than 50/50. The market is not an average of all stocks. It's the average of 500 winners. And that nets you 11%.

To beat 500 winners you really have to have something special. That's why a lot of people buy Mag7, the tech stocks that are driving the economy. That's a much better basket because they're all high performers at the top end of the winners.

It's amazing how I ran circles around all these chuds about finance. Really thought there would be some more MFEs on here.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49766536)

first sentences here "Google says the average annual rate of return of the S&P500 since 1957 is 11%. So anything above that in a given year beats the market."

how fucking dumb do you have to be to state that?

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765922)

If you have an asset that grows faster than the market grows you outperform the market on that asset.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765937)

something like 97% of active investors (including highly paid mutual fund doods) can't beat the market over 20-30 years. however, everyone will have a year here and there where they beat the market. but that is meaningless.

everything you're saying reminds me of my own outlook when i started learning about investing when i was in college. i quickly lost my ass and learned.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765987)

But my whole point is that *somebody* somewhere figured out the long term potential of Nvidia years before it blew up and held onto it long enough to make a life altering amount of money. If you have Tommy's investment strategy you're obviously not that guy. Most people aren't that guy. But somebody had an actual concrete idea, ran with it, and long term he was proven right. Anyone could be that guy if you do enough research and have enough experience.

I'm not talking about Freshman Econ 101 shit. I'm not talking about timing the market and day trading and puts and options. I'm talking about value investing which is a time honored tradition for the gigabrained. And yeah obviously most people don't do it, can't, or won't, for whatever reason. But that opportunity is always out there.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49766032)

like most things, i think tcr is learning enough so you're not ignorant and susceptible to getting scammed, but avoiding hubris and that it's nbd to become an expert.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765381)

I could bet big on an equity and put a ton of effort in and be wrong. I could put no thought in and gamble and be right. But in the long run there are simply people who are better than others at investing over time and consistently winning. It's a fact of reality. If you're argument is that I'm an idiot and can't beat the system then you're probably right. But if you're saying no one can ever have an informed opinion and take advantage of it and be proven right, that's just insanely because people have done it consistently for years.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765504)

that's not my argument, i didnt even know who this is when i replied. my argument is that it's significantly more difficult than how you're framing it, and warren buffet just picking stocks is like saying michael jordan just puts a ball through a hoop.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765546)

i could learn veterinary medicine so that i can provide medical care to my pets. i don't do that because it's not worthwhile. likewise, most people do not have the capital required that learning how to outperform the market is a worthwhile undertaking. that's not to say they should never buy some stocks off a tip or a hunch. only that they should not delude themselves that they're essentially doing the same thing as buffet or shkreli.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765626)

"Date: March 24th, 2026 1:35 PM

Author: :-P (gunneratttt)

half of publicly traded stocks outperform the market, because "the market" refers to the average performance of the entire market."

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765389)

of course because different stocks have different market caps it's not going to be 1/2 the ticker symbols, or big cap companies having an outsized effect on the market average, etc. but half of "the market" will outperform the market average.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765426)

you've gone from being wrong one way to being wrong in another

what was that effect you were talking about?

Date: March 24th, 2026 2:02 PM

Author: :-P(gunneratttt)

yes? do you understand what an average means?

of course because different stocks have different market caps it's not going to be 1/2 the ticker symbols, or big cap companies having an outsized effect on the market average, etc. but half of "the market" will outperform the market average.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765567)

i assume its something pedantic like i just mentioned. of course its not exactly half because outliers can move the market, like if every stock stayed they same price except one that doubled, the market average would be positive but only one actually appreciated. but in the context of a very large market, yes roughly half will outperform the average.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765598)

the only one challenging you for king retard in this thread is the op and your painfully idiotic discussion branches above

Approximately 40% to 50% of individual stocks outperform the broader market in any given year, making it roughly a coin-flip on an annual basis. However, over long-term periods (10–20 years), only about 10% to 20% of individual stocks or active funds consistently beat the market, as a few top performers drive most of the gains.

Dimensional Fund Advisors

Dimensional Fund Advisors

+2

Key findings on stock market outperformance:

Long-Term Odds: Over 20-year periods, only about a fifth of stocks survive and outperform the market.

Active Manager Performance: Roughly 92% of active fund managers fail to outperform the S&P 500 over 20-year periods.

Concentrated Returns: A small number of top performers drive the market; for instance, excluding the top 25% of stocks can result in negative overall market returns.

Concentration Risk: In some years, a tiny fraction of stocks (e.g., top 10) can generate a massive portion of the total market return, as seen in 2023.

Dimensional Fund Advisors

Dimensional Fund Advisors

+3

Why Most Stocks Underperform

The stock market index return is typically skewed by a few massive winners. While the index might show a strong positive return, the "average" individual stock often performs worse than the index itself because a few stellar performers pull the index upward.

Morningstar

Morningstar

+1

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765786)

wow, you mean exactly what im saying?

i didnt say that half the market *CONSISTENTLY* outperforms the market forever. i said, clearly, that approximately half a population outperforms the *average*. obviously that means during whatever time period it's the average of. not in perpetuity you moron.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765817)

let someone else stick up for you.

crickets.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49765925)

BTW those egghead institutional investors lose money all the time. It's mostly a scam and they just make money off fees and trapping people's money in contracts. Who cares if they have an MBA they're still faggots. Some random guy no one's heard of somewhere is outperforming all that brain power. Again I'm not in any way talking about day trading or short term gains. I'm strictly speaking about value investing long term in equities which has the potential to pay off may times more than the market, and it's not just luck and guess work. It's also skill my friend.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49766591)

I'm sure those PhD quants running funds are much more dumber than you.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5849224&forum_id=2#49778240)