Hacker News new | comments | show | ask | jobs | submit login

A lot of people are stating that this is like gambling - it is - but not in the sense that you think. Firstly he doesn't use his entire bankroll on each trade, secondly he goes long-short consistently over very short periods of time, thirdly he's too tiny to actually move markets, and fourthly he is in and out within a day - where his max var. is 100% on thousands of tiny trades. Think of it like this - he has $100 - he bets $10 of that each day. He can blow that $10 - no problems.

Worst case he runs out of capital over a period of weeks.

He can't blow up in the way that you think - but he can have large drawdowns over a period of weeks.

Markets are eventually consistent scalable systems - and that is why we prefer them over central planning. In the medium term they prices things correctly, cheaply and efficiently (decade+).

In the short term however (sub-decade) - they can't price jack.

Markets are inefficient period - if they weren't, well then P=NP and you could just put your NP-hard problems into a market and get back cheap, quick, accurate results. Oh - wait - protein folding is actually harder than that.

There are 2 major ways to make money in the markets. Value-Growth and statistical arb (often high frequency). The former (Buffett) is highly concentrated bets on the future of business (I'm value - long TSLA/GOOG/Samsung). The latter is looking for thousands of small diversified statistically significant correlations above 50% (random guesses) and trading costs between securities/price movements over short time intervals (aka statistical ghosts in the data - RenTech/Shaw).

Both work. Both work well. And will continue to do so as long as markets exist.

Applications are open for YC Summer 2018

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact