个人中心 - 老虎社区

Waynenaidu

IP属地：未知

帖子 · 7帖子 · 7
关注 · 0关注 · 0
粉丝 · 0粉丝 · 0

- WaynenaiduWaynenaidu
  ·2021-05-30
  Ok ✅
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,671 评论
  7
  分享
  举报
- WaynenaiduWaynenaidu
  ·2021-03-23
  👍🏽 👍🏽
  Jury out on whether ARK Innovation returns are due to Cathie Wood’s skill or luck<blockquote>方舟创新公司的回报是凯西-伍德的技术还是运气，目前尚无定论。</blockquote>
  Statistical scrutiny brings this high-flying ETF down to earth You could have performed as well as t
  Jury out on whether ARK Innovation returns are due to Cathie Wood’s skill or luck<blockquote>方舟创新公司的回报是凯西-伍德的技术还是运气，目前尚无定论。</blockquote>
  2,473 评论
  1
  分享
  举报
- WaynenaiduWaynenaidu
  ·2021-03-16
  Good
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,488 1
  2
  分享
  举报
- WaynenaiduWaynenaidu
  ·2021-03-16
  Good read
  AMD Is a Stock to Buy on the Dip - Here’s Why<blockquote>AMD 是一只值得逢低买入的股票--原因如下</blockquote>
  Like other tech stocks, Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) hasn't fared too well lately. Although it’s hel
  AMD Is a Stock to Buy on the Dip - Here’s Why<blockquote>AMD 是一只值得逢低买入的股票--原因如下</blockquote>
  1,686 1
  点赞
  分享
  举报
- WaynenaiduWaynenaidu
  ·2021-03-14
  Haha 👌🏽 of
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,708 评论
  1
  分享
  举报
- WaynenaiduWaynenaidu
  ·2021-03-12
  Wow
  非常抱歉，此主贴已删除
  1,747 评论
  点赞
  分享
  举报
- WaynenaiduWaynenaidu
  ·2021-03-12
  Ok 👍🏽
  2,411 评论
  点赞
  分享
  举报

热议股票

{"i18n":{"language":"zh_CN"},"isCurrentUser":false,"userPageInfo":{"id":"3569917618374883","uuid":"3569917618374883","gmtCreate":1606823595792,"gmtModify":1610760921568,"name":"Waynenaidu","pinyin":"waynenaidu","introduction":"","introductionEn":"","signature":"","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d059d2c0dfcc62b3538622190f2564ed","hat":null,"hatId":null,"hatName":null,"vip":1,"status":2,"fanSize":1,"headSize":515,"tweetSize":7,"questionSize":0,"limitLevel":999,"accountStatus":4,"level":{"id":1,"name":"萌萌虎","nameTw":"萌萌虎","represent":"呱呱坠地","factor":"评论帖子3次或发布1条主帖（非转发）","iconColor":"3C9E83","bgColor":"A2F1D9"},"themeCounts":6,"badgeCounts":0,"badges":[],"moderator":false,"superModerator":false,"manageSymbols":null,"badgeLevel":null,"boolIsFan":false,"boolIsHead":false,"favoriteSize":0,"symbols":null,"coverImage":null,"realNameVerified":null,"userBadges":[{"badgeId":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561-4","templateUuid":"e50ce593bb40487ebfb542ca54f6a561","name":"明星虎友","description":"加入老虎社区2000天","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/dddf24b906c7011de2617d4fb3f76987","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/53d58ad32c97254c6f74db8b97e6ec49","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/6304700d92ad91c7a33e2e92ec32ecc1","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2026.05.25","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1001,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"badgeId":"228c86a078844d74991fff2b7ab2428d-3","templateUuid":"228c86a078844d74991fff2b7ab2428d","name":"投资合伙人虎","description":"证券账户累计交易金额达到100万美元","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/fbeac6bb240db7da8b972e5183d050ba","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/436cdf80292b99f0a992e78750ac4e3a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/506a259a7b456f037592c3b23c779599","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2023.07.14","exceedPercentage":"93.69%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1101,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"badgeId":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37-1","templateUuid":"976c19eed35f4cd78f17501c2e99ef37","name":"博闻投资者","description":"累计交易超过10只正股","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/e74cc24115c4fbae6154ec1b1041bf47","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d48265cbfd97c57f9048db29f22227b0","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/76c6d6898b073c77e1c537ebe9ac1c57","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1102,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"badgeId":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a-1","templateUuid":"518b5610c3e8410da5cfad115e4b0f5a","name":"实盘交易者","description":"完成一笔实盘交易","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/2e08a1cc2087a1de93402c2c290fa65b","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4504a6397ce1137932d56e5f4ce27166","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/4b22c79415b4cd6e3d8ebc4a0fa32604","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":null,"individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0},{"badgeId":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969-3","templateUuid":"35ec162348d5460f88c959321e554969","name":"传说交易员","description":"证券或期货账户累计交易次数达到300次","bigImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/656db16598a0b8f21429e10d6c1cb033","smallImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/03f10910d4dd9234f9b5702a3342193a","grayImgUrl":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/0c767e35268feb729d50d3fa9a386c5a","redirectLinkEnabled":0,"redirectLinkType":null,"redirectLink":null,"redirectLinkValidityFrom":null,"redirectLinkValidityTo":null,"hasAllocated":1,"isWearing":0,"stamp":null,"stampPosition":0,"hasStamp":0,"allocationCount":1,"allocatedDate":"2021.12.21","exceedPercentage":"93.64%","individualDisplayEnabled":0,"backgroundColor":null,"fontColor":null,"individualDisplaySort":0,"categoryType":1100,"isScarce":0,"effectConfig":null,"effectEnabled":0,"plateImgUrl":null,"plateColors":null,"validityTo":null,"validityToTimestamp":null,"wearingSort":0}],"userBadgeCount":5,"currentWearingBadge":null,"individualDisplayBadges":null,"crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"location":"未知","starInvestorFollowerNum":0,"starInvestorFlag":false,"starInvestorOrderShareNum":0,"subscribeStarInvestorNum":0,"ror":null,"winRationPercentage":null,"showRor":false,"investmentPhilosophy":null,"starInvestorSubscribeFlag":false},"page":1,"watchlist":null,"tweetList":[{"id":137448119,"gmtCreate":1622382566231,"gmtModify":1634101907972,"author":{"id":"3569917618374883","authorId":"3569917618374883","name":"Waynenaidu","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d059d2c0dfcc62b3538622190f2564ed","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3569917618374883","idStr":"3569917618374883"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Ok ✅&nbsp;","listText":"Ok ✅&nbsp;","text":"Ok ✅","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":7,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/137448119","repostId":"2138948877","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1671,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":353277924,"gmtCreate":1616506045468,"gmtModify":1634525482720,"author":{"id":"3569917618374883","authorId":"3569917618374883","name":"Waynenaidu","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d059d2c0dfcc62b3538622190f2564ed","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3569917618374883","idStr":"3569917618374883"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"👍🏽 👍🏽&nbsp;","listText":"👍🏽 👍🏽&nbsp;","text":"👍🏽 👍🏽","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/353277924","repostId":"1137063642","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1137063642","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1616505836,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1137063642?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-23 21:23","market":"us","language":"en","title":"Jury out on whether ARK Innovation returns are due to Cathie Wood’s skill or luck<blockquote>方舟创新公司的回报是凯西-伍德的技术还是运气，目前尚无定论。</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1137063642","media":"MarketWatch","summary":"Statistical scrutiny brings this high-flying ETF down to earth\nYou could have performed as well as t","content":"<p>Statistical scrutiny brings this high-flying ETF down to earth</p><p><blockquote>统计审查让这只高飞的 ETF 脚踏实地</blockquote></p><p> You could have performed as well as the high-flying ARK Innovation ETF by investing in the Nasdaq 100 Index.</p><p><blockquote>通过投资纳斯达克 100 指数，您的表现可以与高飞的方舟创新 ETF 一样出色。</blockquote></p><p> I know that seems hard to believe, given the stunning performance chief investment officer Cathie Wood has produced with ARK Innovation— a 229% gain over the past year, according to FactSet. Meanwhile, the Invesco QQQ Trust&nbsp;(which is benchmarked to the Nasdaq 100), gained 78%. Since its creation in October 2014, ARK Innovation has produced an annualized gain of 34.6%, versus 20.6% for the QQQ.</p><p><blockquote>我知道这似乎很难相信，考虑到首席投资官凯西·伍德 (Cathie Wood) 在 ARK Innovation 上取得了令人惊叹的业绩——根据 FactSet 的数据，过去一年增长了 229%。与此同时，景顺 QQQ Trust（以纳斯达克 100 指数为基准）上涨了 78%。自2014年10月成立以来，ARK Innovation的年化收益为34.6%，而QQQ的年化收益为20.6%。</blockquote></p><p> At the same time, ARK Innovation has been extremely volatile and risky, making an apples-to-apples comparison with the Nasdaq 100 misleading. As measured by the standard deviation of monthly returns, ARK Innovation has been 73% more volatile than QQQ. That’s really saying something, since QQQ is itself more volatile than broad market indices such as the S&amp;P 500.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，ARK Innovation 的波动性和风险极大，与纳斯达克 100 强进行单一比较具有误导性。以月回报率标准差衡量，ARK Innovation 的波动性比 QQQ 高出 73%。这确实说明了一些问题，因为 QQQ 本身的波动性比标普500等大盘指数更大。</blockquote></p><p> One approach statisticians use to create an apples-to-apples comparison is with a metric known as the Sharpe Ratio, invented by William Sharpe, the 1990 Nobel laureate in economics. It is the ratio of a fund’s average returns to the standard deviation of those returns. The Sharpe Ratio of ARK Innovation’s monthly returns since 2014 is almost precisely the same as the QQQ’s.</p><p><blockquote>统计学家用来创建苹果与苹果之间比较的一种方法是使用一种被称为夏普比率的指标，该指标由 1990 年诺贝尔经济学奖获得者威廉·夏普发明。它是基金的平均回报率与这些回报率的标准差的比率。ARK Innovation 自 2014 年以来的月回报率夏普比率几乎与 QQQ 完全相同。</blockquote></p><p> If you’re like some of my clients, your reaction is not to care about the Sharpe Ratio. “You can’t take the Sharpe Ratio to the bank,” you in effect tell me. It’s raw performance that counts, and on that basis there’s no doubt that the ARKK did far better.</p><p><blockquote>如果你像我的一些客户一样，你的反应是不在乎夏普比率。“你不能把夏普比率拿到银行去，”你实际上是在告诉我。原始的表现才是最重要的，在此基础上，毫无疑问，ARKK 的表现要好得多。</blockquote></p><p> This reaction is confused, however. In fact you can take the Sharpe Ratio to the bank. If you had been willing to incur the ARK Innovation’s increased volatility, you could have made just as much by leveraging an investment in the QQQ. That is, you would have made just as much by increasing your portfolio allocation to QQQ, or by buying it on sufficient margin. This is illustrated in the chart below:</p><p><blockquote>然而，这种反应令人困惑。事实上，你可以把夏普比率带到银行。如果你愿意承受方舟创新公司增加的波动性，你也可以通过投资 QQQ 来赚取同样多的钱。也就是说，您可以通过增加对 QQQ 的投资组合配置，或者以足够的保证金购买它来赚取同样多的钱。如下图所示：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13b81e9f1962e464faeb2d45cdd0e5f9\" tg-width=\"1260\" tg-height=\"849\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The Sharpe Ratio is not the only method that statisticians employ for measuring adviser performance on a level playing field, but other widely used approaches reach the same conclusion. Perhaps the best known, at least in academic circles, is the Fama-French factor model, named for University of Chicago finance professor Eugene Fama (the 2013 Nobel laureate in economics) and Dartmouth College professor Ken French. Their model involves an econometric test to see if a mutual fund’s return is significantly better than a combination of index funds benchmarked to factors such as small-cap, growth, and momentum.</p><p><blockquote>夏普比率并不是统计学家用来衡量公平竞争环境中顾问表现的唯一方法，但其他广泛使用的方法也得出了同样的结论。也许最著名的，至少在学术界是Fama-French因子模型，以芝加哥大学金融学教授Eugene Fama（2013年诺贝尔经济学奖获得者）和达特茅斯学院教授Ken French的名字命名。他们的模型包括计量经济学测试，以确定共同基金的回报是否明显优于以小盘股、增长和动量等因素为基准的指数基金组合。</blockquote></p><p> The answer for ARK Innovation is “no” — an overweight allocation to a small-cap growth fund would have produced the same overall return since November 2014.</p><p><blockquote>ARK Innovation 的答案是 “否定”--将跑赢大盘配置给小盘股成长基金，自 2014 年 11 月以来，总体回报将保持不变。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Luck versus skill</b></p><p><blockquote><b>运气与技巧</b></blockquote></p><p> Note carefully that these statistical tests do not prove that ARK Innovation’s performance is due solely to luck. Instead, those tests tell us that we cannot conclude that its performance was not due to luck. In this case, the double negative is not the same as the positive; this is a subtle, but important, difference.</p><p><blockquote>请注意，这些统计测试并不能证明方舟创新公司的业绩完全归功于运气。相反，这些测试告诉我们，我们不能得出它的表现不是运气的结论。在这种情况下，双重否定不等于正定；这是一个微妙但重要的区别。</blockquote></p><p> This goes to show just how difficult it is to prove that an investment manager has genuine market-beating ability. If beating an index fund by more than 10 percentage points annualized over a 6-plus-year period is not enough, then what is? (An email to ARK Investment Management requesting comment was not immediately answered.)</p><p><blockquote>这表明，证明投资经理具有真正的战胜市场的能力是多么困难。如果在 6 年多的时间内击败指数基金超过 10 个百分点还不够，那么什么还不够？（向 ARK Investment Management 发送的请求置评的电子邮件没有立即得到回复。）</blockquote></p><p> The answer: Satisfying traditional standards of statistical significance requires beating the market by a larger amount over a much longer period.</p><p><blockquote>答案是：满足传统的统计显著性标准需要在更长的时间内以更大的数量击败市场。</blockquote></p><p> An example of a fund that does jump over this much-higher hurdle is Renaissance Technologies’ Medallion Fund, a hedge fund that has produced an incredible 39% annualized return over the 33 calendar years through 2020, versus “just” 11% annualized for an index fund. Bradford Cornell, an emeritus finance professor at UCLA, told me in an interview that it is impossible to attribute that fund’s outperformance to mere luck. (Unfortunately, this fund is only available to current and former partners at Renaissance Technologies.)</p><p><blockquote>文艺复兴科技公司（Renaissance Technologies）的 Medallion 基金就是一个跨越这一更高门槛的基金例子，该基金在截至 2020 年的 33 个日历年中取得了令人难以置信的 39% 年化回报率，而指数基金的年化回报率 “仅为 ”11%。加州大学洛杉矶分校金融学名誉教授布拉德福德-康奈尔（Bradford Cornell）在接受采访时告诉我，不可能将该基金的出色表现仅仅归因于运气。（遗憾的是，该基金仅适用于 Renaissance Technologies 的现任和前任合作伙伴。）</blockquote></p><p> In the meantime, it’s too early to render anything close to a final verdict on ARK Innovation’s stunning performance. Its performance over the next several years may prove to be good enough to eventually satisfy traditional standards of statistical significance. Until then we can’t be sure. This is yet another reason why index funds are the default investment of choice.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，现在对方舟创新公司的出色表现下结论还为时过早。它在未来几年的表现可能足够好，最终满足传统的统计显著性标准。在此之前，我们无法确定。这是指数基金成为默认投资选择的另一个原因。</blockquote></p><p></p>","source":"market_watch","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>Jury out on whether ARK Innovation returns are due to Cathie Wood’s skill or luck<blockquote>方舟创新公司的回报是凯西-伍德的技术还是运气，目前尚无定论。</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nJury out on whether ARK Innovation returns are due to Cathie Wood’s skill or luck<blockquote>方舟创新公司的回报是凯西-伍德的技术还是运气，目前尚无定论。</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">MarketWatch</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-03-23 21:23</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Statistical scrutiny brings this high-flying ETF down to earth</p><p><blockquote>统计审查让这只高飞的 ETF 脚踏实地</blockquote></p><p> You could have performed as well as the high-flying ARK Innovation ETF by investing in the Nasdaq 100 Index.</p><p><blockquote>通过投资纳斯达克 100 指数，您的表现可以与高飞的方舟创新 ETF 一样出色。</blockquote></p><p> I know that seems hard to believe, given the stunning performance chief investment officer Cathie Wood has produced with ARK Innovation— a 229% gain over the past year, according to FactSet. Meanwhile, the Invesco QQQ Trust&nbsp;(which is benchmarked to the Nasdaq 100), gained 78%. Since its creation in October 2014, ARK Innovation has produced an annualized gain of 34.6%, versus 20.6% for the QQQ.</p><p><blockquote>我知道这似乎很难相信，考虑到首席投资官凯西·伍德 (Cathie Wood) 在 ARK Innovation 上取得了令人惊叹的业绩——根据 FactSet 的数据，过去一年增长了 229%。与此同时，景顺 QQQ Trust（以纳斯达克 100 指数为基准）上涨了 78%。自2014年10月成立以来，ARK Innovation的年化收益为34.6%，而QQQ的年化收益为20.6%。</blockquote></p><p> At the same time, ARK Innovation has been extremely volatile and risky, making an apples-to-apples comparison with the Nasdaq 100 misleading. As measured by the standard deviation of monthly returns, ARK Innovation has been 73% more volatile than QQQ. That’s really saying something, since QQQ is itself more volatile than broad market indices such as the S&amp;P 500.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，ARK Innovation 的波动性和风险极大，与纳斯达克 100 强进行单一比较具有误导性。以月回报率标准差衡量，ARK Innovation 的波动性比 QQQ 高出 73%。这确实说明了一些问题，因为 QQQ 本身的波动性比标普500等大盘指数更大。</blockquote></p><p> One approach statisticians use to create an apples-to-apples comparison is with a metric known as the Sharpe Ratio, invented by William Sharpe, the 1990 Nobel laureate in economics. It is the ratio of a fund’s average returns to the standard deviation of those returns. The Sharpe Ratio of ARK Innovation’s monthly returns since 2014 is almost precisely the same as the QQQ’s.</p><p><blockquote>统计学家用来创建苹果与苹果之间比较的一种方法是使用一种被称为夏普比率的指标，该指标由 1990 年诺贝尔经济学奖获得者威廉·夏普发明。它是基金的平均回报率与这些回报率的标准差的比率。ARK Innovation 自 2014 年以来的月回报率夏普比率几乎与 QQQ 完全相同。</blockquote></p><p> If you’re like some of my clients, your reaction is not to care about the Sharpe Ratio. “You can’t take the Sharpe Ratio to the bank,” you in effect tell me. It’s raw performance that counts, and on that basis there’s no doubt that the ARKK did far better.</p><p><blockquote>如果你像我的一些客户一样，你的反应是不在乎夏普比率。“你不能把夏普比率拿到银行去，”你实际上是在告诉我。原始的表现才是最重要的，在此基础上，毫无疑问，ARKK 的表现要好得多。</blockquote></p><p> This reaction is confused, however. In fact you can take the Sharpe Ratio to the bank. If you had been willing to incur the ARK Innovation’s increased volatility, you could have made just as much by leveraging an investment in the QQQ. That is, you would have made just as much by increasing your portfolio allocation to QQQ, or by buying it on sufficient margin. This is illustrated in the chart below:</p><p><blockquote>然而，这种反应令人困惑。事实上，你可以把夏普比率带到银行。如果你愿意承受方舟创新公司增加的波动性，你也可以通过投资 QQQ 来赚取同样多的钱。也就是说，您可以通过增加对 QQQ 的投资组合配置，或者以足够的保证金购买它来赚取同样多的钱。如下图所示：</blockquote></p><p> <img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/13b81e9f1962e464faeb2d45cdd0e5f9\" tg-width=\"1260\" tg-height=\"849\"></p><p><blockquote></blockquote></p><p> The Sharpe Ratio is not the only method that statisticians employ for measuring adviser performance on a level playing field, but other widely used approaches reach the same conclusion. Perhaps the best known, at least in academic circles, is the Fama-French factor model, named for University of Chicago finance professor Eugene Fama (the 2013 Nobel laureate in economics) and Dartmouth College professor Ken French. Their model involves an econometric test to see if a mutual fund’s return is significantly better than a combination of index funds benchmarked to factors such as small-cap, growth, and momentum.</p><p><blockquote>夏普比率并不是统计学家用来衡量公平竞争环境中顾问表现的唯一方法，但其他广泛使用的方法也得出了同样的结论。也许最著名的，至少在学术界是Fama-French因子模型，以芝加哥大学金融学教授Eugene Fama（2013年诺贝尔经济学奖获得者）和达特茅斯学院教授Ken French的名字命名。他们的模型包括计量经济学测试，以确定共同基金的回报是否明显优于以小盘股、增长和动量等因素为基准的指数基金组合。</blockquote></p><p> The answer for ARK Innovation is “no” — an overweight allocation to a small-cap growth fund would have produced the same overall return since November 2014.</p><p><blockquote>ARK Innovation 的答案是 “否定”--将跑赢大盘配置给小盘股成长基金，自 2014 年 11 月以来，总体回报将保持不变。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Luck versus skill</b></p><p><blockquote><b>运气与技巧</b></blockquote></p><p> Note carefully that these statistical tests do not prove that ARK Innovation’s performance is due solely to luck. Instead, those tests tell us that we cannot conclude that its performance was not due to luck. In this case, the double negative is not the same as the positive; this is a subtle, but important, difference.</p><p><blockquote>请注意，这些统计测试并不能证明方舟创新公司的业绩完全归功于运气。相反，这些测试告诉我们，我们不能得出它的表现不是运气的结论。在这种情况下，双重否定不等于正定；这是一个微妙但重要的区别。</blockquote></p><p> This goes to show just how difficult it is to prove that an investment manager has genuine market-beating ability. If beating an index fund by more than 10 percentage points annualized over a 6-plus-year period is not enough, then what is? (An email to ARK Investment Management requesting comment was not immediately answered.)</p><p><blockquote>这表明，证明投资经理具有真正的战胜市场的能力是多么困难。如果在 6 年多的时间内击败指数基金超过 10 个百分点还不够，那么什么还不够？（向 ARK Investment Management 发送的请求置评的电子邮件没有立即得到回复。）</blockquote></p><p> The answer: Satisfying traditional standards of statistical significance requires beating the market by a larger amount over a much longer period.</p><p><blockquote>答案是：满足传统的统计显著性标准需要在更长的时间内以更大的数量击败市场。</blockquote></p><p> An example of a fund that does jump over this much-higher hurdle is Renaissance Technologies’ Medallion Fund, a hedge fund that has produced an incredible 39% annualized return over the 33 calendar years through 2020, versus “just” 11% annualized for an index fund. Bradford Cornell, an emeritus finance professor at UCLA, told me in an interview that it is impossible to attribute that fund’s outperformance to mere luck. (Unfortunately, this fund is only available to current and former partners at Renaissance Technologies.)</p><p><blockquote>文艺复兴科技公司（Renaissance Technologies）的 Medallion 基金就是一个跨越这一更高门槛的基金例子，该基金在截至 2020 年的 33 个日历年中取得了令人难以置信的 39% 年化回报率，而指数基金的年化回报率 “仅为 ”11%。加州大学洛杉矶分校金融学名誉教授布拉德福德-康奈尔（Bradford Cornell）在接受采访时告诉我，不可能将该基金的出色表现仅仅归因于运气。（遗憾的是，该基金仅适用于 Renaissance Technologies 的现任和前任合作伙伴。）</blockquote></p><p> In the meantime, it’s too early to render anything close to a final verdict on ARK Innovation’s stunning performance. Its performance over the next several years may prove to be good enough to eventually satisfy traditional standards of statistical significance. Until then we can’t be sure. This is yet another reason why index funds are the default investment of choice.</p><p><blockquote>与此同时，现在对方舟创新公司的出色表现下结论还为时过早。它在未来几年的表现可能足够好，最终满足传统的统计显著性标准。在此之前，我们无法确定。这是指数基金成为默认投资选择的另一个原因。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-jury-is-out-on-whether-ark-innovations-red-hot-returns-are-due-to-cathie-woods-skill-or-luck-11616460092?mod=home-page\">MarketWatch</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"ARKF":"ARK Fintech Innovation ETF","ARKK":"ARK Innovation ETF","QQQ":"纳指100ETF","TSLA":"特斯拉","ARKQ":"ARK Autonomous Technology & Robotics ETF"},"source_url":"https://www.marketwatch.com/story/the-jury-is-out-on-whether-ark-innovations-red-hot-returns-are-due-to-cathie-woods-skill-or-luck-11616460092?mod=home-page","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/599a65733b8245fcf7868668ef9ad712","article_id":"1137063642","content_text":"Statistical scrutiny brings this high-flying ETF down to earth\nYou could have performed as well as the high-flying ARK Innovation ETF by investing in the Nasdaq 100 Index.\nI know that seems hard to believe, given the stunning performance chief investment officer Cathie Wood has produced with ARK Innovation— a 229% gain over the past year, according to FactSet. Meanwhile, the Invesco QQQ Trust (which is benchmarked to the Nasdaq 100), gained 78%. Since its creation in October 2014, ARK Innovation has produced an annualized gain of 34.6%, versus 20.6% for the QQQ.\nAt the same time, ARK Innovation has been extremely volatile and risky, making an apples-to-apples comparison with the Nasdaq 100 misleading. As measured by the standard deviation of monthly returns, ARK Innovation has been 73% more volatile than QQQ. That’s really saying something, since QQQ is itself more volatile than broad market indices such as the S&P 500.\nOne approach statisticians use to create an apples-to-apples comparison is with a metric known as the Sharpe Ratio, invented by William Sharpe, the 1990 Nobel laureate in economics. It is the ratio of a fund’s average returns to the standard deviation of those returns. The Sharpe Ratio of ARK Innovation’s monthly returns since 2014 is almost precisely the same as the QQQ’s.\nIf you’re like some of my clients, your reaction is not to care about the Sharpe Ratio. “You can’t take the Sharpe Ratio to the bank,” you in effect tell me. It’s raw performance that counts, and on that basis there’s no doubt that the ARKK did far better.\nThis reaction is confused, however. In fact you can take the Sharpe Ratio to the bank. If you had been willing to incur the ARK Innovation’s increased volatility, you could have made just as much by leveraging an investment in the QQQ. That is, you would have made just as much by increasing your portfolio allocation to QQQ, or by buying it on sufficient margin. This is illustrated in the chart below:\n\nThe Sharpe Ratio is not the only method that statisticians employ for measuring adviser performance on a level playing field, but other widely used approaches reach the same conclusion. Perhaps the best known, at least in academic circles, is the Fama-French factor model, named for University of Chicago finance professor Eugene Fama (the 2013 Nobel laureate in economics) and Dartmouth College professor Ken French. Their model involves an econometric test to see if a mutual fund’s return is significantly better than a combination of index funds benchmarked to factors such as small-cap, growth, and momentum.\nThe answer for ARK Innovation is “no” — an overweight allocation to a small-cap growth fund would have produced the same overall return since November 2014.\nLuck versus skill\nNote carefully that these statistical tests do not prove that ARK Innovation’s performance is due solely to luck. Instead, those tests tell us that we cannot conclude that its performance was not due to luck. In this case, the double negative is not the same as the positive; this is a subtle, but important, difference.\nThis goes to show just how difficult it is to prove that an investment manager has genuine market-beating ability. If beating an index fund by more than 10 percentage points annualized over a 6-plus-year period is not enough, then what is? (An email to ARK Investment Management requesting comment was not immediately answered.)\nThe answer: Satisfying traditional standards of statistical significance requires beating the market by a larger amount over a much longer period.\nAn example of a fund that does jump over this much-higher hurdle is Renaissance Technologies’ Medallion Fund, a hedge fund that has produced an incredible 39% annualized return over the 33 calendar years through 2020, versus “just” 11% annualized for an index fund. Bradford Cornell, an emeritus finance professor at UCLA, told me in an interview that it is impossible to attribute that fund’s outperformance to mere luck. (Unfortunately, this fund is only available to current and former partners at Renaissance Technologies.)\nIn the meantime, it’s too early to render anything close to a final verdict on ARK Innovation’s stunning performance. Its performance over the next several years may prove to be good enough to eventually satisfy traditional standards of statistical significance. Until then we can’t be sure. This is yet another reason why index funds are the default investment of choice.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"QQQ":0.9,"ARKK":0.9,"ARKQ":0.9,"ARKF":0.9,"TSLA":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2473,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":325119833,"gmtCreate":1615873988822,"gmtModify":1703494301968,"author":{"id":"3569917618374883","authorId":"3569917618374883","name":"Waynenaidu","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d059d2c0dfcc62b3538622190f2564ed","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3569917618374883","idStr":"3569917618374883"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Good&nbsp;","listText":"Good&nbsp;","text":"Good","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":2,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/325119833","repostId":"1107832092","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1488,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":325958587,"gmtCreate":1615859152449,"gmtModify":1703494077710,"author":{"id":"3569917618374883","authorId":"3569917618374883","name":"Waynenaidu","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d059d2c0dfcc62b3538622190f2564ed","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3569917618374883","idStr":"3569917618374883"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Good read","listText":"Good read","text":"Good read","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":1,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/325958587","repostId":"1130810138","repostType":4,"repost":{"id":"1130810138","kind":"news","pubTimestamp":1615857713,"share":"https://www.laohunote.com/m/news/1130810138?lang=zh_CN&edition=full","pubTime":"2021-03-16 09:21","market":"us","language":"en","title":"AMD Is a Stock to Buy on the Dip - Here’s Why<blockquote>AMD 是一只值得逢低买入的股票--原因如下</blockquote>","url":"https://stock-news.laohu8.com/highlight/detail?id=1130810138","media":"TheStreet","summary":"Like other tech stocks, Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) hasn't fared too well lately.\nAlthough it’s hel","content":"<p>Like other tech stocks, Advanced Micro Devices&nbsp;(<b>AMD</b>) hasn't fared too well lately.</p><p><blockquote>与其他科技股一样，先进微设备公司（<b>AMD</b>）最近表现不太好。</blockquote></p><p> Although it’s held up better than some of its high-growth peers, AMD hasn’t been immune to the decline in tech stocks.</p><p><blockquote>尽管 AMD 的表现优于一些高增长同行，但科技股的下跌也未能幸免。</blockquote></p><p> While&nbsp;higher interest rates have been the blame, the entire tech space has been struggling. Shares of AMD fell 25.5% from peak to their recent trough, which is about in-line with Nvidia’s&nbsp;(<b>NVDA</b>) &nbsp;recent slide.</p><p><blockquote>虽然利率上升是罪魁祸首，但整个科技领域一直在苦苦挣扎。AMD 的股价从峰值到最近的低谷下跌了 25.5%，这与英伟达的跌幅大致相同（<b>NVDA</b>）最近的幻灯片。</blockquote></p><p> I liked Nvidia on the dip&nbsp;and because both companies have great fundamentals I like AMD on the dip too.</p><p><blockquote>我喜欢 Nvidia 的低迷时期，因为两家公司都有很好的基本面，所以我也喜欢 AMD 的低迷时期。</blockquote></p><p> So far, shares have been rallying nicely off last week’s low. Let’s take a closer look at the chart to see what the damage is.</p><p><blockquote>到目前为止，股市已从上周的低点反弹。让我们仔细看看图表，看看损坏程度如何。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Trading AMD</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交易 AMD</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c1746940036301b9d0299b9304312180\" tg-width=\"1070\" tg-height=\"736\"><span>Daily chart of AMD stock.</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>AMD股票日线图。</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Earlier in the year, AMD looked set to test $100 and potentially break out over this mark.</p><p><blockquote>今年早些时候，AMD 看起来将测试 100 美元，并有可能突破这一关口。</blockquote></p><p> Instead, it kept finding sellers on each rally, even as the $87 level was acting as support along with the 100-day moving average.</p><p><blockquote>相反，它在每次反弹中都不断找到卖家，即使 87 美元水平与 100 日移动平均线一起作为支撑。</blockquote></p><p> Ultimately these levels failed as support, with shares flushing down to the 200-day moving average.</p><p><blockquote>最终，这些水平未能作为支撑，股价跌至 200 日移动平均线。</blockquote></p><p> It wasn’t necessarily wrong for investors to expect the 200-day moving average to be support. However, with rising interest rates driving the narrative, tech stocks were under heavy pressure.</p><p><blockquote>投资者期待 200 日移动平均线成为支撑并不一定是错误的。然而，随着利率上升推动了这种说法，科技股面临着巨大压力。</blockquote></p><p> Once this level failed for AMD, it looked dicey. That is, unless you were looking at multiple timeframes.</p><p><blockquote>一旦这个水平对AMD来说失败了，它看起来很危险。也就是说，除非你在看多个时间框架。</blockquote></p><p> AMD stock traded down perfectly to range support near $74, as well as the 50-week moving average. It bounced from this level on Friday March 5th and closed at it on Monday March 8th. Since then, it’s been enjoying a strong rally.</p><p><blockquote>AMD 股价完美下跌至 74 美元附近的区间支撑位以及 50 周移动平均线。它于3月5日星期五从该水平反弹，并于3月8日星期一收于该水平。从那时起，它就一直在强劲反弹。</blockquote></p><p> From here, we have to see how the stock handles its 100-day moving average and the $87 level. These prior measures were support. If they are reclaimed, they can again act as support.</p><p><blockquote>从这里开始，我们必须看看该股如何处理其 100 天移动平均线和 87 美元水平。这些先前的措施得到了支持。如果它们被回收，它们可以再次充当支持。</blockquote></p><p> However, if they are resistance, AMD stock may need more time to consolidate.</p><p><blockquote>然而，如果它们是阻力，AMD 股票可能需要更多时间来盘整。</blockquote></p><p> On the downside, let’s see if shares can stay above the 200-day moving average. If the stock can do so, it’s likely a buyable dip. Below it puts the 50-week moving average in play.</p><p><blockquote>不利的一面是，让我们看看股价能否保持在 200 天移动平均线之上。如果该股能做到这一点，那么这很可能是一个值得买入的下跌。其下方是 50 周移动平均线。</blockquote></p><p> Even though I don't know if $78 or $88 is next, I like AMD stock for the long term. It has too many catalysts to ignore.</p><p><blockquote>尽管我不知道 78 美元还是 88 美元是下一个，但我长期喜欢 AMD 股票。它有太多不容忽视的催化剂。</blockquote></p><p></p>","collect":0,"html":"<!DOCTYPE html>\n<html>\n<head>\n<meta http-equiv=\"Content-Type\" content=\"text/html; charset=utf-8\" />\n<meta name=\"viewport\" content=\"width=device-width,initial-scale=1.0,minimum-scale=1.0,maximum-scale=1.0,user-scalable=no\"/>\n<meta name=\"format-detection\" content=\"telephone=no,email=no,address=no\" />\n<title>AMD Is a Stock to Buy on the Dip - Here’s Why<blockquote>AMD 是一只值得逢低买入的股票--原因如下</blockquote></title>\n<style type=\"text/css\">\na,abbr,acronym,address,applet,article,aside,audio,b,big,blockquote,body,canvas,caption,center,cite,code,dd,del,details,dfn,div,dl,dt,\nem,embed,fieldset,figcaption,figure,footer,form,h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6,header,hgroup,html,i,iframe,img,ins,kbd,label,legend,li,mark,menu,nav,\nobject,ol,output,p,pre,q,ruby,s,samp,section,small,span,strike,strong,sub,summary,sup,table,tbody,td,tfoot,th,thead,time,tr,tt,u,ul,var,video{ font:inherit;margin:0;padding:0;vertical-align:baseline;border:0 }\nbody{ font-size:16px; line-height:1.5; color:#999; background:transparent; }\n.wrapper{ overflow:hidden;word-break:break-all;padding:10px; }\nh1,h2{ font-weight:normal; line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:.6em; }\nh3,h4,h5,h6{ line-height:1.35; margin-bottom:1em; }\nh1{ font-size:24px; }\nh2{ font-size:20px; }\nh3{ font-size:18px; }\nh4{ font-size:16px; }\nh5{ font-size:14px; }\nh6{ font-size:12px; }\np,ul,ol,blockquote,dl,table{ margin:1.2em 0; }\nul,ol{ margin-left:2em; }\nul{ list-style:disc; }\nol{ list-style:decimal; }\nli,li p{ margin:10px 0;}\nimg{ max-width:100%;display:block;margin:0 auto 1em; }\nblockquote{ color:#B5B2B1; border-left:3px solid #aaa; padding:1em; }\nstrong,b{font-weight:bold;}\nem,i{font-style:italic;}\ntable{ width:100%;border-collapse:collapse;border-spacing:1px;margin:1em 0;font-size:.9em; }\nth,td{ padding:5px;text-align:left;border:1px solid #aaa; }\nth{ font-weight:bold;background:#5d5d5d; }\n.symbol-link{font-weight:bold;}\n/* header{ border-bottom:1px solid #494756; } */\n.title{ margin:0 0 8px;line-height:1.3;color:#ddd; }\n.meta {color:#5e5c6d;font-size:13px;margin:0 0 .5em; }\na{text-decoration:none; color:#2a4b87;}\n.meta .head { display: inline-block; overflow: hidden}\n.head .h-thumb { width: 30px; height: 30px; margin: 0; padding: 0; border-radius: 50%; float: left;}\n.head .h-content { margin: 0; padding: 0 0 0 9px; float: left;}\n.head .h-name {font-size: 13px; color: #eee; margin: 0;}\n.head .h-time {font-size: 12.5px; color: #7E829C; margin: 0;}\n.small {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.9); -webkit-transform: scale(0.9); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.smaller {font-size: 12.5px; display: inline-block; transform: scale(0.8); -webkit-transform: scale(0.8); transform-origin: left; -webkit-transform-origin: left;}\n.bt-text {font-size: 12px;margin: 1.5em 0 0 0}\n.bt-text p {margin: 0}\n</style>\n</head>\n<body>\n<div class=\"wrapper\">\n<header>\n<h2 class=\"title\">\nAMD Is a Stock to Buy on the Dip - Here’s Why<blockquote>AMD 是一只值得逢低买入的股票--原因如下</blockquote>\n</h2>\n<h4 class=\"meta\">\n<p class=\"head\">\n<strong class=\"h-name small\">TheStreet</strong><span class=\"h-time small\">2021-03-16 09:21</span>\n</p>\n</h4>\n</header>\n<article>\n<p>Like other tech stocks, Advanced Micro Devices&nbsp;(<b>AMD</b>) hasn't fared too well lately.</p><p><blockquote>与其他科技股一样，先进微设备公司（<b>AMD</b>）最近表现不太好。</blockquote></p><p> Although it’s held up better than some of its high-growth peers, AMD hasn’t been immune to the decline in tech stocks.</p><p><blockquote>尽管 AMD 的表现优于一些高增长同行，但科技股的下跌也未能幸免。</blockquote></p><p> While&nbsp;higher interest rates have been the blame, the entire tech space has been struggling. Shares of AMD fell 25.5% from peak to their recent trough, which is about in-line with Nvidia’s&nbsp;(<b>NVDA</b>) &nbsp;recent slide.</p><p><blockquote>虽然利率上升是罪魁祸首，但整个科技领域一直在苦苦挣扎。AMD 的股价从峰值到最近的低谷下跌了 25.5%，这与英伟达的跌幅大致相同（<b>NVDA</b>）最近的幻灯片。</blockquote></p><p> I liked Nvidia on the dip&nbsp;and because both companies have great fundamentals I like AMD on the dip too.</p><p><blockquote>我喜欢 Nvidia 的低迷时期，因为两家公司都有很好的基本面，所以我也喜欢 AMD 的低迷时期。</blockquote></p><p> So far, shares have been rallying nicely off last week’s low. Let’s take a closer look at the chart to see what the damage is.</p><p><blockquote>到目前为止，股市已从上周的低点反弹。让我们仔细看看图表，看看损坏程度如何。</blockquote></p><p> <b>Trading AMD</b></p><p><blockquote><b>交易 AMD</b></blockquote></p><p> <p class=\"t-img-caption\"><img src=\"https://static.tigerbbs.com/c1746940036301b9d0299b9304312180\" tg-width=\"1070\" tg-height=\"736\"><span>Daily chart of AMD stock.</span></p><p><blockquote><p class=\"t-img-caption\"><span>AMD股票日线图。</span></p></blockquote></p><p> Earlier in the year, AMD looked set to test $100 and potentially break out over this mark.</p><p><blockquote>今年早些时候，AMD 看起来将测试 100 美元，并有可能突破这一关口。</blockquote></p><p> Instead, it kept finding sellers on each rally, even as the $87 level was acting as support along with the 100-day moving average.</p><p><blockquote>相反，它在每次反弹中都不断找到卖家，即使 87 美元水平与 100 日移动平均线一起作为支撑。</blockquote></p><p> Ultimately these levels failed as support, with shares flushing down to the 200-day moving average.</p><p><blockquote>最终，这些水平未能作为支撑，股价跌至 200 日移动平均线。</blockquote></p><p> It wasn’t necessarily wrong for investors to expect the 200-day moving average to be support. However, with rising interest rates driving the narrative, tech stocks were under heavy pressure.</p><p><blockquote>投资者期待 200 日移动平均线成为支撑并不一定是错误的。然而，随着利率上升推动了这种说法，科技股面临着巨大压力。</blockquote></p><p> Once this level failed for AMD, it looked dicey. That is, unless you were looking at multiple timeframes.</p><p><blockquote>一旦这个水平对AMD来说失败了，它看起来很危险。也就是说，除非你在看多个时间框架。</blockquote></p><p> AMD stock traded down perfectly to range support near $74, as well as the 50-week moving average. It bounced from this level on Friday March 5th and closed at it on Monday March 8th. Since then, it’s been enjoying a strong rally.</p><p><blockquote>AMD 股价完美下跌至 74 美元附近的区间支撑位以及 50 周移动平均线。它于3月5日星期五从该水平反弹，并于3月8日星期一收于该水平。从那时起，它就一直在强劲反弹。</blockquote></p><p> From here, we have to see how the stock handles its 100-day moving average and the $87 level. These prior measures were support. If they are reclaimed, they can again act as support.</p><p><blockquote>从这里开始，我们必须看看该股如何处理其 100 天移动平均线和 87 美元水平。这些先前的措施得到了支持。如果它们被回收，它们可以再次充当支持。</blockquote></p><p> However, if they are resistance, AMD stock may need more time to consolidate.</p><p><blockquote>然而，如果它们是阻力，AMD 股票可能需要更多时间来盘整。</blockquote></p><p> On the downside, let’s see if shares can stay above the 200-day moving average. If the stock can do so, it’s likely a buyable dip. Below it puts the 50-week moving average in play.</p><p><blockquote>不利的一面是，让我们看看股价能否保持在 200 天移动平均线之上。如果该股能做到这一点，那么这很可能是一个值得买入的下跌。其下方是 50 周移动平均线。</blockquote></p><p> Even though I don't know if $78 or $88 is next, I like AMD stock for the long term. It has too many catalysts to ignore.</p><p><blockquote>尽管我不知道 78 美元还是 88 美元是下一个，但我长期喜欢 AMD 股票。它有太多不容忽视的催化剂。</blockquote></p><p></p>\n<div class=\"bt-text\">\n\n\n<p> 来源：<a href=\"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/advanced-micro-devices-amd-stock-buy-the-dip-trading\">TheStreet</a></p>\n<p>为提升您的阅读体验，我们对本页面进行了排版优化</p>\n\n\n</div>\n</article>\n</div>\n</body>\n</html>\n","type":0,"thumbnail":"","relate_stocks":{"AMD":"美国超微公司"},"source_url":"https://www.thestreet.com/investing/advanced-micro-devices-amd-stock-buy-the-dip-trading","is_english":true,"share_image_url":"https://static.laohu8.com/e9f99090a1c2ed51c021029395664489","article_id":"1130810138","content_text":"Like other tech stocks, Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) hasn't fared too well lately.\nAlthough it’s held up better than some of its high-growth peers, AMD hasn’t been immune to the decline in tech stocks.\nWhile higher interest rates have been the blame, the entire tech space has been struggling. Shares of AMD fell 25.5% from peak to their recent trough, which is about in-line with Nvidia’s (NVDA)  recent slide.\nI liked Nvidia on the dip and because both companies have great fundamentals I like AMD on the dip too.\nSo far, shares have been rallying nicely off last week’s low. Let’s take a closer look at the chart to see what the damage is.\nTrading AMD\nDaily chart of AMD stock.\nEarlier in the year, AMD looked set to test $100 and potentially break out over this mark.\nInstead, it kept finding sellers on each rally, even as the $87 level was acting as support along with the 100-day moving average.\nUltimately these levels failed as support, with shares flushing down to the 200-day moving average.\nIt wasn’t necessarily wrong for investors to expect the 200-day moving average to be support. However, with rising interest rates driving the narrative, tech stocks were under heavy pressure.\nOnce this level failed for AMD, it looked dicey. That is, unless you were looking at multiple timeframes.\nAMD stock traded down perfectly to range support near $74, as well as the 50-week moving average. It bounced from this level on Friday March 5th and closed at it on Monday March 8th. Since then, it’s been enjoying a strong rally.\nFrom here, we have to see how the stock handles its 100-day moving average and the $87 level. These prior measures were support. If they are reclaimed, they can again act as support.\nHowever, if they are resistance, AMD stock may need more time to consolidate.\nOn the downside, let’s see if shares can stay above the 200-day moving average. If the stock can do so, it’s likely a buyable dip. Below it puts the 50-week moving average in play.\nEven though I don't know if $78 or $88 is next, I like AMD stock for the long term. It has too many catalysts to ignore.","news_type":1,"symbols_score_info":{"AMD":0.9}},"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1686,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":326264971,"gmtCreate":1615668390193,"gmtModify":1703491935988,"author":{"id":"3569917618374883","authorId":"3569917618374883","name":"Waynenaidu","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d059d2c0dfcc62b3538622190f2564ed","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3569917618374883","idStr":"3569917618374883"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Haha 👌🏽 of&nbsp;","listText":"Haha 👌🏽 of&nbsp;","text":"Haha 👌🏽 of","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":1,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/326264971","repostId":"1100027772","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1708,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":328289351,"gmtCreate":1615529676673,"gmtModify":1703490497862,"author":{"id":"3569917618374883","authorId":"3569917618374883","name":"Waynenaidu","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d059d2c0dfcc62b3538622190f2564ed","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3569917618374883","idStr":"3569917618374883"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Wow","listText":"Wow","text":"Wow","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/328289351","repostId":"1119544264","repostType":4,"isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":1747,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0},{"id":328280138,"gmtCreate":1615529586224,"gmtModify":1703490496831,"author":{"id":"3569917618374883","authorId":"3569917618374883","name":"Waynenaidu","avatar":"https://static.tigerbbs.com/d059d2c0dfcc62b3538622190f2564ed","crmLevel":11,"crmLevelSwitch":0,"followedFlag":false,"authorIdStr":"3569917618374883","idStr":"3569917618374883"},"themes":[],"title":"","htmlText":"Ok 👍🏽&nbsp;","listText":"Ok 👍🏽&nbsp;","text":"Ok 👍🏽","images":[],"top":1,"highlighted":1,"essential":1,"paper":1,"likeSize":0,"commentSize":0,"repostSize":0,"link":"https://laohu8.com/post/328280138","isVote":1,"tweetType":1,"viewCount":2411,"authorTweetTopStatus":1,"verified":2,"comments":[],"imageCount":0,"langContent":"EN","totalScore":0}],"defaultTab":"posts","isTTM":false}