Dump it Here

[Skate]

Churchill's quote perfectly captures the essence of trading
"The pessimist sees difficulty in every opportunity. The optimist sees the opportunity in every difficulty."

This is a timely reminder for traders to stay alert for potential opportunities, especially during volatile market conditions. Rather than focusing on the challenges, look for the trades you can profit from.

Skate.

 

[CNHTractor]

@Richard Dale . You should never post when you are angry. Take it from an expert.

Whatever the rights and wrongs, you have made your point. I don't use data anymore as there is so much free stuff out there that satisfies my needs.

On a positive note it would now appear that your systems are now robust enough to prevent people using your data free. If it had been me I would have said nothing, I guess you've never served in the army, the last thing you share is intel on those opposing you. I briefly thought of really testing your systems but decided against it as time is more precious to me than idle fun.

I do understand your angst as it is your livelihood that is being threatened. @Skate has apologised.

gg

It’s great to see active discussions like this unfolding here on the forum. I want to take a moment to acknowledge @Richard Dale ’s contributions to this thread.

The goal of forums like this is to foster informed and challenging discussions, where alternate views can be shared freely and without fear of ridicule or hostility. Richard’s perspective brings up valid concerns about the importance of transparency and evidence, particularly when discussing models or formulas that impact decision-making. Without sharing the specifics of the model or formula, it becomes difficult for others to critically evaluate or engage with its validity.

While it’s natural to have strong opinions, we should remember that respectful dialogue is the foundation of productive debate. Challenging @Skate on the transparency of the model isn’t about discrediting their perspective but about holding ideas to a higher standard of scrutiny for the benefit of the community. This type of constructive challenge is exactly what fosters better understanding and informed decision-making.

Let’s continue to challenge ideas, not individuals, and ensure that this forum remains a space for thoughtful, respectful exchange of ideas. Transparency and open critique will make the discussions here even more meaningful.

 

[Skate]

It’s great to see active discussions like this unfolding here on the forum. I want to take a moment to acknowledge @Richard Dale ’s contributions to this thread.

The goal of forums like this is to foster informed and challenging discussions, where alternate views can be shared freely and without fear of ridicule or hostility. Richard’s perspective brings up valid concerns about the importance of transparency and evidence, particularly when discussing models or formulas that impact decision-making. Without sharing the specifics of the model or formula, it becomes difficult for others to critically evaluate or engage with its validity.

While it’s natural to have strong opinions, we should remember that respectful dialogue is the foundation of productive debate. Challenging @Skate on the transparency of the model isn’t about discrediting their perspective but about holding ideas to a higher standard of scrutiny for the benefit of the community. This type of constructive challenge is exactly what fosters better understanding and informed decision-making.

Let’s continue to challenge ideas, not individuals, and ensure that this forum remains a space for thoughtful, respectful exchange of ideas. Transparency and open critique will make the discussions here even more meaningful.

@CNHTractor, thanks for your thoughtful input and for acknowledging @Richard Dale's contributions. I appreciate the emphasis on having a space where ideas can be challenged constructively.

The point about transparency in sharing is well-taken. In an educational thread like this, it's indeed crucial for all members to feel they can critically assess the information presented. However, I'd like to clarify that the aim of this thread is not only to dissect the technical aspects of trading but also to encourage a broad spectrum of learning experiences.

My approach has been to share insights and methods in a way that's accessible to a wide range of experience levels, encouraging discussion rather than demanding perfection in detail.

I encourage @Richard Dale and all members to continue sharing their thoughts and questions and I'll do my best to address them in a way that educates without overwhelming. Let's keep fostering an environment where everyone feels they can comfortably contribute, learn, and grow, respecting each other's learning journey.

Skate.

 

[Skate]

The goal of forums like this is to foster informed and challenging discussions, where alternate views can be shared freely and without fear of ridicule or hostility.

@CNHTractor you nailed it with your "quoted comments" above.

In my opinion
There is no right or wrong method when it comes to trading. What works for one person might not work for another. It's up to each individual to decide which method resonates with them.

A variety of opinions are welcomed
The "Dump it here" thread is about the exchange of ideas & certainly not a "contest of ideas".

In the "Dump it here" thread
As far as I'm concerned there is no "right or wrong" when views are expressed in this thread. Every member has the right to express their views without being ridiculed. There are just alternative views. Each member will take something different from each of our posts. It might even be the catalyst for them to think about the topic being discussed on a deeper level or encourage them to do a bit of their own follow-up research.

When opinions are expressed
You take what you can from what is being presented. Some posts will resonate, and others will fall flat, but that doesn't mean the information presented lacks value. What you regard as common knowledge, others may think is gold. Every post I've made in the "Dump it here" thread is in the hope of helping others. The ideas presented might just be the catalyst to spark an idea in someone else.

This thread is a learning space rather than a battleground for ideas
I believe this thread is "different to most" since it encourages respect for all contributions to maintain a positive community spirit where everyone feels valued.

Skate.

 

[CNHTractor]

Thank you for your reply, @Skate. I appreciate your commitment to fostering a respectful and inclusive environment where everyone feels comfortable sharing their views. Your emphasis on diverse learning experiences and respecting different perspectives is undoubtedly one of the strengths of this thread.

That said, I think transparency and clarity in presenting ideas can enhance the learning experience for all. While not every detail needs to be perfect or exhaustive, providing more specifics—especially around methods or models—can help others engage more deeply and critically with the concepts being shared. It’s not about creating a battleground for ideas, but rather a space where they can be constructively examined to maximize their educational value.

I also agree with your point that everyone takes something different from a discussion. By sharing both broad insights and enough detail for meaningful critique, we can ensure this thread continues to spark ideas, encourage follow-up research, and benefit members with varying levels of experience.

Looking forward to seeing more of the thoughtful exchanges that make this community so valuable!

 

[Skate]

By sharing both broad insights and enough detail for meaningful critique, we can ensure this thread continues to spark ideas, encourage follow-up research, and benefit members with varying levels of experience.

@CNHTractor, thank you for your follow-up post. It allows me to share my views and explain why I post the way I do. I acknowledge that no one person has all the answers or complete accurate information, but we all believe in what we share.

The “Dump it here” Thread Thrives on Information
When additional information clarifies and enhances the original or subsequent posts, focusing on the topic rather than the person adds value. Unfortunately, some members can’t resist trying to score points by ridiculing others. These individuals know who they are and simply can’t help themselves.

Poor Behaviour
My response to such behaviour is to keep the conversation going to understand different perspectives. Without member involvement, this thread would merely be a collection of my opinions, which is unhealthy.

Purpose of the Thread
The “Dump it here” thread is designed for beginners, focusing on general discussions rather than deep dives into specifics. This approach encourages self-education without overwhelming anyone.

Level of Detail
I recognise the importance of not delving into overly specific or technical details (like PI to 10 decimal places) but instead focusing on explaining core concepts (what PI is). This helps maintain the clarity and relevance of this thread.

Example of Specific Sharing
I recently shared some basic Excel code to access the “Market Index Weekend Newsletter,” which includes a free market download workbook as a practical example. When I delve into specifics, it’s to show a balance in sharing information appropriate for beginners.

Technical Terms
In my trading strategy, I use functions like (Hann, COS, FIR, PDI, MDI) which might not be beneficial in this context. This reinforces my stance that this thread should stimulate thought rather than confuse it with jargon.

Encouragement of Broad Understanding
Over time, I’ve posted about various concepts and strategies to foster a broad understanding rather than a deep but narrow band of information.

Summary
I strive to post and respond to all posts respectfully, with an educational ethos in mind, valuing each member’s points of view and suggestions. This approach ensures that the conversation remains constructive and aligned with our small community’s expectations.

Skate.

 

[Rabbithop]

It’s great to see active discussions like this unfolding here on the forum. I want to take a moment to acknowledge @Richard Dale ’s contributions to this thread.

The goal of forums like this is to foster informed and challenging discussions, where alternate views can be shared freely and without fear of ridicule or hostility. Richard’s perspective brings up valid concerns about the importance of transparency and evidence, particularly when discussing models or formulas that impact decision-making. Without sharing the specifics of the model or formula, it becomes difficult for others to critically evaluate or engage with its validity.

While it’s natural to have strong opinions, we should remember that respectful dialogue is the foundation of productive debate. Challenging @Skate on the transparency of the model isn’t about discrediting their perspective but about holding ideas to a higher standard of scrutiny for the benefit of the community. This type of constructive challenge is exactly what fosters better understanding and informed decision-making.

Let’s continue to challenge ideas, not individuals, and ensure that this forum remains a space for thoughtful, respectful exchange of ideas. Transparency and open critique will make the discussions here even more meaningful.

I agree with your comments. However it can be done in a tactful way via PM.
Its not a good idea trying to discredit someone who is trying to bring forth of his research to shall with others in the name of teaching but not for selfish individual gain. Also this may not look good for both parties. It's my humble opinion.

 

[Skate]

Also this may not look good for both parties. It's my humble opinion.

@Rabbithop, that's a great observation as further discussions could quickly turn tribal.

The "Dump it Here" Thread is a Knowledge Sharing Hub
The major purpose of this thread is to establish an environment where we can exchange knowledge and ideas to enhance our trading experiences. As a diverse group of individuals with varying levels of skill, everyone has something meaningful to contribute to the discussion.

To maintain a positive and productive atmosphere
Please remember the T.H.I.N.K. principle before posting:

T is for True - Is your information accurate?
H is for Helpful - Does your post contribute positively to the discussion?
I is for Inspiring - Does your contribution encourage others to share their ideas?
N is for Necessary - Is your input relevant to the topic at hand?
K is for Kind - Are you communicating respectfully with others?

In conclusion
Remember, no one knows everything, and there's always room to learn more. IMHO, the "Dump it Here" thread is an opportunity that benefits all, no matter your experience level or trading know-how.

Skate.

 

[divs4ever]

Chinese Firm Disrupts Big AI With DeepSeek



here is a new AI app for you to play with

 

[Skate]

A year ago, I was inspired by an article from Chris Conway of Livewire Markets to run an "AI vs fund manager" stock-picking experiment on ASX 200 income stocks. The results are in, so I thought I’d share a quick update (Feb 2024–Feb 2025).

Full Results

MSN

The Condensed Results
#1. The winner: Fund Manager (Dr. Don Hamson): +15.8% who outperformed Google Bard (AI) by 3.3%, thanks to smarter stock selection.

#2. AI (Google’s Bard): +12.5%

#3. ASX 200 Benchmark: +10.2%

It should be noted
Both did better than the market, but the human edge was pretty clear.

The Key Takeaways
#1. (AI) is great at crunching numbers but struggles to understand the nuances of the markets.
#2. IMHO, if you’re using (AI) for stock picks, treat it as a tool, not a crystal ball.

Summary
(AI) is improving rapidly, but for now, human experience still holds the edge in this experiment. A hybrid approach "blending" AI’s data power with human judgment "feels like" the smartest strategy moving forward.

Skate.

 

[divs4ever]

just keep checking AI is improving for the task you set it

while your AI can search wider and deeper ( and quicker ) make sure it doesn't vacuum up flawed data to process in the mission

yes , sentiment and dubious news affects the short-term share price , but long term accuracy of data counts

 

[Skate]

just keep checking AI is improving for the task you set it

while your AI can search wider and deeper ( and quicker ) make sure it doesn't vacuum up flawed data to process in the mission

yes , sentiment and dubious news affects the short-term share price , but long term accuracy of data counts

@divs4ever, I love your perspective on this. Trading and investing are all about making informed decisions, but human analysis can only take us so far. This is where (AI) truly shines, in my opinion "acting as a powerful scenario simulator" that uncovers a wide range of possibilities that human analysts might overlook or never even consider. This approach doesn’t replace human judgment "it enhances it", giving us the tools to make smarter, more data-driven decisions.

Skate.

 

[dyna]

The Key Takeaways
#1. (AI) is great at crunching numbers but struggles to understand the nuances of the markets.
#2. IMHO, if you’re using (AI) for stock picks, treat it as a tool, not a crystal ball.

For a long time now , I' ve been thinking If I was starting from scratch all over again , I 'd not even bother with individual shares . They are just too much work for a young person not yet addicted to the damn things . Instead , I'd put all my efforts into choosing ( or paying for the advice on : ) a bunch of ETF's .
My query now : Will AI ever surpass ETF's ? Perhaps it's too early to tell , wait for a bear market .

 

[divs4ever]

well humans can suffer from 'too much data' AND 'too many places to look/watch ' ( 2020 made me very aware of that )

a decent AI should not be overwhelmed that way

but clever humans offset that by limiting the search area first ( and deciding a desired position at the end of the process )

now a hybrid ( human +AI ) process has plenty of adaptability and flexibility

now sure the ASF ( stock-market ) veterans have it fairly right ( good reliable stocks , nice entry prices and EXPERIENCE )

Fundie vs AI: One year on, who is the winner?​

Fundie vs AI: One year on, who is the winner?

A year ago, we asked whether AI will ever be able to pick stocks like a human? Here, we get some answers.

www.livewiremarkets.com

 

[divs4ever]

For a long time now , I' ve been thinking If I was starting from scratch all over again , I 'd not even bother with individual shares . They are just too much work for a young person not yet addicted to the damn things . Instead , I'd put all my efforts into choosing ( or paying for the advice on : ) a bunch of ETF's .
My query now : Will AI ever surpass ETF's ? Perhaps it's too early to tell , wait for a bear market .

if YOUNGER ( i started this adventure in my mid 50's ) and starting i would go the opposite way

depending on the ETFs selected you are basically just following the crowd

but i would have had more time to study/read/think on my investments before opening each position.

AI v ETFs that might depend if you use an AI with basic commands , or you refine your AI before unleashing it
ETFs rely on selling to ( hundreds of ) thousands investors so must use popular parameters

how many ETFs would dare limit D/E to under 40% ?

more likely they will insert BIG names rather than solid financials ( to sell more units )

but yes a bear market should be very educational this time

 

[Richard Dale]

Skate - the "excercise" was on "income stocks" but you have completely ignored dividends in all of your reports, so your conclusion is flawed.

Going back to the original list and based upon your start date of 2024-01-22 (and using open price), here's the results, inclusive of dividends (total return) for the first 12 month period, not including brokerage or tax.

2024-01-22 (At Open) - 2025-01-21 (At Close)
Don Hamson - Plato Investment Management 20.40%
IOZ.au iShares Core S&P/ASX 200 ETF 16.62%
AI 12.31%
Skate Portfolio 4.72%

However, if we use the dates in the article, the here at the results inclusive of dividends (total return) , not including brokerage or tax:
2024-02-05 (At Close) + 12 months = 2025-02-04 (At Close)
Don Hamson - Plato Investment Management 21.18%
IOZ.au iShares Core S&P/ASX 200 ETF 13.54%
AI 10.50%
Skate Portfolio 0.11%

And a point of comparison on the yearly CPI rate:
CPI (Dec 2023-Dec 2024) 2.42%

(it should be noted that my total return figures differ from the article - I'm going to get in touch with the author)

 

[Skate]

Skate - the "excercise" was on "income stocks" but you have completely ignored dividends in all of your reports, so your conclusion is flawed.

Going back to the original list and based upon your start date of 2024-01-22 (and using open price), here's the results, inclusive of dividends (total return) for the first 12 month period, not including brokerage or tax.

2024-01-22 (At Open) - 2025-01-21 (At Close)
Don Hamson - Plato Investment Management 20.40%
IOZ.au iShares Core S&P/ASX 200 ETF 16.62%
AI 12.31%
Skate Portfolio 4.72%

However, if we use the dates in the article, the here at the results inclusive of dividends (total return) , not including brokerage or tax:
2024-02-05 (At Close) + 12 months = 2025-02-04 (At Close)
Don Hamson - Plato Investment Management 21.18%
IOZ.au iShares Core S&P/ASX 200 ETF 13.54%
AI 10.50%
Skate Portfolio 0.11%

And a point of comparison on the yearly CPI rate:
CPI (Dec 2023-Dec 2024) 2.42%

(it should be noted that my total return figures differ from the article - I'm going to get in touch with the author)

@Richard Dale, thank you for your detailed analysis and for pointing out the importance of including dividends in the evaluation of income stocks. I appreciate your thoroughness and the effort you’ve put into recalculating the results with dividends included, as well as using both the original start date (22/1/2024) and the article’s reference date (5/2/2025). Your work adds significant depth to the discussion and highlights a critical aspect of performance measurement for income-focused portfolios.

Skate.

 

[divs4ever]

The investor who crushed AI with founder-led businesses​

The investor who crushed AI with founder-led businesses

A year ago, we asked whether AI will ever be able to pick stocks like a human. As the headline suggests, the current answer is 'not yet'.

www.livewiremarkets.com

well this AI v. professional stock-picker is getting the microscope treatment

EVENTUALLY i see AI PLUS human research being the great option ( but tweaking that AI first might be the secret sauce )