Momentum Investing Quotes

The formation of bubbles isn’t so much about people irrationally participating in long-term investing. They’re about people somewhat rationally moving toward short-term trading to capture momentum that had been feeding on itself.

A stock screening feature is then used to find the leading stocks within the leading sectors.

Under the tenets of behavioral finance, markets are not always efficient. It is human behavior that moves markets and not the universal information shared by market participants.

Buying stocks when the broader overall market is trending up is a good idea, for long positions. The trend will provide a tailwind for the stock prices to move higher.

The tools and resources used in this book are FREE and readily available on the internet. Details on how to access these tools are shown.

For international readers, the FREE tools presented in this book are applicable for trading any stock market in the world.

One concept lately gaining momentum is “impact investing” or “triple-bottom-line investing,” whereby investors back businesses that generate financial returns and meet measurable social or environmental goals.

Many thought of the election of Barack Obama, not as the end of racism, but certainly as a turning point. And it was. But for many, President Obama's election was a turning point in a different direction. It spurred a backlash among white supremacists invested in maintaining the status quo. It can be no coincidence that the carnage of the Voting Rights Act so central to the Shelby decision occurred during the presidency of our first-ever Black president. It is no coincidence that in the decade since Obama's election, voter suppression has gained more momentum, velocity, and animosity than it had in the previous three elections combined. Since Shelby County v. Holder, voter suppression has taken on more pervasive and pernicious forms than ever before.

Still, when it comes to careers, instead of searching for the job where we’ll be happiest, we might be better off pursuing the job where we expect to learn and contribute the most. Psychologists find that passions are often developed, not discovered. In a study of entrepreneurs, the more effort they put into their startups, the more their enthusiasm about their businesses climbed each week. Their passion grew as they gained momentum and mastery. Interest doesn’t always lead to effort and skill; sometimes it follows them. By investing in learning and problem solving, we can develop our passions—and build the skills necessary to do the work and lead the lives we find worthwhile.

His great concern had to do with the fact that private fortunes were significantly outpacing investments in public services like schools, parks, and safety net programs. The process tends to begin gradually before accelerating under its own momentum. As people accumulate more money, they become less dependent on public goods and, in turn, less interested in supporting them. If they get their way, through tax breaks and other means, personal fortunes grow while public goods are allowed to deteriorate. As public housing, public education, and public transportation become poorer, they become increasingly, then almost exclusively, used only by the poor themselves.[6] People then begin to denigrate the public sector altogether, as if it were rotten at the root and not something the rich had found it in their interest to destroy. The rich and the poor soon unite in their animosity toward public goods—the rich because they are made to pay for things they don’t need and the poor because what they need has become shabby and broken. Things collectively shared, especially if they are shared across class and racial divides, come to be seen as lesser. In America, a clear marker of poverty is one’s reliance on public services, and a clear marker of affluence is one’s degree of distance from them. Enough money brings “financial independence,” which tellingly does not signal independence from work but from the public sector. There was a time when Americans wished to be free of bosses. Now we wish to be free of bus drivers. We wish for the freedom to withdraw from the wider community and sequester ourselves in a more exclusive one, pulling further and further away from the poor until the world they inhabit becomes utterly unrecognizable to us.[7]

Thanks to our discussion in the last chapter, we can also agree that character is a product of perseverance: “Suffering produces perseverance; perseverance, character; and character, hope” (Rom. 5:3–4). I don’t know how that idea strikes you, but it sounds a little backward to me. I would expect that a person with character would find it easier to persevere through difficult circumstances. That makes sense. But how does perseverance produce character? When I look at the world around me, it seems to me that most things actually decay over time rather than grow stronger. The longer we live in our home, the more I see spots that need a paint touch-up. The longer I drive my car, the more I find I need to take it in for tune-ups and repairs. And the longer I live, the more I realize my body isn’t what it used to be! But maybe this process of perseverance leading to character works differently. Surely God is the X-factor. When you add God to the equation, persistence over time builds up character and strength instead of taking it away. Consider, if you will, the snowball. Left by itself, it doesn’t amount to much. It’s just a little round chunk of white frozen water. Yet place that snowball at the top of a steep hill on a snowy day, and things begin to change. If you invest some time rolling that snowball across the ground so it picks up snow and grows into a larger ball, you begin to create something big and heavy. If you invest even more time and energy (this is where perseverance comes in), you might get that ball rolling down the hill. And the longer it rolls, the faster it goes, the bigger it gets. Now you’ve got something powerful. This is a force to be reckoned with. This is when people start running for cover. Your little snowball suddenly becomes a runaway freight train! I believe that equation of suffering, which produces perseverance, which produces character, works in a similar fashion. Our willingness to trust and rely on the Lord in a time of trouble invites His power to work in our lives. The more we trust and depend on Him, the easier it becomes. As the Lord says, “My yoke is easy and my burden is light” (Matt. 11:30). Pretty soon our perseverance enables the Lord to add character to our “snowball”—and the more we persevere, the stronger we grow. We find ourselves rolling downhill toward a godly life. It still might be a bumpy ride, but the size and momentum of our snowball just about guarantees that as long as we are pursuing God’s will for our lives, nothing will stop us.

In the words of Richard Driehaus, "The stock market is like a woman. You observe her. You respond to her. And you respect her." That is not as easy as it sounds. Just ask my ex-wife.

The fear of, “losing out on what you have now,” causes traders to prematurely sell profitable stocks; leaving considerable money on the table.

According to rules-based momentum, you buy the strongest 10% to 30% stocks over the past 6 to 12 months, hold them 1 to 3 months, then reevaluate and rebalance the portfolio. As

Passengers are people who don't mind simply being carried along by the company's momentum, offering little or no input, seemingly not caring much about the direction chosen by management. They are often pleasant, get along with everyone, attend meetings promptly, and generally do not stand out as troublemakers. They are often accepted into the fabric of the organization and stay there for many years. The problem is that while passengers can often diagnose and articulate a problem quite well, they have no investment in solving it. They don't do the heavy lifting. They avoid taking strong positions at the risk of being wrong about something. They can take any side of an issue, depending on how the prevailing winds are blowing. In large organizations especially, there are many places to hide without really being noticed.

Get out of the weeds. Go where there’s fast growth, because fast growth creates all opportunities.”[2] It was outstanding advice: Work in a market with natural momentum, as we discussed in the preceding chapter. Ride the big waves. Some industries are growth loops in and of themselves, and that’s where you want to be.

Third, the idea that venture capitalists get into deals on the strength of their brands can be exaggerated. A deal seen by a partner at Sequoia will also be seen by rivals at other firms: in a fragmented cottage industry, there is no lack of competition. Often, winning the deal depends on skill as much as brand: it’s about understanding the business model well enough to impress the entrepreneur; it’s about judging what valuation might be reasonable. One careful tally concluded that new or emerging venture partnerships capture around half the gains in the top deals, and there are myriad examples of famous VCs having a chance to invest and then flubbing it.[6] Andreessen Horowitz passed on Uber. Its brand could not save it. Peter Thiel was an early investor in Stripe. He lacked the conviction to invest as much as Sequoia. As to the idea that branded venture partnerships have the “privilege” of participating in supposedly less risky late-stage investment rounds, this depends from deal to deal. A unicorn’s momentum usually translates into an extremely high price for its shares. In the cases of Uber and especially WeWork, some late-stage investors lost millions. Fourth, the anti-skill thesis underplays venture capitalists’ contributions to portfolio companies. Admittedly, these contributions can be difficult to pin down. Starting with Arthur Rock, who chaired the board of Intel for thirty-three years, most venture capitalists have avoided the limelight. They are the coaches, not the athletes. But this book has excavated multiple cases in which VC coaching made all the difference. Don Valentine rescued Atari and then Cisco from chaos. Peter Barris of NEA saw how UUNET could become the new GE Information Services. John Doerr persuaded the Googlers to work with Eric Schmidt. Ben Horowitz steered Nicira and Okta through their formative moments. To be sure, stories of venture capitalists guiding portfolio companies may exaggerate VCs’ importance: in at least some of these cases, the founders might have solved their own problems without advice from their investors. But quantitative research suggests that venture capitalists do make a positive impact: studies repeatedly find that startups backed by high-quality VCs are more likely to succeed than others.[7] A quirky contribution to this literature looks at what happens when airline routes make it easier for a venture capitalist to visit a startup. When the trip becomes simpler, the startup performs better.[8]

We started with a small number of two-pizza teams so that we could learn what worked and refine the model before widespread adoption. One significant lesson became clear fairly early: each team started out with its own share of dependencies that would hold them back until eliminated, and eliminating the dependencies was hard work with little to no immediate payback. The most successful teams invested much of their early time in removing dependencies and building “instrumentation”—our term for infrastructure used to measure every important action—before they began to innovate, meaning, add new features. For example, the Picking team owned software that directed workers in the fulfillment centers where to find items on the shelves. They spent much of their first nine months systematically identifying and removing dependencies from upstream areas, like receiving inventory from vendors, and downstream areas, like packing and shipping. They also built systems to track every important event that happened in their area at a detailed, real-time level. Their business results didn’t improve much while they did so, but once they had removed dependencies, built their fitness function, and instrumented their systems, they became a strong example of how fast a two-pizza team could innovate and deliver results. They became advocates of this new way of working. Other teams, however, put off doing the unglamorous work of removing their dependencies and instrumenting their systems. Instead, they focused too soon on the flashier work of developing new features, which enabled them to make some satisfying early progress. Their dependencies remained, however, and the continuing drag soon became apparent as the teams lost momentum.

Ross’s “arbitrage pricing theory” and Rosenberg’s “bionic betas” posited that the returns of any financial security are the result of several systematic factors. Although seemingly stating the obvious, this was a seminal moment in the move toward a more vibrant understanding of markets. The eclectic Rosenberg was even put on the cover of Institutional Investor in May 1978, the bald, mustachioed man depicted as a giant meditating guru with flowers in his hair, worshipped by a gathering of besuited portfolio managers. The headline was “Who Is Barr Rosenberg? And What the Hell Is He Talking About?”8 What he was talking about was how academics were beginning to classify stocks according to not just their industry or their geography, but their financial characteristics. And some of these characteristics might actually prove to deliver better long-term returns than the broader stock market. In 1973, Sanjoy Basu, a finance professor at McMaster University in Ontario, published a paper that indicated that companies with low stock prices relative to their earnings did better than the efficient-markets hypothesis would suggest. Essentially, he showed that the value investing principles espoused by Benjamin Graham in the 1930s—which revolved around buying cheap, out-of-favor stocks trading below their intrinsic worth—was a durable investment factor. By systematically buying all cheap stocks, investors could in theory beat the broader market over time. Then Banz showed the same for small caps, another big moment in the evolution of factor investing. Follow-up studies on smaller stocks in Japan and the UK showed similar results, so in 1986 DFA launched dedicated small-cap funds for those two markets as well. In the early 1990s, finance professors Narasimhan Jegadeesh and Sheridan Titman published a paper indicating that simply surfing market momentum—in practice buying stocks that were already bouncing and selling those that were sliding—could also produce market-beating returns.9 The reasons for these apparent anomalies divide academics. Efficient-markets disciples stipulate that they are the compensation investors receive for taking extra risks. Value stocks, for example, are often found in beaten-up, unpopular, and shunned companies, such as boring industrial conglomerates in the middle of the dotcom bubble. While they can underperform for long stretches, eventually their underlying worth shines through and rewards investors who kept the faith. Small stocks do well largely because small companies are more likely to fail than bigger ones. Behavioral economists, on the other hand, argue that factors tend to be the product of our irrational human biases. For example, just like how we buy pricey lottery tickets for the infinitesimal chance of big wins, investors tend to overpay for fast-growing, glamorous stocks, and unfairly shun duller, steadier ones. Smaller stocks do well because we are illogically drawn to names we know well. The momentum factor, on the other hand, works because investors initially underreact to news but overreact in the long run, or often sell winners too quickly and hang on to bad bets for far longer than is advisable.

They say that the biggest opportunities are often outside of most people’s comfort zones. The juiciest market returns are where very few are willing to go. Momentum investing is the ultimate contrarian approach. How many investors would venture to buy a stock that is already up 50% in the past six months? Psychologically, it is a lot harder to buy in this situation than to sell, isn’t it?   How ridiculous does it sound that stocks that went up 50% in the past six months are likely to outperform in the next six months? Stock picking cannot be that easy, right? There has to be some complicated formula that takes into account hundreds of different criteria in order to have a chance at outperforming the market. Sometimes the most effective methods are the simplest. Most people stay away from them exactly because they seem too simple to work. There is nothing magic about using past performance to select future winners. It is all about simple math.   What

A level 4 leader's greatest asset is his ability to engage, empower, and equip his people; this is what creates the momentum for a significant change in the organization. He invests 80% in his people and 20% in the process.

However, if your agenda is truly to serve, your ROI (return on investment) will substantially expand. As we know from the "Law of Reciprocity," what you give is what you get. If you are helping people only to see what you can get out of it, your pie stays small and your opportunities stay limited. However, if you sincerely want to help people succeed, you will not only enjoy more success, but expand your possibilities beyond your expectations. Once you see the benefits from all directions, you will not want it any other way!

I see professional advisors cold-call perfect strangers rather than do a call rotation for existing clients. I see advisors do prospecting seminars rather than a client advisory council or client appreciation event, and I see advisors run advertising campaigns rather than network with existing strategic allies and other professional influencers. “Spray and pray” marketing strategies are flawed on so many levels. Why, then, do so many advisors still attempt them? The reason for this is simple; nurturing existing relationships and other tried and true strategies can be boring and rarely results in instant gratification. Too many advisors want to find the next “new idea”, something with some “sizzle”, and, as a result, are continually searching for and dabbling with concepts that ultimately have minimal impact. It’s not unlike investing. How many times have you seen someone try to hit a home-run with a high-risk investment opportunity rather than stick with a methodical long-term approach? It’s not just money that compounds. As I’ve said before, discipline compounds, too. You have to be patient and let your efforts gather momentum. Too many advisors get themselves into the proverbial “Red Zone” and, rather than stick to the plan and see it through, they self-sabotage by abandoning the fundamentals and trying something new. Neglect also compounds. If we neglect our existing relationships it’s only a matter of time before they’ll be lured away and we’ll have to throw our own Hail Mary. Don’t deviate from your process. Identify the most fundamentally sound and proven trust-building activities, stick with them and tune out all the other noise. It’s much more effective to strengthen and nurture existing relationships over the long haul, rather than perpetually trying to start new ones. The prospecting treadmill is draining and you are building a business that is chaotic and unfocused. Relationships are proprietary and are a big part of the equity that you are building in your business.

Forgetting sunk costs is a tough lesson to heed, so in a ship-and-iterate model, leadership’s job must be to feed the winners and starve the losers, regardless of prior investment. Products that get better and gather momentum should be rewarded with more resources; products that stagnate should not.

In practice, ship and iterate means that marketing programs and PR pushes should be minimal at launch. If you are in the restaurant business, you call this a soft opening. When you push the babies out of the nest, don’t give them a jetpack or even a parachute—let them fly on their own. (Note: This is a metaphor.) Invest only when they get some lift. Google’s Chrome is a great example of this—it launched in 2008 with minimal fanfare and practically no marketing budget and gained terrific momentum on its own, based solely on its excellence. Later, around the time the browser pushed past seventy million users, the team decided to pour fuel on the fire and approved a marketing push (and even a TV advertising campaign). But not until the product had proven itself a winner did it get fed.

Perhaps the best-known investment paradigm is buy low, sell high. I believe that more money can be made by buying high and selling at even higher prices … . I try to buy stocks that have already had good price moves, that are already making new highs, and that have positive relative strength … . I always look for the best potential performance at the current time. Even if I think that a stock I hold will go higher, if I believe another stock will do significantly better in the interim, I will switch.

And while those survival instincts are quite useful in general, when translated into a modern world, and especially a modern investment world, they make us prone to all sorts of errors. Think of chasing momentum all too often in the hope that it will continue and running from falling markets just as they start to turn. What works for survival in the African jungles is not as productive in the jungles of world finance.

As active managers see allocators moving capital to passive investing, they have little choice but to try and stem the flow by trying to demonstrate outperformance immediately. Short-term thinking and decision-making inevitably lead to poor performance. In the market environment of 2019, short-term decision-making translates into buying high-growth stocks, because they have momentum. Popular growth stocks are bought regardless of valuation and the core tenets of cash flow analysis and contrarianism are cast aside. Ultimately this will cause negative performance for those active managers unable to abstain from following the herd and chasing a momentum-driven market to try and keep their investor base.

Leveraging the support from consulting and delivery partners (they can be the same) is critical for gaining the right momentum in the organization with minimum investment.

Long-term thinking levers our existing abilities and lets us do new things we couldn’t otherwise contemplate,” Jeff wrote. “Long-term orientation interacts well with customer obsession. If we can identify a customer need and if we can further develop conviction that that need is meaningful and durable, our approach permits us to work patiently for multiple years to deliver a solution.”2 Key word: patiently. Many companies will give up on an initiative if it does not produce the kind of returns they are looking for within a handful of years. Amazon will stick with it for five, six, seven years—all the while keeping the investment manageable, constantly learning and improving—until it gains momentum and acceptance.

The formation of bubbles isn't so much about people irrationally participating in long-term investing. They're about people somewhat rationally moving toward short-term trading to capture momentum that had been feeding on itself.

Approaching Existing Investors If you ever need to raise more money, there’s no better audience than your existing investors! I find that the best way to reach out is with a super short email blast. For example: “Dear Backers, [2-3 sentences on what you just accomplished, extremely excited] We’ve also got a very exciting opportunity. Based on our milestones, we are gearing up for a serious product launch and will raise another $1M at a special-priced note to accelerate a few components. If you’ve wanted to get more deeply invested, now is the time. I imagine this being accounted for very quickly, so please ping me ASAP!” You might want to send a couple of “momentum” emails leading up to this message so that they’re already excited by the time they get the email from you.

Raising from Series A/B firms for a seed Bringing a Series A/B firm in for a seed round is risky business. They’ll want to talk to you to get an early look and learn about what you’re up to. But don’t get too excited! In fact, I’d recommend avoiding those conversations entirely. Whatever capital they commit will be trivial relative to their total balance sheet. No Series A/B firm is serious unless they lead your A or B, and, if for some reason they decide not to do so, you’re screwed because that’s a red flag for other investors. This is called “signaling risk.” Basically, by investing in your seed, they intend to block out others from your next round. It’s a win-win for them because they either lead your next round from a privileged position or, they pass and you’re the one who’s screwed as a founder. So, your incentives are completely misaligned! You may have heard success stories, but that’s a sampling bias — you’ll rarely hear about the companies that do not get the follow-on term sheet. Note: A fund investing in your company at the seed stage is completely irrelevant to their willingness to write a check to lead your Series A or B. The only thing that determines their willingness to invest is your traction and momentum. Letting them in makes them no more willing to invest, and anyone who tries to convince you otherwise is deceiving you. There might be relationship benefits, but you can build on the relationship without letting them on your cap table!

This leads to “private opulence and public squalor,” a self-reinforcing dynamic that transforms our communities in ways that pull us further apart. It’s an old problem, one documented by the Roman historian Sallust in his first monograph, Bellum Catilinae, which recounts the political turmoil that roiled Rome in 63 b.c.e., during the time of Julius Caesar.[5] But the mid-century economist John Kenneth Galbraith popularized the predicament in his 1958 book, The Affluent Society. Galbraith did not spill much ink (or any ink, really) on the issue of exploitation. His great concern had to do with the fact that private fortunes were significantly outpacing investments in public services like schools, parks, and safety net programs. The process tends to begin gradually before accelerating under its own momentum. As people accumulate more money, they become less dependent on public goods and, in turn, less interested in supporting them. If they get their way, through tax breaks and other means, personal fortunes grow while public goods are allowed to deteriorate. As public housing, public education, and public transportation become poorer, they become increasingly, then almost exclusively, used only by the poor themselves.[6] People then begin to denigrate the public sector altogether, as if it were rotten at the root and not something the rich had found it in their interest to destroy. The rich and the poor soon unite in their animosity toward public goods—the rich because they are made to pay for things they don’t need and the poor because what they need has become shabby and broken. Things collectively shared, especially if they are shared across class and racial divides, come to be seen as lesser. In America, a clear marker of poverty is one’s reliance on public services, and a clear marker of affluence is one’s degree of distance from them. Enough money brings “financial independence,” which tellingly does not signal independence from work but from the public sector. There was a time when Americans wished to be free of bosses. Now we wish to be free of bus drivers. We wish for the freedom to withdraw from the wider community and sequester ourselves in a more exclusive one, pulling further and further away from the poor until the world they inhabit becomes utterly unrecognizable to us.

Before we explore the account setup, let's take a closer look at how Immediate Momentum functions. Understanding the mechanics of this trading software is crucial to comprehend its potential benefits. According to Immediate Momentum's official website, the software harnesses sophisticated algorithms to analyze cryptocurrency price movements with pinpoint accuracy. It relies on technical indicators and historical data to identify lucrative trading opportunities by monitoring market trends. Immediate Momentum review operates fully automatically, executing every action on behalf of traders. Users have the flexibility to fine-tune trade parameters to align with their risk tolerance, investment objectives, and experience level. This customization empowers the software to analyze market trends and generate precise trade signals. Immediate Momentum continually assesses price fluctuations, notifying users of any significant value changes in the cryptocurrencies they're trading. All it takes is twenty minutes to set up the software's parameters, after which it takes over the trading process with efficiency.

In Tsai's go‐go years, high‐flying stocks with​ positive momentum were all the rage. Polaroid, Xerox, IBM all traded at price‐to‐earnings ratios of more than 50. These expensive stocks were supported by explosively high growth rates. From 1964 to 1968, IBM, Polaroid, and Xerox grew their earnings per share at 88%, 22%, and 171%, respectively. Others like University Computing, Mohawk Data, and Fairchild Camera traded at several‐hundred times their trailing 12‐month earnings. The latter three and many others like them would go on to lose more than 80% in the 1969–1970 bear market. The Manhattan Fund was up almost 40% in 1967, more than double the Dow. But in 1968, he was down 7% and was ranked 299th out of 305 funds tracked by Arthur Lipper.16 When the market crash came, the people responsible were entirely unprepared. By 1969, half of the salesmen on Wall Street had only come into the business since 196217 and had seen nothing but a rising market. And when stocks turned, the highfliers that went up the fastest also came down the fastest. For example, National Student Marketing, which Tsai bought 122,000 shares for $5 million, crashed from $143 in December 1969 to $3.50 in July 1970.18 Between September and November 1929, $30 billion worth of stock value vanished; in the1969‐1970 crash, the loss was $300 billion!19 The gunslingers of the 1960s were thinking only about return and paid little attention to risk. This carefree attitude was a result of the market they were playing in. From 1950 through the end of 1965, the Dow was within 5% of its highs 66% of the time, and within 10% of its highs 87% of the time. There was virtually no turbulence at all. From 1950 to 1965, the only bear market was “The Kennedy Slide,” which chopped 27% off the S&P 500, and recovered in just over a year.

5. Empower others to act. Leaders seek to empower others and deploy them for action. They seek to remove obstacles that hamper action that is in line with the vision. The rebuilding of the wall was a monumental task that took many people; therefore, it required broadening the base of those committed to the vision. Nehemiah involved many people in the project. He placed people in areas about which they were passionate. For example, several worked on the wall in front of their homes (3:23), likely most burdened for that particular area of the wall. Ministry leaders must empower others to develop leaders. Leadership development must not be only the responsibility of the senior pastor or senior leadership team. Others must be invited to embrace the opportunity to invest their lives in creating and commissioning leaders. 6. Generate short-term wins. Change theorist William Bridges stated, “Quick successes reassure the believers, convince the doubters, and confound the critics.”7 Leaders are wise to secure early wins to leverage momentum. Nehemiah and those rebuilding the wall faced immediate and constant ridicule and opposition; therefore, it was necessary for Nehemiah to utilize short-term wins to maintain momentum. After the initial wave of criticism, Nehemiah noted that the wall was halfway complete (4:6). The reality of the progress created enough energy to overcome the onslaught of negativity. Ministry leaders can create short-term wins by beginning with a few people, by inviting others to be developed. As leaders are discipled, people in the church will take notice. People will begin to see that the church does more than produce programs and events.

Trippe’s strategy of nurturing P-type loonshots and betting on bigger, faster, more—with a dash of marketing glamour—worked brilliantly. Technology improvements lowered costs, providing more money to invest in more technology improvements. Larger planes flew more customers farther, faster. That virtuous cycle continuously grew his franchise, propelling Trippe far ahead of competitors, attracting fame and celebrity, just as a similar virtuous cycle would propel leading technology companies for the rest of the century, from Polaroid to IBM and Apple. P-type loonshots feed a growing franchise, which feeds more P-type loonshots. And as the momentum builds, so does the tunnel vision: keep turning the wheel, faster and faster.

The fact is almost anyone can achieve positive absolute returns in a trending up market. Watch TV and listen to market pundits, buy the hot stocks of the day, and ignore valuation. Growth and momentum have been the lessons learned by new portfolio managers in the 2010s. Only when the tide goes out, do you discover who has been swimming naked. —Warren Buffett When the tide goes out, good investors create outperformance. Global central banks have made sure the tide has not gone out for a decade. US equity market drawdowns of more than 10% have occurred only four times in the last decade and each drawdown has lasted less than 60 days.

By giving myself permission to make a small investment in my art, I sometimes build momentum

the time and energy that you do invest in people issues should produce better results and create teams and a culture where momentum and energy thrive.

It is a good idea to trade high-growth momentum stocks with a tight stop, if this is available in the market and, as the price rises, move it up to the entry price. It can then be allowed to run on, perhaps with a trailing stop, which keeps adjusting higher.

Diversify your investment among a number of cryptos that make it to the list of top 10 in terms of momentum. Technical indicators like RSI can help.

So how do you select the right crypto asset that can generate a 10-30x return? The answer is momentum.

Momentum investing works great in crypto

Momentum investing relies heavily on a number of technical indicators like the Relative Strength Index (RSI), Moving Averages, Rate of Change (ROC), and Average Directional Index (ADX). For example, when the 50-day moving average of an asset crosses over the 200-day moving average, it signals a rising momentum and generates a ‘buy’ signal.