If we build an analyst group of 100 people, we will conduct transactions according to the principle of the minority obeying the majority, is it feasible?

If this question is not true or not, just think about it. You remind me of the question raised by the last person in Huihu. Since the forward order always loses money, wouldn't the reverse order be a stable profit? ! That’s probably what it means. Isn’t this bullshit? It looks fine from the text alone, but there are too many variables in it. It’s not as simple as you think. It’s also utopian. It doesn’t consider the actual situation, and it’s not easy to implement. In the field, it is better to open the book and study hard to lay a solid foundation~

The landlord has a great idea, but it is not desirable. Every analyst has his own ideas, and the direction may be the same, but what about the entry point? How do you choose? This multi-person analysis is that if you say that the points are similar, there must be, but most of them will be different. Do you choose which point more?

Well, let's leave this question alone, don't worry about it. Then the rest is by elimination:

1. Fixed stop loss.

A group of people will be eliminated here, because everyone has a different way of dealing with stop losses and a different ability to bear losses. There is no good or bad here, only suitable or not. The entry point of others is a combination of their own risk tolerance and stop loss. You are now asking for a fixed stop loss, no matter how fixed it is, there will be a group of people who want to OUT.

2. The minority obeys the majority.

It will be more complicated to elaborate here. We classify this group of people. It is simply divided into left-hand traders and right-hand traders. So do analysts. Which batch will the majority be? Right. Well, some people were eliminated.

3. Fixed stop profit.

Some people do ultra-short-term, some people hold positions for 3-6 hours, and some people like to place an order and then go out the next day. Some are longer. Depending on the position period, the target point of staring is different. Another batch of people are being eliminated here.

Who are the rest? Well, in fact, they are people who trade in a similar way to the landlord. That being the case, why bother with a group of 100 people?

Everyone's trading methods are different, why do you forcefully focus on a framework to limit them? The operation of trading on the left side + anti-order + lock-up, is there anyone who can make stable profits? Yes, I know it, and it has been for several years, there are losses and gains, and the overall profit;

Have you ever met a werewolf who manually traded more than 100 times a day? It's not about brushing orders, it's about making orders. Also overall profit.

There are not no people who earn money floating in the market for a few weeks at a time.

There are people who make money in a well-behaved way, and there are people who make money by making money with seemingly heresy operations, and there are even people who make money by deviant ways. There are good and bad methods, but they are more suitable or not. Other people's methods are tailor-made for yourself, and they are definitely not suitable for you.

So your method seems to be a combination of the directors of various companies, but the final result is only a loss, and there is no other result. This is like learning more and more indicators, but the more you have, the more confused you will be, and the less you will be able to make orders. Because there is no fusion. The situation here is the same, you haven't integrated other people's things, and the tragedy is that you can't integrate them if you want to, because you don't have other people's experience and insights.

So the same list is held by different people, some people lose money, some people get a balance, and some people make money.