> Studies have consistently shown there is very little or no autocorrelation between excess returns--that is, someone who beats the market in year n is essentially no more likely to beat the market in year n+1 than anyone else. This is very different than a field like programming or basketball, where someone who performs well one year will probably perform well the next year.
> To me, this is absurdly good evidence that the market is not "stupid," even when I think it is.
Or it could be evidence that the game is essentially random, and that intelligence is not a differentiating factor.
> To me, this is absurdly good evidence that the market is not "stupid," even when I think it is.
Or it could be evidence that the game is essentially random, and that intelligence is not a differentiating factor.