Can't say for sure, but I'd say much better. My philosophy is, Regardless how well you know sports or cap, you still hit only around 60% if you have an "unbelievable" year. Sports are just too unpredictable, bottom line. In stocks, your studies and research can lead to much more valuable info regarding companies on the rise or decline.
No, different animal.
Most pro gamblers either do arb or straight betting.
There are very few arb opportunities in the stock market unless you are a floor trader and as far as predicting stock market movement, wall street is littered with brilliant minds who have tried and failed miserably.
The bread and butter of wise guys is getting information that no one else has. This does not happen on wall street where no one has an information advantage unless they act illegally (inside info).
And if you think it takes a strong stomach to bet sports for a living, you need one twice as strong to trade for a living.
Most pro gamblers either do arb or straight betting.
There are very few arb opportunities in the stock market unless you are a floor trader and as far as predicting stock market movement, wall street is littered with brilliant minds who have tried and failed miserably.
The bread and butter of wise guys is getting information that no one else has. This does not happen on wall street where no one has an information advantage unless they act illegally (inside info).
And if you think it takes a strong stomach to bet sports for a living, you need one twice as strong to trade for a living.
General, this is a very good question.
You would think that as the stock market has positive equity that it would be easier to beat.
The trouble is the market for stocks is far more sophisticated than for sports betting.
A good poker player will beat bad players easily but will lose to excellent poker players.
Its hard (not impossible) for the stock picker to over come the market which is filled with people with tremendous resources and infomation.
A good handicapper can far out perform the stock market over the long term even using a conservative fractional kelly betting system.
You would think that as the stock market has positive equity that it would be easier to beat.
The trouble is the market for stocks is far more sophisticated than for sports betting.
A good poker player will beat bad players easily but will lose to excellent poker players.
Its hard (not impossible) for the stock picker to over come the market which is filled with people with tremendous resources and infomation.
A good handicapper can far out perform the stock market over the long term even using a conservative fractional kelly betting system.
Lurk,
True, wall street is similiar to a casino with the edge going to the palyer, not the hous.
However, most people who try to trade for a living tend to lose money.
Look at Lynch's Magellen fund, he earned 28 % over a 10 year period yet half the people who bought into the fund lost money because they kept trying to time thier buys/sells.
They couldn't even win with a 28 % edge!
True, wall street is similiar to a casino with the edge going to the palyer, not the hous.
However, most people who try to trade for a living tend to lose money.
Look at Lynch's Magellen fund, he earned 28 % over a 10 year period yet half the people who bought into the fund lost money because they kept trying to time thier buys/sells.
They couldn't even win with a 28 % edge!
for a while i was splitting my time equally between handicapping sports and handicapping the stock market. lost all my sports winnings and more betting on stocks. tho i have made a bit back in the past 2 quarters, i am still down over $40k to the market over the past 18 months or so. it sucks. i have to agree with the comments by pancho and lurker and i would add that as far as the time invested, imo the stock market is much more demanding.
beating the stock market is not that difficult.
provided you are taking a medium term view and not punting around paying commissions and spreads left right and centre.
I have beaten the market every year since 1996, and 2003 looks like being decent as I am up 20% so far.
Pick good solid stocks and avoid the crap and the hype, and hold them for 2 years minimum unless you can see you have blundered in which case ditch them, take the hit and move on.
Money management is as per sports betting - defend in bear markets and reduce holdings, attack like hell when you are beating the markets. So long as you don't move your selection goalposts and start buying rubbish.
Just avoiding the total crap that is on the market practically guarantees you to beat the index which includes the crap.
provided you are taking a medium term view and not punting around paying commissions and spreads left right and centre.
I have beaten the market every year since 1996, and 2003 looks like being decent as I am up 20% so far.
Pick good solid stocks and avoid the crap and the hype, and hold them for 2 years minimum unless you can see you have blundered in which case ditch them, take the hit and move on.
Money management is as per sports betting - defend in bear markets and reduce holdings, attack like hell when you are beating the markets. So long as you don't move your selection goalposts and start buying rubbish.
Just avoiding the total crap that is on the market practically guarantees you to beat the index which includes the crap.
