Mark Re: Sentiment

Hi Mark, Got a question about sentiment if I may. Here's the short version: Who is smart money? Here's the long version: Every time there's a blow-off top in a stock, it's preceded by HUGE buying interest marked by INCREDIBLE volume - the kind of volume that could only be by institutions. I'm thinking fast money, i.e., hedge funds. Hedgies are supposed to be smart money, but they're really dumb buying at the top. So I have trouble with the "smart money" concept. And I wonder what it really entails. Mutual funds I can buy as smart money - they have large research staffs and they buy deliberately. But trend-following hedge funds, I have trouble with, though I realize they're not the only hedge funds around. Some hedgies actually put some thought into what they're buying. But I don't know the percentages of each type. So back to the original question: Who is smart money? Thanks!

Hi Mark,

Got a question about sentiment if I may.

Here's the short version:

Who is smart money?

Here's the long version:

Every time there's a blow-off top in a stock, it's preceded by HUGE buying interest marked by INCREDIBLE volume - the kind of volume that could only be by institutions. I'm thinking fast money, i.e., hedge funds. Hedgies are supposed to be smart money, but they're really dumb buying at the top.

So I have trouble with the "smart money" concept. And I wonder what it really entails.

Mutual funds I can buy as smart money - they have large research staffs and they buy deliberately.

But trend-following hedge funds, I have trouble with, though I realize they're not the only hedge funds around. Some hedgies actually put some thought into what they're buying. But I don't know the percentages of each type.

So back to the original question: Who is smart money?

Thanks!

The "Smart Money" concept is less important than other sentiment. For what it's worth, it's true value is in contrast with other sentiment.

Now, who is the "Smart Money"? The one's who are consistently right or at least more often than not.

I keep a survey of "Smart money" on my end, but outside of the folks that are here, that's my primary source for smart money sentiment.


Mark

1331 should have been a no brainer. Now we have less than 20 minutes and.
THOSE darn AMATEURS ARE MUCKING UP EVERYTHING!

Edited by milbank, 31 March 2008 - 02:43 PM.

DAMNED THOSE AMATEURS!

FOILED AGAIN!

Now, who is the "Smart Money"? The one's who are consistently right or at least more often than not.

Holy Batman! I thought there was more to it than that.

But I won't complain... Sentiment analysis seems to work pretty well...definitions be damned!

Well, after all, even the smart money can be made to look and feel stupid from time to time. But I do survey a proprietary and confidential group of traders that I've watched for over 10 years now and know them to be consistently pretty accurate and not just temporary hot hands. I'll also say that I view the OEX traders to be smart money, though I don't know who they are. M

Now, who is the "Smart Money"? The one's who are consistently right or at least more often than not.

Holy Batman! I thought there was more to it than that.

But I won't complain... Sentiment analysis seems to work pretty well...definitions be damned!

Did you mean Mark's Institutional Sentiment & Analysis Smart Money? That's different. There's "smart money" in general, then there's the Smart Money Pollees... Mark, I think he's asking who they are?

Did you mean Mark's Institutional Sentiment & Analysis Smart Money? That's different. There's "smart money" in general, then there's the Smart Money Pollees... Mark, I think he's asking who they are?

Actually, I was just tagging off the other thread where Mark was talking about amateur/dumb investors. I assumed there was another side, i.e. the smart investors or "smart money", since I've heard about them forever in connection with sentiment analysis. And have been curious ever since who they were...especially since I see "smart money behaving badly".

So in a nutshell, I was just speaking generally, not based on Mark's work solely.