CFA® funtamental or technical
For the CFA® or to be an analyst do you use more technical analysis or funtamental analysis?
Trending Content - Equity Research Forum
Career Resources
what do you consider technical analysis? the CFA isn't going to test you on nonsense like "charting"....
CFA is mostly fundamental analysis, though they cover a few very basic technical analysis concepts.
This. It's more like, "if a lot of people are practicing this witchcraft then it could move markets at times, so you should at least be aware of it".
Exactly, great way to phrase it. But I wouldn't trust somebody to manage money just with a CFA. I know people who have the designation, yet are terrible investors...and a ton of people who are great investors without the CFA.
Go to the CFA Institute's website
you actually managed to collect 69 points on wallstreet oasis without knowing the answer to this!!!@ ur the dude!!!
Obviously fundamental analysis.
Lol @ ppl discounting TA. Like it or not but any decision based off historical data qualifies as TA including spreads, asset correlations, calculating historical VAR (delta version), seasonality spreads, a ton of econometric tools, etc. Of course you also have simple relative strength and momentum tools as well as esoteric oscillators. Nevertheless TA provides a number of valid indicators to describe the market environment. And a lot of those indicators are leaders as opposed to fundamental analysis which is almost entirely lagging. Price action > fundamental analysis
you have an interesting view of "TA". to me it's a bunch of idiots who don't understand how markets work stupidly looking for repetition in time frames that are too short for such expectations (aka gambler's fallacy). i personally put a lot of weight in the schiller 10 year trailing P/E and other long term factors - never would have considered that tats and iss however
P/E is a fundamental ratio. The price of the asset, however, is a TA trait. Pairs trading, convergence trades, etc. are largely based off price behavior, aka technicals. TA is more than stupid moving averages and other esoteric signals. If you use historical prices to make decisions then you're using TA.
using historical prices in the absence of other info seems pretty stupid to me... are you saying that a TA analyst would like a stock based on it's "positive" price movement regardless of a "negative" earnings / sales / assets / liabilities outlook?
trying to use positive and negative carefully here, acknowledging that positive for a momentum trader is different than for a value investor
If you read Market Wizards you'll see that a lot of top traders use a combination of fundamentals and technicals. Also depends what kind of assets you're investing/trading in as well as the time frame. Most forms of arbitrage (rel value), aside perhaps risk arb, is based more off technicals (historical prices) combined with fundamentals to ensure that the cash flow payoffs expectations are similar/exact.
But yea, for value investing TA is not that relevant. Nevertheless I bet even value investors scan charts for "better" entry points or to see where the stock has come from... or at least the flow traders that fight the VWAP that make the executions do.
There is one reading on technical analysis in level I
one.
Nulla eum et autem non unde dolorem. Itaque nihil sed est molestiae qui. Quas voluptates et et qui. Reiciendis ut molestias et tenetur excepturi aperiam vitae.
Iusto eos voluptatem quos adipisci. Autem quae illum aspernatur eligendi porro repellendus tempore. Ullam aut tempore vitae quibusdam. Itaque ratione aut quis accusamus rem. Est velit sit officiis quasi reprehenderit.
See All Comments - 100% Free
WSO depends on everyone being able to pitch in when they know something. Unlock with your email and get bonus: 6 financial modeling lessons free ($199 value)
or Unlock with your social account...