| | | "financial statements are the way to achieve exceptional financial returns"
Well, we don't have a definition of "exceptional". If deep understanding (again no def. for deep) of financials and annual reports were so necessary, then professional analysts and the fund managers should be able to demonstrate that consistently (again a general term). All their effort/study -- if that's what they actually are doing with the info at hand, that has not led to "exceptional" and consistent returns as measured by their ability to beat their market indices for most fund managers/analysts. We see a few analysts who've done well and moved into "great investor" category, but they seem to be very few. How much credence should we give to something like Tipranks, when the consensus is often proved wrong with time? Do you believe a small player can do better than the pro's with a deep dive into the financials and annuals? Could be, maybe somebody like Mike Burry with his laser focus; somebody like Mintzmeyer (sp?) on Seeking Alpha with his specialty in ship transport. Maybe too somebody like petal. Maybe he can.
=========================
How can you really have an in depth knowledge any stock without in depth knowledge of their financial statements?
What's in depth? Why do you need in depth knowledge of a stock?
My opinion is that you want to have enough knowledge of the stock - financials and the business, so you have confidence or can maintain confidence in the stock after you've bought it but the market takes it down. Confidence in your knowledge so you don't get scared out.
My further opinion is this: It's not like college. Unlike studying in college, the more you study and delve into a stock, it's not given that the better you will do. |
|
