The headline won't tell you which three stocks. That's the game. Top analysts are confident about stocks for the long haul, but the article makes you click to find out which ones. It's a financial peep show where you pay with your attention and leave disappointed.
These analysts tracked volatility and decided now is the time to share their genius. They could've recommended these stocks last month. They could've recommended them next month. But they chose this exact moment of volatility to go public with their confidence. What changed? The content calendar needed filling.
The phrase "top Wall Street analysts" does heavy lifting here. Top by what metric? Assets under management? Prediction accuracy? Whoever responded to the reporter's email? One of these analysts probably recommended Bear Stearns in 2007 and still gets quoted because he works at a firm with a media relations department.
Retail traders will read this headline and think they've stumbled onto insider knowledge. They'll imagine themselves getting the same intel as hedge funds. They'll click through, see three ticker symbols they've never heard of, and convince themselves this is their edge. By next week they'll be wondering why "long haul" didn't mean three trading days.
The analysts are confident for the long haul. Not confident enough to stake their compensation on it. Not confident enough to put a price target with a date attached. Just confident in that vague Wall Street way that means they'll be right eventually or quietly stop talking about it.
Volatility creates opportunity, they'll tell you. Volatility also creates bag holders, but that's not in the headline. The recommendations come with asterisks in the fine print and conviction in the summary. One is a growth play. One is a value play. One is probably a company that makes software for other software companies.
The real insight here: analysts who get paid regardless of performance have opinions about stocks they don't own.
Photo by Larry Nalzaro on Unsplash
Leave a Comment