CTO Larsson's "Larsson Line" indicator and process applied to Apple Inc (above) result in:
1 trade in the 19 years between 2001 - 2020.
Entry: 26 Apr, 2004 @ $1.95 (indicator flipped Gold)
No more trades - indicator never turned blue.
Still holding today at $320 at the time of publishing this - June 2, 2020.
=> Total 164x return, with relatively low risk.
For clarity, above I am showing the trading technique + indicator output. I was not trading this instrument myself in 2004, and the indicator did not exist until 2018. I have however forward-tested it since then, which e.g. let me catch the dip on many tech stocks both in January 2019 and in March 2020, when many people were predicting doom.
Let us take a few more examples.
The Larsson Line indicator and process taught applied to Amazon Inc (above) results in:
5 trades in the 23 years between 1997 - 2020.
Entry: Aug 1997 @ $2.35 (when I first heard about Amazon and thought it sounded like a good idea, but you can pick any date)
Exit: 4 June, 2001 @ $16.50 (indicator flipped blue)
Re-entry: 23 June, 2003 @ $36 (indicator flipped yellow, party wasn’t over after all)
Exit: 14 Aug, 2006 @ $27 (flipped blue again, maybe it was)
Re-entry: 9 Apr, 2007 @ $42 (yellow, so maybe not)
Still holding at the time of writing, June 2, 2020 @ $2,455 (no more flips)
=> Total 307 x return, with relatively low risk.
More examples: Microsoft
The Larsson Line indicator and techniques taught applied to Microsoft Corp (above) result in:
8 trades in the 30 years between 1989 - 2020:
Entry: June 1989 @ $0.38 (when I learned about Microsoft and realized they were good, but you can pick any date)
Exit: 24 Sept, 2001 @ $27 (indicator flipped blue)
Re-entry: 18 Dec, 2006 @ $30 (indicator flipped yellow, party wasn’t over after all)
Exit: 18 Oct, 2008 @ $22 (flipped blue again, maybe it was)
Re-entry: 15 Mar, 2010 @ $29.4 (yellow, so maybe not)
Exit: 23 May, 2011 @ $24 (flipped blue again, maybe it was)
Re-entry: 17 Jan, 2012 @ $28.7 (yellow, so maybe not)
Still holding today at the time of writing, 2 June, 2020 @ $182 (no more flips)
=> Total 269 x return, with relatively low risk.
=> No matter where you entered, you would have good return with relatively low risk.
At this point you are probably thinking: Yes but all these curves point up, so any strategy could have worked - which is true, so let’s take another example.
The Larsson Line indicator and process taught applied to Blackberry Ltd (above) result in:
6 trades in the 31 years between 1989 - 2020.
Entry: March 1999 @ $1.62 (I was in telecom and was quite impressed by them early, but you can pick any date)
Exit: Dec, 2001 @ $3.90 (indicator is emerging blue - not sure if earlier price data is available, if so it would have flipped earlier at a better sell price)
Re-entry: Jan, 2004 @ $13 (indicator flipped yellow, party wasn’t over after all)
Exit: June, 2010 @ $54 (flipped blue again, maybe it was)
Re-entry: Jan, 2018 @ $14 (yellow, so maybe not)
Then your SL would have hit soon after, or you would have averaged down and then gotten out at the same level, say at at a generous $11.
Today you are out.
=> Total 7.8 x (positive) return, in one of the most famous failures of our generation.
Usually in tech, when things fail, it is not as soft a landing for investors as with Blackberry or Nokia, who are still around as stable listed companies.
The famous Pets.com went public at $11, shot up to $14, then down to $0.19 on the day of its liquidation - all within the same year.
Some of you will remember GeoCities, MySpace, Netscape, eToys.com, Yahoo - all once some of the most promising Internet companies - until someone else came along and executed better on their idea. These companies could have made it, but they didn’t.
I hope that the examples above illustrate the usefulness of long timeframes. In all the examples above, I assumed that you only checked in on the investments once every 2 weeks. Checking the share price 25 times a day is not only pointless, but creates the risk to no longer seeing the forest for the trees.
The HOLD strategy (buy & never sell) would have performed better than over-trading in the examples above, staking everything on one big bet - that your fundamental analysis is correct. That is a strategy that WORKS, no doubt about it. If you are right on 1 Apple that goes 152x, you can be wrong on 151 other companies that all go bankrupt, and still come out in profit (exaggerated example and disregarding NPV but you get the point).
But the examples above paint a misleading picture. There were indeed almost 100 companies that didn’t make it for every one that did and it is possible to do better than riding those all the way to 0 with a HOLD strategy.
Also, realistically, you cannot keep up with 100+ companies, and if you only invest in say 5-10, you stand a risk that you picked 10 companies out of which none truly makes it. So in fact, you do stand a real risk of losing everything even if some companies in that industry make it big, despite HOLD-ing for decades. You need to be an exceptional Technology Strategist to pull this off consistently.
I have replaced so many technologies, where the proponents thought they were too big to fail. With 2G GSM we beat Nortel's CDMA, Japan's PDC, iDEN and D-AMPS. With 3G WCDMA we beat EV-DO. With 4G LTE we beat Intel's WiMAX. In 5G IoT, NB-IoT / CatM1 comes for Sigfox and LoRa. In each of those technologies, there were hundreds of tech companies that had a “promising future” and were “too big to fail”.
You never know when the trend ends and bends. When I am pushing a tech, I am a juggernaut, but when I am investing, I stay humble and open to all possibilities.
The technique I teach largely avoids the HOLD risk, locking in the majority of gains in case the train stops at some point, while providing exposure to the big rides up. The technique also solves the risk for over-trading.
Look again at the charts above. All it would have taken was to literally look at the color of the indicator:
Flipped to gold? Scale in longs
Flipped to blue? Scale out longs (and optionally scale in shorts).
A monkey could have done it, working 5 minutes per year, beating most human human traders in suits and corner offices, with epic returns.
If then firing the monkey and adding a minimum of TA skill, based on principles from 1932, like taking home some profits at distinct broken parabolas, a near ideal result is produced.
The principle is effective on all assets that follow a certain set of key characteristics. FA is required to understand which assets.
Put together, the technique works on most tech stocks and on most cryptocurrencies (with a few tweaks).
Quite a few people actually sold the first dot com blow off top. It is what happened next that is interesting: Many of them bought back in shortly after and lost all the money again on the way down, and then sold the bottom before it actually turned up again.
This is where a cold-blooded binary indicator becomes valuable. Making money in the markets is relatively easy, but keeping it is hard, and the Larsson Line Indicator and process helps with that.
The principle behind the indicator is not new and not my invention. I started by just tweaking it a little to handle certain edge cases in crypto better. But then I did something else, almost by accident, which became the big discovery that made all the difference in my TA system:
I removed data, so that it only gives one piece of information in one of three states: GOLD, BLUE or NONE (gray). If the indicator is blue, I can't buy, no matter how “once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” it seems. No ifs and buts, because all other information is hidden. I cannot “explain it away” by some line that “almost” crosses, because the state is absolute and opaque.
I have back tested it to the beginning of both crypto and key tech stocks, and I have forward tested it for 2 years now on both crypto and technology stocks and it is scarily accurate, when used right.
It is an implementation of the most famous saying of all trading, that your uber driver and aunt knows: “The trend is your friend, until the end, when it bends”.
As a technology man, I know to appreciate simplicity over complexity.
Because it is so accurate, it is also dangerous. If someone, or a piece of software, gives good trading advice 9 times in a row, and that is all you know because the process is hidden from view, the 10th time any sane person might mortgage their house to go all in - and end up losing everything, because the 10th time it was wrong. The person can enter a life long tragedy, impacting the person and everyone they love. I don't want to be responsible for that.
I'm happy to give you guys access to the indicator, but you need to take the driver's license first, so that you understand how to use it in a context. I also want us to be on the same page, so that we can efficiently exchange ideas and opportunities over time without discussing principles.
Having said that, just because something worked yesterday, it doesn’t mean it will work tomorrow with certainty. Maybe more people have realized the same thing as I, soon putting the system out of play, who knows. Any investment is risky. Any investment means that you can lose all the money, full stop. Don’t invest money that you need.
The process is not the indicator. The indicator is simple. What is valuable is how to apply it - and the understanding of why.
The course costs money because I give something of great value, that costs me something to give: If more and more big investors start doing the same trade, eventually it will reach the point where it no longer works. Right now it’s an open field, but if you are going to jump on this train, don’t wait too long!
Pass the test, and you will get the indicator, but again, that is not the main value. I have played a role in creating the biggest technology ecosystem the world has ever seen. That gave me perspectives which are fairly unique among investors. It is those principles that are valuable, because they are not widely understood by other investors. The indicator is just an aid, like a good hammer, albeit a very good hammer.
In the course, I share my best insights from those 25 years of technology strategy and translate them into very practical hands-on guidelines to investing in cryptocurrencies and tech stocks. Then, combining those insights with the indicator, we become killers on the market.
I have consolidated the course to include both cryptocurrencies and tech stocks, for two reasons:
With minor tweaks, the same principles can be applied to both.
Many stocks will probably be represented by a crypto token rather than an SQL database entry in the future, hence it makes no sense to separate them.
(There are still differences that needs to be managed, and I cover those in the course.)
So don’t buy the course twice, you already get both scopes the first time!
The course is fun and light, on video, and takes only 5-10 minutes per day for 3 weeks, total 21 sessions.
I don’t intend to make this a mass-program. On the contrary, I want it to be a contained and a manageable size of people, since I want to interact and exchange ideas in the future. I am doing this mainly to expand my network to more sharp minds with common investment principles and ideas.
So: Get the free checklist or roll up your sleeves and Start the course now. It literally takes 1 minute to start. You can pay with PayPal, Credit Card or by any major cryptocurrency if you prefer. You can complete today’s session in less than 10 minutes from now, so no excuse! :-)
P.S. If you have read all the way here, we have a lot in common. Then definitely write to me personally at e-mail [email protected] Cheers.
Thank you for being here. I hope to be of service to you. // Larsson