Status Report on Market Bottom Claim

He checked the portfolio at 7:14 in the morning, before coffee, which was a new habit formed sometime around March.

The number was lower than it had been in November. It was higher than it had been in June. This context did not provide comfort. He added the context anyway, because the number without context was worse.

Someone had said the bottom was in. This was the fourth person to say so this year. The first three had said it at different numbers, all of which turned out not to be the bottom. He held this information carefully. He did not discard it.

First consequence. The first case of market bottom claim changes one small decision without being discussed. He does not tell his wife the new number. He tells her a rounded version. The rounding is slightly optimistic.

Second consequence. After repetition, other people begin adjusting their behavior around market bottom claim. A friend stops asking what he thinks about the market. A different friend starts asking what he thinks about the market, newly, having not been interested before. Both changes make sense. Neither requires explanation.

Third consequence. Eventually market bottom claim acquires an unwritten enforcement system that everyone denies creating. Saying the bottom is in becomes a social act that supersedes its accuracy. People who said it correctly once are more trusted than people who have said it incorrectly twice, even when the margin of error was the same.

The relevant absurd rule governing this: uncertainty may be converted into certainty by checking the same number again under identical conditions. The number does not become more certain. The person becomes more practiced at carrying uncertainty, which is a different thing and takes about as much energy.

He checked again at 7:41. Flat. Acceptable.

The bottom, he thought, might be in. He had said this before. He said it again with equivalent sincerity. December was a reasonable time to mean it.