Originally Posted by
BlackPeter
Though it is hard to fault a theory predicting an eventual change with only one observation period of finite length ....
However - no matter what it is - if we assume for arguments sake that Couta's theory holds water, than it does not matter whether we invest into SUM or RYM. According to Couta both will develop with the same velocity - and $1000 invested into RYM will grow as fast as $1000 invested into SUM.
However if Couta's theory is wrong, than the $ invested in SUM will grow faster. Which means - there is no drawback of investing into SUM ... you either get the same return as with RYM (according to Couta), or a better return (if Couta is wrong).
Looks different for the people investing into RYM - they either get the same return as the SUM investors, or they get less.
Given this choice - what possible reason could there be to invest into RYM, if you can put your money as well into an either equal or better performing SUM?
Given that markets are a chaotic system 2nd order ... just the existence of this thought will increase the buying pressure on SUM, which means that SUM inevitably will outgrow RYM in a rational market :p;
QED.