????隨后，西爾斯表示，成功的投資者必須跟蹤經濟周期和經濟指標，包括波動率恐懼指數（VIX fear index），了解應該何時進入、退出股市板塊及具體的個股。值得指出的是，波動率和美國供應管理協會（ISM）的經濟報告是投資界普遍關注的報告。但在2008年，關注這些指標也救不了誰。

????西爾斯在這本書中常常聽起來就像是一名日間操盤手。考慮到他的日常工作是為《巴倫周刊》的期權市場欄目撰稿，這也難怪。倒不是說他說不出什么高見，但他每日時時刻刻跟蹤市場的變動，這種思維模式似乎影響到了他的建議。

????真相是成功投資是人生的苦苦追求之一。偉大的投資者通常都有你我所不具備的特質，而且，他們的行事方式通常與一般的人背道而馳。再以巴菲特為例。上世紀90年代初，他公開支持富國銀行（Wells Fargo）的股票，因為該股當時很便宜，續跌空間有限，而上升空間巨大。但當時，其他所有人都盯著該行糟糕的房地產貸款。

????三位知名做空者穿著印有“巴菲特-小子”的T恤，四處高呼富國銀行股票將下跌（我們都知道最后的贏家是誰）。這給我們什么啟示？很多最優秀的投資者不像其他人那樣試圖把握經濟周期的時機。他們按照自己的步調走。

????看起來似乎毫無希望，但有工作的人可以成功地進行投資。而且，這不需要依照華爾街規則來做。只需要知道幾個“訣竅”就行。第一，成本永遠是投資過程中你唯一能夠控制的因素。現如今，很多華爾街分析師告訴我們，美國企業的利潤將繼續蓬勃增長，美國股市每年將上漲9%，等等。這樣的預測可能在未來10年是成功的，但之后10年就又說不準了。天曉得。但如果你的共同基金收取1.50%的費用，你唯一可以指望的事情就是，你的錢每年會損失1.50%。

????第二，不應在股價貴的時候買入，也不應在股價便宜的時候賣出。但你怎么知道今天是便宜、還是貴呢？最可信的指標就是耶魯大學（Yale）教授羅伯特?席勒的長期股票水平評測工具，他用一個Excel表格來跟蹤歷年股市走勢，并發表在耶魯大學網站上，全世界的人都能看到。根據席勒的表格，經過周期調整的美國股票歷史平均市盈率為16倍。如今，這一比率為22倍。華爾街人士總是一味讓你買進。但席勒提供了一個更好的方法。

????第三，對股市進行更廣泛投資，或者找一個人幫你做，最好這個人還喜歡價值股，不喜歡那些熱門但前景不可預測的成長型公司。簡單說，除非想尋開心，否則不要想著在個股上賭一把。每天都有數以萬計極其聰明、極富野心的選股者涌入股市。你真的比他們還懂行嗎？

????Sears then argues that successful investors must follow economic cycles and indices such as the VIX fear index to understand when to hop in and out of market sectors and individual stocks. It's worth noting, however, that the VIX and ISM economic reports are some of the most widely followed reports in the investing world. Yet tracking them didn't save anyone in 2008.

????Sears often sounds like a day trader in this book. That makes sense given that his day job is covering the options market for Barron's. It's not that he can't provide wise insights, but his advice seems distorted from covering market gyrations on a second-by-second basis.

????The truth is that successful investing is among life's harder pursuits. Great investors often possess traits unlike yours and mine, and they act in ways that often contradict basic human behavior. Take Buffet again. There was a time in the early 1990s when he publicly supported Wells Fargo (WFC) stock because the bank's shares were cheap enough to protect against further losses and offered enormous upside. But everyone else was focused on the bank's terrible real estate loans.

????A trio of well-regarded short selling brothers went around wearing "Buffett Busters" T-shirts and shouting that Wells Fargo was going down. (We know who came out on top.) What's the takeaway? Many of the best investors don't worry about trying to time economic cycles like everyone else. Instead they chart their own course.

????It may seem hopeless, but people with day jobs can invest successfully. And it doesn't require playing the game by Wall Street rules. You only need to know a few "secrets." First, cost is the only aspect of the investing process that you'll ever be able to control. Nowadays, many Wall Street analysts tell us that U.S. corporate earnings will continue to flourish, that U.S. stocks can be expected to rise by 9% a year on average, and on and on. These predictions may pan out over the next decade, and then again they may not. Who knows? But if your mutual fund charges 1.50% in expenses, the one thing you can bank on every year is losing 1.50% of your money.

????Second, you shouldn't buy stocks when they're expensive, nor sell when they're cheap. How do you know which condition applies today? The most reliable indicator is Yale professor Robert Shiller's long-term gauge of stock levels that he tracks on an Excel file and publishes on a Yale website for all the world to see. According to Shiller's spreadsheet, the average historical cyclically-adjusted P/E multiple for U.S. stocks is 16. Today they trade at 22. Wall Street will always tell you to buy. Shiller espouses a better method.

????Third, invest in the broad stock market or find someone who will do it for you, preferably someone who favors value stocks instead of high-flying but unpredictable growth companies. Simply, the only time you should gamble on individual stocks is to have fun. Tens of thousands of very smart, very ambitious stock pickers crowd into the market every day. Do you really know more than they do?