Do nothing, watch nature claim it back.

Jup, so meinte ich das auch. Kann natürlich sein, dass das auch das Testergebnis war auch wenn ichs nicht glaube.

Manchmal sind die angelegten Kriterien etwas seltsam und wirken willkürlich, aber man kann sich ja die Liste der Kriterien anschauen und muss nicht stur der Endnote vertrauen. Und zuletzt haben sie AV-Software getestet, das wirkte auf mich recht unseriös aber muss zugeben, dass ich den Test nicht gelesen habe.

What is this format? Spongebob on the right panel makes no sense, it should be Squidward.

Yes there are things happening on the markets which you can find causal connections for but market efficiency stops you from benefiting, as the information available is the same for everyone (unless insider info is used). In 2020 you bet on something and were lucky.

Following public portfolios is following public information which is available to the public an therefore also will not work (on average, of course you can be lucky). If this would yield consistent results, everyone would do it and it would stop working.

What you might percieve as an educated guess is more or less a 50/50 bet minus the transaction cost in the best case and a bet with worse odds in any other case. Research has shown that people trading with what they think is educated guessing performs worse than just doing random transactions.

That’s not how markets work. You can not predict what they will do next based on what happened before. In general you can not predict a market without insider info and/or manipulating it.