“The biggest mindset change for me is to let my profits run…”

Feedback in:

Hey Michael,

I’ll tell you about the mindset change that’s occurred since I started listening to your podcast and reading your book

The biggest mindset change for me is to let my profits run instead of taking money off the table prematurely. My gains have been much bigger since that change. Not worrying about all the voices of CNBC and other amateur traders has also been beneficial. In addition, I’ve found myself studying stoic philosophy since your podcast with Ryan Holiday so that’s been beneficial as well and not just for my trading.

I plan on eventually buying your system once I get out of my parents place (I’m 21) and an expense like that makes sense. Until then, I gotta stick to the books and podcast. Thank you for making such useful content.


Best of luck!

Ep. 637: Oliver Hart Interview with Michael Covel on Trend Following Radio

Oliver Hart
Oliver Hart

Subscribe to Trend Following Radio on iTunes

Oliver Hart is the 6th Nobel Prize winner to appear on Trend Following Radio. He is a British-born American economist, and currently the Andrew E. Furer Professor of Economics at Harvard University. He received the Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences in 2016 for his work on contract theory.

Oliver is an expert on contract theory, theory of the firm, corporate finance, law and economics. He studies how ownership roles, structure and contractual arrangements are used in the governance and boundaries of corporations. How did he get his start? After receiving his PhD from Princeton in 1974, he began studying general equilibrium under uncertainty – particularly the behavior of firms when under uncertainty. Summer of 1983 was when his career path shifted – specifically to contracts. He became less interested in what firms should do, and more interested in how firms align with what shareholders want them to do.

Following the 2008 financial crisis, Oliver believed it was dangerous to start intervening in such a fragile economy. Yes, it was an unprecedented crisis but, Oliver believes it was totally overblown. No physical or human assets were disappearing and we had mechanisms such as bankruptcy to fall back on. What was the reasoning behind some banks beings saved and others not? Wall Street was bailed out but mainstream was not? Oliver looked at the crisis as arbitrary and rigged. Michael and Oliver wrap the podcast up discussing the differences in block chain and bitcoin and end the podcast with a 6 minute bonus Q&A.

In this episode of Trend Following Radio:

  • Contracts
  • Venture capital
  • Residual control
  • Irrational exuberance
  • Currency equilibrium
  • Bitcoin
  • Differences in bitcoin and blockchain
  • Efficient Market Theory

Mentions & Resources:

Ep. 636: The Noise with Michael Covel on Trend Following Radio

The Noise
The Noise

Subscribe to Trend Following Radio on iTunes

What drives, distracts or motivates you? There has never been more availability to information than today. It is being pumped out every second of everyday. Is it useful?

Michael pulls a few quotes from a Farnam Street blog post and Nassim Taleb who further his point; we are not free, we are all part of the matrix, information is transforming us from nice people to neurotic people, and data that is not well discussed is toxic. Twitter, Facebook, CNBC, Bloomberg, and Yahoo Finance (among many others) are brainwashing the public. Shane Parish (from Farnam Street) also encourages people to think about what the information they are consuming means to them. Will it be relevant to them in a week, month, or year? He breaks the value of information down into two parts: Will the information stand the test of time? Does the information have detail?

The highest achievers have figured out how to sort through the chaos. They choose not to participate in the noise and tune everything out that is not essential. They are busy getting things done, rather than watching what everyone else is doing.

In this episode of Trend Following Radio:

  • Signal and noise
  • Distraction
  • Time and Details
  • Click bait
  • Social media
  • News scripts
  • Antifragility
  • Michelin over McDonalds

Mentions & Resources:

Ep. 635: Martin Ford Interview with Michael Covel on Trend Following Radio

Martin Ford
Martin Ford

Subscribe to Trend Following Radio on iTunes

Martin Ford is a futurist and author focused on the impact artificial intelligence is having on society and the economy. He is also the founder of a Silicon Valley based software development company and recently started Genesis Systems, focused on creating sustainable water by way of atmospheric water retention systems. He has over 25 years of experience in software development and systems. His newest book is “Rise of the Robots: Technology and the Threat of a Jobless Future.”

What was the trigger that caused Martin to go down the path of studying artificial intelligence? He was running a small software company from the mid 90’s to the 2000’s. He saw first hand in that short span of time how rapid technology was shifting jobs. Once his interest was sparked, he quickly began looking beyond just the loss of jobs and thinking of the economical ripple effect of jobs disappearing.

How do we disrupt the economical and social impact of severe unemployment? Martin proposes a “basic income”. Basic income would be enough money for the typical individual to get by on and survive, but not thrive. Controversial? Yes. Michael and Martin end the podcast discussing the ever looming threat of sustainable water and Martin’s newest venture, Genesis Systems.

In this episode of Trend Following Radio:

  • Loss of jobs to robots
  • Basic income
  • Rapid advancements in technology
  • Poverty traps
  • Dignity and work
  • Technology in medicine
  • Population and pollution
  • Sustainable water

Mentions & Resources:

Michael Covel’s Mind Food for Thought: February 22nd Edition

Food for thought:


“Faulkner was next level, really enjoyed it…”

Charles Faulkner
Charles Faulkner

Feedback in:

Mike –

That episode with Faulkner was next level. Really enjoyed it. Too bad you guys couldn’t spend more time on network theory, maybe in the future. I was able to reach out to him and he sent me over some additional material on the network theory. This podcast has been a great source that articulates work and ideas concisely where someone looking for them can then go in that direction. I’ve always played around with the inefficiencies of language etc. but to see that Faulkner has done so much work and articulates it so well is refreshing. Thanks for creating a tool for motivated people.

Just curious, I wasn’t sure if you were agreeing for the flow of conversation or you thought the logic was sound. But I don’t get how you and Annie Duke came to the conclusion that running it was better than passing on the first play. She starts by saying caught/dropped is 99% of occurrence but leaves out completion rate vs rush success of first occurrence. Furthermore, Russell Wilson’s redzone completion percentage was probably in the 50s or 60s in the postseason, I’m guessing. Not to mention his INT/Pass was much higher than 1% so again going back to that 99% number so I don’t understand why she would think it would be better in the redzone where you have less field to work with. She reinforces this with saying you get an extra play and don’t have to use that timeout by passing on first play if you don’t get it. 24 seconds best case scenario incompletion you can still run it afterward, call timeout, if you don’t get it then run or pass again, 3 plays. If you run first, you can call timeout, pass it if you don’t get it (clock would be stopped) and run or pass on the 3rd play again. In either scenario the success rate of the first play is probably closer than the masses would like to believe but you also don’t have the risk of an interception on a tipped pass with 11 defenders in a 12 yard depth area. She just went on for awhile about this like it was some great epiphany when I don’t even think she was correct 🙂

What made you want to put what Pena had to say on your cast? Going from perspectives like Chris Voss or Sally Hogshead on how to work with people or collaborate, who both seem very effective in their approach, using the information of the situation and maximizing effectiveness accordingly. Whereas Pena just seems like someone whose OS is outdated. Sure the blunt force strategy of just calling people pussies and talking in a loud imposing voice can be effective but I’m not sure it is always the approach with the most success in dealing with people. Just my humble onion. It seems like having a network of highly intelligent open minded people is important to you, would you say that the majority of them would enjoy (operate at peak efficiency) collaborating on a project with someone with Pena’s approach?

I’ve never been to Saigon. My first Asia trip was last year to Tokyo. I think I’m still processing it. Looking forward to checking out more of Asia. But if you’re ever in San Diego lets meet up at the Comber in South Mission for a beer, hows that for a filter? Ha take care, keep up the next level content!

Some questions there are no answers for! My podcast definitely has a perspective and some voices push the envelope. That’s a good thing. Thanks for the great feedback.