Rule of thumb: if an equity market move is ever less than 1.5% in either direction, the headlines about why it happened are completely made up. Financial news has to assign a narrative even when there is none.
I've favorited this comment but why 1.5%? Why not 2 or 3%? I guess that is a big enough move to suggest some shift in fundamentals or some major event in FANG
I tried to be intentionally conservative, but I agree there’s an argument for it to be higher. As someone who watches markets a decent amount, 3% seems far more likely to be in clear reaction to some event, or a continuation of a recent major trend.
To be clear I’m referring to the whole market, not a move in a single stock.
