The fourth step of the ordinary person's economic radar is not about learning more knowledge, but about starting to manage oneself. In the end, the hardest part of investing is not understanding the macroeconomy or financial reports, but understanding your own reactions. Wanting to chase when prices rise, Wanting to run when prices fall, Regretting selling too early, Holding on stubbornly after buying at a high price, Feeling anxious when others make money, Questioning life when you lose money yourself. These are not individual problems; this is human nature. Therefore, the fifth stage to improve is investment psychology and risk control. You need to know that the most costly mistakes in the market are often not about getting the direction wrong once, but about emotions taking over the system. Selling long-term assets out of panic. Chasing high-valued assets because of FOMO. Clinging stubbornly to a cost basis because of anchoring. Mistaking luck for ability due to overconfidence. Only seeing information that supports your own judgment because of confirmation bias. A truly mature investor is not one without emotions, but one who has rules to limit emotions. Ask 10 questions before buying: Why am I buying? How long do I plan to hold? What role does it play in my portfolio? What is the maximum drawdown I can accept? Is the valuation reasonable? Has the fundamental changed? Does the macro environment support it? Are there alternative choices? What if I am wrong? What are the stop-loss or rebalancing rules? These questions may seem troublesome, but they help you make fewer impulsive decisions. The sixth stage is to broaden your perspective to Chinese assets and the global cycle. Because ordinary people cannot just look at one market. China has its own policy cycle, real estate cycle, and credit cycle. The U.S. has its own inflation cycle, interest rate cycle, and dollar cycle. Globally, there are big variables like deglobalization, supply chain restructuring, energy, military industry, and semiconductors. Even within tech stocks, Chinese tech, U.S. tech, and Hong Kong tech have different underlying pricing logics. A-shares focus on policy, liquidity, and risk appetite. Hong Kong stocks focus on dollar liquidity, China's fundamentals, and foreign capital sentiment. U.S. stocks focus on earnings, interest rates, and tech capital expenditure. Gold focuses on real interest rates and monetary credit. BTC focuses on liquidity, risk appetite, and cyclical sentiment. When you put these variables on one chart, investing is no longer about guessing price movements, but about judging: which cycle we are in now, which assets have advantages, and which risks are accumulating. Ordinary people don't need to predict the market every day. But they must know what they are betting on. Don't bet on direction, bet on cycles. Don't bet on the future, manage risk. Don't chase hot spots, build a system. In the end, you will find that what the economic radar truly trains is not "market-watching ability," but long-term survival ability.

Why has the U.S. stock market been rising continuously? 38 times. 7,799 points. This is the historical highest closing price of the S&P 500 on August 13, 2026. A widely circulated explanation recently attributes this to three reasons: Global capital has nowhere else to go, the U.S. fiscal system is deeply tied to the stock market, and the AI capital expenditure story is not yet finished. The combination of these three forms a self-reinforcing closed loop. This framework is very elegant. So much so that I shared it after my first read. On the second read, I checked each number cited. The direction is right, but the numbers are wrong. There are four cracks, precisely in the most critical places. 1. First, clarify the correct parts These three points are not nonsense; each has empirical support. Global capital is indeed flowing into the U.S. The overseas revenue proportion of S&P 500 constituent companies is about 28% (Goldman Sachs, July 2026), and about 39% for the Nasdaq 100. What you buy is not a U.S. company, but a company collecting money globally. The U.S. fiscal system is indeed tied to asset prices. In 2025, capital gains tax contributed about 10% of personal income tax revenue, approximately $270 billion, equivalent to 0.9% of GDP. The richest 1% paid about 46% of all personal income tax. Personal income tax accounts for about 52% of federal revenue (Fiscal Year 2026). If stock prices fall, the tax base collapses. AI money is indeed still being poured in. But the scale is much larger than that claim — not $200 billion, but $388 billion. This is the combined capital expenditure of Amazon, Google, Microsoft, and Meta in 2025; the 2026 guidance is $602 billion to $630 billion. After correcting the numbers, this point is even stronger. Nearly three times the difference, the conclusion changes from "the story is not finished" to "the money has already been spent." 2. However, reasons do not equal predictions The problem is not the direction, but the way it is used. The fundamental logic behind the long-term rise of U.S. stocks is only one: corporate profits are growing. Capital flows, fiscal ties, and industry narratives are levers that amplify this logic, not the logic itself. And levers amplify both rises and falls. Each of these three levers now shows cracks. Without evidence, I rely on data. First, the claim "capital has no other choice" has been made before. If global capital truly had nowhere else to go and could only flood into dollar assets, bond yields should not rise. But they have risen. On September 1, 2026, the 10-year U.S. Treasury yield rose to 4.792%, a 19-month high; the 30-year yield was 5.243%. On the same day, the Bloomberg Global Government Bond Yield Index rose to 3.72%, the highest since mid-2008; the 10-year Japanese bond yield hit 3% for the first time since 1996. Rising yields mean someone is selling. This is not "no choice," but "you have to pay more to attract buyers." A more counterintuitive figure: the S&P 500's overseas revenue share of 28% sounds high, but the peak in 2012 was 34%. The idea that "U.S. companies are making money worldwide" has weakened over the past fourteen years, not strengthened. Second, and most critically: the direction is reversed. That explanation directly infers "the U.S. fiscal system tied to the stock market" means "the Fed will provide a backstop." This inference skips a step. And that step is now moving in the opposite direction. The federal funds rate is currently 3.50%–3.75%. The July FOMC vote was 9 to 3 to hold steady — three votes favored an immediate hike. On August 28, Waller's speech at Jackson Hole was interpreted as a strong hawkish signal; in the following two trading days, the 10-year Treasury yield broke above 4.75%, a new high since January 2025. Regarding the September 16 meeting: On August 26, CME FedWatch priced "no change" at 63.9%; after Waller's speech until August 31, "rate hike" flipped to 65.4%; by September 1, the same market showed two readings simultaneously: 30.6% and 66%. Goldman Sachs said a hike was "extremely unlikely," while another group of traders said it was very likely. Within a week, the market's collective judgment flipped twice; on the same day, two readings differed by a factor of two. I won't guess a third answer here. What I want to say is: if you include "the Fed will provide a backstop" as a buying reason, you are making a short-term prediction. And a probability that flips twice in a week cannot support a long-term position. Third, what you are buying is not "the U.S. economy." Seven giants account for about 33.9% of the S&P 500 weight; the top ten total about 38%–40%. The historical average is 24%, and the previous high in 1970 was 28%. Breadth is also narrowing. On September 1, 2026, the S&P 500 fell only 0.3%, but nearly 75% of constituent stocks closed lower that day. The index rising does not mean stocks are rising. 3. We need to clarify a cognitive misconception That is: mistaking "the reason for the rise" as "the reason for continued rise." 38 new highs are results that have already happened; they do not constitute the basis for the 39th. The more elegant a retrospective framework is, the more it can create the illusion "I understand it, so I know the next step." There is no logical connection between these two sentences. On April 7, 2025, the S&P 500 hit the year's low of 4,835.04. Almost everyone said "this time is really different." Sixteen months later, 7,798.99. $100,000 became $161,000. Those who said "wait for a pullback to buy" ended up waiting until March 30, 2026, at 6,316.91 — 30.6% more expensive than the "bottom" they initially thought was too expensive to buy. The pullback you wait for is more expensive than the bottom you missed. This is the most expensive lesson I have learned in nine years of dollar-cost averaging VOO. 4. My approach Years have passed, and my answer hasn't changed a word: I don't predict. I dollar-cost average. VOO's expense ratio is 0.03%, with a ten-year annualized return of 15.4% (Morningstar, as of 2026-08-27). These two numbers are known and verifiable, not relying on anyone's judgment about next month. CAPE at 39.1 times, top ten weight at 38%, the Fed might hike next week — these are all true. They won't make me sell out; they only make me avoid borrowing, avoid concentration, and avoid increasing positions just because of a well-written article. Closed loops will eventually break; I agree with that. But no one can know the timing of the break in advance. And the money you lose by avoiding it is certain; the decline you avoid is uncertain. The simplest path: build positions on things that don't rely on predictions, then live long enough to let compounding work. Time is wealth; start dollar-cost averaging today!

The third step for ordinary people in economic radar is to start understanding one thing: Asset prices do not move on their own; usually, it is the "price of money" behind the movement. Many people look at the market only by watching stock rises and falls, gold price changes, Hong Kong stocks, and the Nasdaq index fluctuations. But the real source is often interest rates. When U.S. Treasury yields move, global assets are repriced accordingly. Because U.S. Treasury yields essentially serve as the global benchmark for capital, they determine the cost of money and how much investors are willing to pay for future cash flows. When interest rates rise, valuations get compressed. When interest rates fall, risk assets are more easily supported. When inflation rises, central banks tighten policies, causing asset volatility to increase. When credit expands, the market is more willing to take risks. When credit contracts, capital seeks safety first. This is why the same news causes reactions in Nasdaq, gold, Hong Kong stocks, A-shares, and bonds. It's not that they suddenly have mysterious connections, but that capital is recalculating. For example, when U.S. Treasury yields rise, tech growth stocks face more pressure because a large part of their valuation comes from future profits. Gold also faces short-term pressure because rising real interest rates increase the opportunity cost of holding gold. Hong Kong stocks and emerging markets are also affected because when the dollar is strong and liquidity tightens, foreign capital's risk appetite declines. So, what ordinary people need to learn at this stage is not "which fund is more popular," but first to understand: Why do interest rates affect valuations? Why does inflation affect policy? Why does credit affect risk appetite? Why do exchange rates affect capital flows? Why do bonds often react earlier than stocks? Once this logic is clear, move on to the fourth step: funds, ETFs, and asset allocation. The most important change at this stage is that the questions become more advanced. Previously, the question was: Can I buy this fund? Later, the question becomes: What role does this fund play in my portfolio? Cash is responsible for defense and opportunities. Bonds are responsible for stability and volatility hedging. Broad-based funds are responsible for long-term growth. Gold is responsible for hedging risks and currency credit. Sector funds are responsible for thematic flexibility. Overseas assets are responsible for diversifying single-market risk. What ordinary people really need to build is not a portfolio of "all the best-performing assets to buy," but a portfolio that can survive in different environments. Look at assets, not just their price changes; Look at portfolios, not just individual products; Look at roles, not just returns. The core of this stage can be summed up in one sentence: Upgrade from "what to buy" to "how to allocate."

If I had 1 million U on OKX, this is how I would allocate it: Spot + Dollar-Cost Averaging + Futures + Flexible Cash. Keep it simple, because after BTC returns to 80,000, the biggest risk is not missing the opportunity, but being driven by emotions to make erratic moves. My allocation: Spot base position: 350,000 U Establish a foundational position first, but don’t go all in at once. Buy 150,000 U around 80,000 first. If it dips to 76,000-78,000, add 100,000 U. If it dips to 72,000-74,000, add another 100,000 U. This part is not for short-term trading; the core is to ensure you don’t miss out. Dollar-Cost Averaging position: 300,000 U Split purchases over the next 30 days, about 10,000 U per day. If BTC consolidates sideways, continue normal DCA. If it drops more than 5% in a single day, double the DCA amount that day. If it continuously rises above 88,000, reduce the daily DCA amount and slow down the pace. The purpose of DCA is not to catch the bottom, but to avoid constantly waiting for a "lower point." Futures position: 100,000 U Only low leverage, no more than 2x. No chasing long positions on rallies. Use only in two scenarios: Hedge lightly when breaking key support; After breaking through 86,000-88,000 and pulling back to hold, lightly follow the trend. Futures are not the main position, but a tool position. Flexible cash: 250,000 U This part is the most important. If BTC falls below 72,000 but does not break the long-term cycle logic, gradually add to spot. If it falls below 70,000 and panic occurs, use some to catch extreme volatility. If it rallies directly, don’t chase; wait for a pullback. My core idea: 35% base position, 30% DCA to navigate volatility, 10% futures as support, 25% reserved for market mistakes. When BTC returns to 80,000, many rush to prove they didn’t miss out. But I prefer to divide the money into rhythms. Have positions when it rises, cash when it pulls back, and plans for extreme markets. This is the most comfortable strategy for ordinary people. #OKXMillionPlanner