TL;DR
Get smart everyday buys delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
Technical analysis remains visible on social media and has a long-running published handbook, but the source report describes a decline in its standing among investment institutions. It gives no evidence that chart-based methods have disappeared or measures how well they perform, so the question of whether they work remains unresolved.
Technical analysis is still promoted by chartists on TikTok and covered in a standard book now in its 11th edition, but a MoneyWeek report says the approach has lost standing in parts of professional finance. The contrast points to a change in the method’s reputation, not proof that chart-reading has vanished or that it cannot help investors.
The report describes a shift in how technical analysis is viewed. It says investment banks used to employ chartists, while an aspiring graduate seeking an investment role might now be advised not to mention having read the field’s best-known book. The article does not identify which banks or employers hold that view, or provide interviews with hiring managers to document how widespread it is.
There is still a visible audience for chart-based analysis. MoneyWeek notes that TikTok features chartists and that Robert Edwards and John Magee’s Technical Analysis of Stock Trends, first published in 1948, remains in print in an eleventh edition. The book’s continued publication shows ongoing interest, though it does not establish how many investors use its methods or whether those methods produce reliable results.
The report also compares professional credentials. It puts the number of active charterholders at the Chartered Market Technician Association at about 2,500, but gives no date for that count. It contrasts this with the CFA Institute, which sets standards for investment professionals and runs the Chartered Financial Analyst programme. No comparable CFA enrolment or charterholder figure is supplied, so the comparison signals different scale and profile without allowing a direct numerical assessment.
Charting’s Place in Finance
For readers, the development matters because professional acceptance and public popularity are not the same. A method can be widely discussed online while carrying less weight in some institutional hiring and investment settings. Someone choosing what to study or how to evaluate market commentary should distinguish visibility from professional recognition—and both from evidence that a strategy works.
The report offers signs of a reputational divide, but not a test of investment performance. It provides no returns data, comparison with a benchmark, or evidence about risk. Its account therefore cannot show whether technical analysis reliably predicts prices, whether particular chart-reading practices have value, or how results vary across markets and time periods. Those questions require evidence beyond employment anecdotes, social-media activity, book sales or credential counts.
That distinction also cautions against treating the article’s headline question as settled. A declining institutional profile may affect career choices and the way research teams are staffed. It does not, by itself, prove that every use of charts is ineffective. Likewise, continued interest does not confirm the claims made by chartists about market direction.
technical analysis stock trading book
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
A Book and Two Credentials
Technical analysis generally refers to studying price charts and related market data to identify patterns or possible trends. The report focuses on its status as a profession and investment discipline, rather than presenting a new study of whether chart patterns predict future prices. Its examples span three different measures: public attention, a long-running book, and professional certification.
The cited book’s publication history reaches back to 1948, while the Chartered Market Technician Association provides a credential specifically associated with market charting. The CFA Institute, by contrast, operates a broader professional programme for investment analysts and other finance workers. These facts offer background for understanding the comparison, but the report does not provide a historical series showing how either credential’s participation has changed.
That missing timeline matters: a snapshot of roughly 2,500 active charterholders cannot establish whether membership is rising or falling. Nor does a contrast between the two organisations alone show how employers assess their credentials. The report’s central observation is about perceived professional standing, supported by examples rather than a systematic survey of firms.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Evidence Behind the Reputation Shift
The report does not identify the date of its certification count or provide a trend in charterholder numbers. It also does not name the graduate recruiters said to discourage candidates from citing the classic book. The scope of the reported change in employer attitudes is therefore unclear, as is whether it applies across investment banks, asset managers and other finance firms.
There is also no performance study in the supplied material. It does not test technical strategies against passive investing or other approaches, account for fees and risk, or distinguish among different forms of chart analysis. The claim that the discipline has lost institutional standing should be read as a report about reputation, not a conclusion about its predictive power.
stock market technical analysis guide
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
What Further Evidence Could Show
The supplied report does not announce a forthcoming study, policy change or update to the certification figures. A clearer picture of technical analysis’s professional role would require dated membership data, employer evidence across firms and a defined measure of institutional use. Any claim about investment value would need separate performance research with transparent time periods, benchmarks and risk measures.
Until such evidence is available, the confirmed picture remains limited: charting retains public and publishing visibility, while MoneyWeek describes its professional reputation as diminished. Readers considering the method should treat online predictions and claims of institutional decline as claims to examine, not as proof of future market outcomes.
professional technical analysis certification
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
Is technical analysis dead?
The supplied report does not establish that it is. It describes a weaker professional reputation alongside continued online activity and a book still in print. Whether chart-based strategies work is not assessed.
How many active market technician charterholders are reported?
MoneyWeek gives a figure of about 2,500 active charterholders at the Chartered Market Technician Association. The report does not state when that count was measured or provide earlier figures for comparison.
Does the report show that chart analysis cannot predict markets?
No. It contains no performance test, return figures or comparison with other investment strategies. Its focus is technical analysis’s standing in professional finance.
Why compare the technician credential with the CFA programme?
The report uses the comparison to illustrate the different profiles of a specialist chart-reading credential and a broader investment-professional programme. It does not provide comparable enrolment figures or employer surveys.
Source: rss
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
