Investing in stocks—or more accurately, investing in companies—is an asset class I’ve been familiar with for about four to five years, though prior to that, like most people, I used to look down on it. Having taken courses and studied it for the past three to four years, this form of investing was initially quite exciting for someone like me who loves sharing what they learn. Over time, however, the weight of responsibility—the risk of inadvertently misleading people—started to hit home. That’s when I realized that something I initially viewed as quite simple was actually far more challenging.
Our local stock market, in particular, has increasingly turned into a complete den of wolves in my eyes. As I witness a whole series of absurdities day in and day out, telling people “Investing here will net you higher returns”—as I used to do early on—feels absurd to me now. Over time, I came to realize that this isn’t a market where you can easily generate sustainable income just by applying rules read out of a textbook. I’m not saying you need to trade on lies and schemes or align yourself with those who do. What I want to convey is just how difficult this game really is, where those difficulties stem from, and how—despite all of it—the stock market can still be turned into a sustainable source of income.
Why Am I Writing This?
My main goal in writing this post is to help beginners avoid, right from the start, the mistakes I made when I first got into investing. Even though I started out fairly cautious and invested in relatively solid companies, I succumbed to the opportunity cost of time over and over again along the way. While money lost in a bad investment might seem recoverable through future gains, not every loss can truly be made up. That’s because you lose not just the capital, but also the returns that money could have generated elsewhere—and, most importantly, time. Since we can’t turn back the clock and are constantly battling the inflation monster in our country, I know that the losses stemming from my past mistakes may never fully heal; that deficit will linger somewhere on my portfolio balance sheet for the rest of my investing journey.
What I’m saying here might sound like I’m taking jabs at people who have been teaching this for years or opposing them outright. On the contrary, I still view many of those people as masters of the trade. I’ve learned a great deal from them, and I truly believe the core ideas behind most of what they say are sound. But over the years, I’ve observed one thing: when a sound idea is explained incompletely, it can turn into a flawed rule—especially in a market with dynamics as unique as Borsa Istanbul. My issue isn’t with the essence of what people preach, but rather with those statements being presented as absolute, unbroken rules.
Take the phrase we hear so often in the investment world: “The long term always pays off.” In my view, stated on its own, this is flat-out wrong. The accurate phrasing should be: “The long term pays off with the right companies.” A few extra words might seem minor, but from an investment perspective, they change the entire meaning. Holding for a long time alone doesn’t make an investor successful; waiting ten years in the wrong company simply means staying wrong for ten times longer than waiting one year in the wrong company.
Similarly, another common saying is “The stock market always delivers the highest returns.” Leaving this incomplete sets people up with unrealistic expectations. A more accurate statement would be: “Investments made in well-researched, right companies or funds under the right conditions can outperform other asset classes in the stock market.” Simply having skin in the stock market doesn’t automatically grant you high returns. Which company you own, the valuation at which you bought it, how long you hold it, and whether the company actually grows during that period can completely alter the outcome.
Another popular narrative goes like this: “Investing in the stock market is super easy. Just buy shares with whatever you save on payday every month, and years later, you won’t believe your returns.” This is one of the ideas I struggle with the most, because fixing it with just a single sentence is near impossible. In our local stock market, the “buy and forget” mindset simply doesn’t work for every company due to the reasons I laid out. There are cases where even seemingly stellar companies lagged behind gold over 15 to 20-year horizons, let alone 5 to 10 years. In such scenarios, the investor carries company risk, country risk, market risk, and liquidity risk for decades—only to end up trailing an asset class they could have held with significantly lower risk. If you aren’t compensated with excess returns for the risks you take, the question naturally arises: why take that risk in the first place?
That’s why I don’t think the long-term investing mindset popularized by investors like Warren Buffett is completely inapplicable to our market; however, simply “being long-term” isn’t enough on its own. Buying a company and sitting idle for years without doing a thing is not the same as long-term investing while actively keeping tabs on the company’s operations, financials, industry, and macroeconomic context. In fact, this is why I notice the same blind spot even among folks who have been teaching investment for years and genuinely believe in what they preach. What they say is rarely wrong—in fact, theoretically, it’s spot on. But when you leave out Turkey’s investment culture and the inner workings of Borsa Istanbul, the premise remains incomplete and loses its real-world utility over time.
Perhaps that’s why I can no longer easily dismiss the choices of everyday folks who aren’t technically versed in financial markets as “wrong.” If someone sits down, runs a basic calculation, and decides, “I’ll just buy gold” or “I’ll buy property and hold it for years,” they might actually be acting completely rationally from their perspective. After all, there is no guarantee that the higher-risk alternative will actually yield higher returns. Expecting people to spend years researching companies, analyzing balance sheets, tracking sectors, and bearing the relentless psychological pressure of the market—only to end up with returns comparable to gold—just isn’t a reasonable ask.
And that brings me to the core reason I’m writing this piece: not to convince people that the stock market is a bad place, but to demonstrate that many rules we take for granted in the stock market are actually conditional. When you blindly follow slogans without understanding those conditions, you can end up losing years while believing you’re investing. I’ve paid a high enough price for the cost of time in my own investing journey. My hope is that this post helps at least a few newcomers avoid paying that exact same toll.
Why Only Borsa Istanbul?
First off, I should clarify that Borsa Istanbul is the only equity market I invest in. I’ve never invested in foreign stock exchanges or overseas companies. The main reason is simple: I don’t consider myself knowledgeable enough in those markets. I’m not just talking about knowing a company’s financial statements here. I don’t know enough about those countries’ culture, language, people, politics, regulatory framework, and countless other dynamics. In my view, investing in individual companies is inherently high-risk, and venturing into an environment you don’t thoroughly understand compounds that risk even further. If I can’t sleep soundly at night after making an investment, I find it far wiser for myself to stick to paths that feel more predictable.
The Inner Workings of US Stock Markets
Look at the US stock market. When you examine corporate valuations, many companies trade at multiples that seem exceptionally high—or in some cases, downright absurd—by our usual standards. What’s more, except for rare stretches, this dynamic has persisted for decades. So how is it that, much like how physical gold steadily gains value in Turkey outside of a few anomalous periods, US stock markets consistently trend upward over the long run?
Based on my own observations, I see a two-pronged cause that ultimately leads back to the same core driver:
- A strikingly high percentage of the American public—around 55%—invests in stocks. In Turkey, this figure is dramatically lower. Because American retail investors direct a substantial portion of their savings into equities, companies are continuously fed with fresh liquidity.
- The second reason leads right back to the same outcome. Beyond US citizens, savers across the globe trust US markets and companies, channeling their capital there as well. This creates a secondary, continuous stream of international liquidity.
When investor interest and liquidity consistently back companies in a stock market, it becomes normalized for certain businesses to trade well above their intrinsic value for years on end. The perceived absurdity of buying shares at those valuations fades away. Sky-high valuations become accepted as the norm, allowing the system to run smoothly for decades.
Borsa Istanbul and Turkey’s Investment Culture
So how do things play out in our domestic market and companies? In my view, we face a fundamental issue right from the start: there is no shared, established consensus in our country on what “investing” actually means. As a result, it’s hard to talk about a structured investment culture similar to the US. Still, there are a few key points worth highlighting.
Looking at recent surveys and the behavior of people around me, gold, real estate, and automobiles consistently rank among the primary vehicles for personal savings. That first pillar of liquidity I mentioned regarding the US translates into a deep-seated cultural issue here. Personally, I don’t view real estate or vehicles as pure investment instruments. Even gold, depending on the period, ought to be seen more as a store of value than a growth asset. Yet, because these habits have been baked in for generations, explaining these distinctions is an uphill battle.
When it comes to the second pillar—foreign investors—my outlook is considerably more pessimistic. I don’t believe foreign capital enters our country with the intent of providing long-term, sustainable liquidity. On the contrary, during certain periods, foreign funds operate to capitalize on short-term mispricings, pocket quick yields, and exit the market. Given their capital scale and information edge, this dynamic looks to me like a financial-market manifestation of modern economic hegemony.
Information Asymmetry and Risk Perception
After years of education and research, one of my key answers to the question “Why is this so tough here?” was liquidity. But leaving out the other side of the coin would leave the picture incomplete: Information asymmetry.
Investing ultimately serves a simple purpose: extracting maximum utility from your savings over a given timeframe. People run their own mental accounting and direct their funds into whatever assets they believe will yield the highest utility based on their knowledge base. Most people around me actually understand that equity investments can offer superior returns in the long run. But knowing is one thing; bearing that risk is another. The volatile trajectory of our stock market and people’s risk appetite keep many at arm’s length. Sharp, prolonged drawdowns that are rare in US markets can sometimes manifest here in reverse as “rare periods of sustained rallies.” In such an environment, handing out blanket advice like “This place is great, you should invest” no longer feels right to me.
Market Manipulation and the Moral Aspect
In my opinion, this is by no means a sustainable way to invest. However, touching upon it is necessary to make sense of certain price movements in our market.
Think of the stock market, loosely speaking, as a weekly neighborhood produce market. Now imagine this market is the single nationwide marketplace where everyone can trade easily. Suppose that during a lull in volume—when overall demand is relatively weak, much like certain phases in our stock market—I begin quietly buying up all the tomatoes in the market. If I have enough capital, I gradually gain control over a major portion of the supply. Then, using my financial muscle to push prices higher over time, onlookers see only one thing: tomatoes consistently surging in price. This is precisely where information asymmetry kicks in. Fearing they’ll miss out, people rush in to buy. What started as controlled demand engineered by my capital evolves into a frenzy of uncontrolled public demand.
The tipping point arrives when information asymmetry leads the public to normalize these inflated prices. If the endgame is to unload inventory at peak prices, that massive stockpile of tomatoes gets dumped onto buyers who believe prices will keep climbing forever. Capital multiplies rapidly. But what ultimately happens to tomato prices? Once artificial demand evaporates, prices inevitably revert toward real supply-and-demand fundamentals. And those who assumed prices would go up indefinitely realize their mistake only when the adrenaline fades, rationality returns, and they’re left staring at their lost capital.
A crucial distinction needs to be made here. Buying an asset and selling it later at a higher price is not inherently illegal. However, transactions aimed at artificially manipulating prices or investor perception can be classified as market-disruptive behavior or market fraud, depending on the methods used and specific circumstances. What I’m emphasizing here, though, is the moral dimension. Exploiting someone’s lack of knowledge or emotional excitement to offload an asset far above its true worth presents a serious ethical issue in my book.
Unfortunately, this is an issue Borsa Istanbul has wrestled with in various forms since its inception. While we used to associate these tactics mainly with foreign capital, I now observe similar patterns in the movements of domestic institutional players and funds. Consequently, a portion of the already modest retail investor base drifts away from equities altogether—driven out by both market manipulation and the reality that gains tend to be concentrated in fleeting windows.
Examples of Pricing Absurdities in Borsa Istanbul
The tomato analogy is just one illustration of the steep uphill battle faced by investors trying to generate returns via the second method—rigorous reading and research. I plan to write a dedicated post titled “How to Invest in Companies.” Since I’ll dive much deeper into stock selection and valuation there, I won’t linger too long on it here.
Still, I’d like to share a few concrete examples that, while explainable upon deep forensic analysis, appear utterly paradoxical at first glance:
- Enka İnşaat (ENKAI): The company reported real growth across virtually all financial line items; yet, its stock price dropped by roughly 10% following the earnings release.
- Ahlatcı Doğal Gaz Dağıtım (AHGAZ): The company nearly doubled its financial metrics year-over-year, yet its stock price remained flat.
- Hitit Bilgisayar (HTTBT): Despite demonstrating real financial growth, the stock continued its downward trend right after reporting earnings.
- Aksa Akrilik (AKSA): Financial results improved significantly year-over-year; nonetheless, the stock fell about 10% post-earnings and maintained its downward momentum.
- Ford Otomotiv (FROTO): Earnings hit one of their weakest levels in years due in part to slumping demand, yet the stock price traded sideways after reporting.
- Ereğli Demir ve Çelik (EREGL): Despite a notable jump in profitability, the stock tumbled roughly 13%.
- İş Yatırım Menkul Değerler (ISMEN): Financial results deteriorated sharply compared to the previous period, yet the stock price continued to trade sideways.
These are household names occupying market-leading positions in their respective sectors—companies you would theoretically expect to be less susceptible to pricing paradoxes. Yet, as demonstrated, even with blue chips like these, relying solely on headline balance sheet figures to explain price action falls short. You have to synthesize forward-looking guidance, prior market pricing, sector backdrop, market liquidity, investor psychology, and a host of other variables. I could go on listing examples like these; I encounter similar pricing behaviors across a significant chunk of the financial reports I analyze.
Two Winning Playbooks in Borsa Istanbul
After laying all this out, the natural question becomes: “So why do you still invest here?” Honestly, that’s probably the single best question to ask. Information asymmetry sits at the top of the list of hurdles in our market. Through years of observation and studying the lives of successful investors, I’ve identified two primary playbooks for building wealth here.
Method 1: Long-Term Passive Accumulation
The first approach involves positioning yourself on the “uninformed” side of information asymmetry. I don’t mean “uninformed” as a pejorative. On the contrary, refraining from constant trading or market timing can often play to an investor’s advantage. There’s even a famous saying on this: “The best investor is a dead investor.”
The logic is simple: make dollar-cost averaged investments into historically sound companies or funds and don’t look back for years. By maintaining continuous market exposure, you inevitably capture those rare, explosive secular bull runs. If you hold the right assets long enough, the probability of outperforming traditional savings instruments during those rallies increases dramatically. Of course, I’m not promising “guaranteed returns” here; company-specific and country-specific risks are always on the table.
Through my own research, crunching the numbers, and tracking my own portfolio performance, I found that my long-term holdings in select companies managed to match the return of physical gold over time. And I experienced this during one of Borsa Istanbul’s most grueling stretches. So I know firsthand that this playbook can work.
However, this approach carries its own formidable hurdles. Relative to active trading, it may look simpler, but patience and holding power are paramount. The true challenge lies in selecting the right company or fund. Even if you think you’ve picked the right fund, you still need to review it at least a couple of times a year, as fund management or investment mandates can shift. Stock selection, in my view, is even harder. Even if nothing changes operationally within the company, macroeconomic or geopolitical headwinds can turn against it. In both scenarios, that patience comes into play—and holding firm becomes brutal when you’re watching your purchasing power erode against rampant inflation. If competing asset classes are rallying during that same stretch, the psychological pain multiplies.
Method 2: Continuous Reading and Research
Now let’s turn to the more demanding method—where potential gains are substantial, but downside risks are equally elevated. This is what most people claiming to “beat the market” actually do (or try to do): READING. This process is really the catalyst for writing this entire article. What looks straightforward from the outside is, in my opinion, the hardest part of investing: relentless research and continuous reading.
Over the years, I’ve observed a key trend in the stock market: no matter how absurd, irrational, or chaotic short-term noise gets, as long as a company’s underlying fundamentals keep improving over the long haul, its valuation eventually catches up. The macro environment might look grim. War might break out next door. Market liquidity might dry up. A stock might trade well below its intrinsic value for an uncomfortably long time. But barring total catastrophic collapse, truly solid companies find a way to compound value over time.
That brings us to the crux of the matter: How do we identify the right company? This is where the real work begins. The goal isn’t to pick winners every single time or predict the future flawlessly; it’s to assess probabilities as accurately as possible and build a risk management system that caps downside when you’re wrong. Successful investing isn’t about getting every call right—it’s about ensuring your winning decisions outweigh your losing ones.
I won’t dive deep into stock selection techniques here to keep from going off on a tangent. At its core, the only reliable path I’ve found is reading. The more information you absorb about companies, sectors, macroeconomic landscapes, and asset classes—and the better you synthesize those dots—the higher your odds of picking winning stocks. I’m not saying this as a self-proclaimed legendary investor claiming massive returns; it’s simply the universal pattern I’ve seen in the lives of investors I respect. Most of them dig deep into the businesses they buy, the industries those businesses operate in, and global macroeconomic conditions. So it’s not just about reading balance sheets; it’s about connecting all those data points together.
And that’s precisely why this method is so demanding. Reading takes time. It requires drive, consistency, discipline, and routine. None of these qualities sound impossible on their own, but sustaining them all together for years—especially while managing a full-time job—is a huge ask. And if you don’t possess a burning passion for financial markets (which is completely natural; everyone has different passions), keeping up this grind becomes even harder.
One Piece of Advice for Investors
Having lived through all these experiences, I now offer people just one piece of advice regarding their savings. Both methods might seem feasible to someone who shares my curiosity for the market, but over time I’ve realized that isn’t realistic for most people. For the vast majority, executing either method properly is a tall order. That’s why my single most important takeaway is this: Know yourself thoroughly before you invest.
Understand your risk tolerance. Know your investment horizon. Know how you’ll react when an asset sits in the red for months on end. Decide whether you actually want to research companies every day. And know the asset class where you entrust your hard-earned savings just as intimately as you know yourself. Doing this is one of the greatest favors you can do for yourself as an investor.
This is precisely why I can no longer give blanket recommendations like “Invest in the stock market.” Having researched this market for years, I can contextualize price action more easily and try to map out potential scenarios ahead of time. But expecting everyone to dedicate years to this field simply isn’t realistic. So what is the general public supposed to do in this den of wolves? They either spend years reading, researching, and making mistakes to learn how this market works—or they follow my advice and start by truly understanding themselves and the assets they invest in.
I’ve tried to cover a vast topic as concisely as possible. There are obviously many aspects left unsaid that deserve deeper exploration later on, but I believe the core premise comes through. I’d like to close with a famous market adage that captures this reality perfectly:
“In the stock market, expectations are bought and reality is sold.”
LEGAL DISCLAIMER: This content does not constitute investment advisory services. Investment advisory is a personalized service provided based on an individual’s risk-return profile, financial standing, and investment objectives. The information, commentary, and assessments provided herein are prepared solely for general informational purposes and should not be construed as investment recommendations or guidance. This content may not align with the reader’s financial position or risk-return preferences; therefore, investing based solely on this information may not yield the expected outcomes.
