“Selling your winners and holding your losers is like cutting the flowers and watering the weeds.”
Peter Lynch averaged 29.2% annual return between 1977 to 1990.
His books One Up Wall Street and Beating the Street offered great insights into his success.
Here are my top 10 lessons from the legend:

“Selling your winners and holding your losers is like cutting the flowers and watering the weeds.”
“People who succeed in the stock market also accept periodic losses, setbacks, and unexpected occurrences. Calamitous drops do not scare them out of the game.”
"Owning stocks is like having children. Don't get involved with more than you can handle."
"There's no shame in losing money on a stock. Everybody does it. What is shameful is to hold on to a stock, or worse, to buy more of it when the fundamentals are deteriorating."
“This is one of the keys to successful investing: focus on the companies, not on the stocks.”
"While catching up on the news is merely depressing to the citizen who has no stocks, it is a dangerous habit for the investor."
"Never invest in any company before you've done the homework on the company's earnings, prospects, financial condition, competitive position, plans for expansion, and so forth."
"The stock market demands conviction as surely as it victimizes the unconvinced."
"In stocks – as in romance – ease of divorce is not a sound basis for commitment."
"If you can't find any companies that you think are attractive, put your money in the bank until you discover some."
• Investing.
• Business breakdowns.
• Company updates.
Every week.
https://t.co/96pjE7aGBm
More from Thomas Chua
Buffett's letters taught me more about investing than any business school ever could.
Even after investing for 14 years, I uncover new insights every time I reread his letters.
Recently, I reread his letters from 1977 to 2020 for a third time.
Here are my key insights:
1. Moat is NEVER stagnant
A company's competitive position either grows stronger or weaker each day.
Widening the moat must always take precedence over short-term targets.
2. Commodity businesses
A business without moat will have its returns competed away.
Regardless of improvement, your competitors will quickly copy your advantage away.
Where returns on capital is dismal, reinvestment will only destroy value.
3. The flywheel effect
Buffett was preaching about the flywheel effect before it became cool.
Back then, newspapers were similar to today's platform businesses like Amazon, Meta, and App Store.
More readers beget more advertisers beget more readers.
4. Operating leverage
Companies with high fixed costs and low variable costs will see earnings rise faster than revenue.
However, it cuts both ways.
It becomes a disaster when revenue is declining.
Check out my article on how operating leverage works: https://t.co/Nv747oBAK0
Even after investing for 14 years, I uncover new insights every time I reread his letters.
Recently, I reread his letters from 1977 to 2020 for a third time.
Here are my key insights:

1. Moat is NEVER stagnant
A company's competitive position either grows stronger or weaker each day.
Widening the moat must always take precedence over short-term targets.

2. Commodity businesses
A business without moat will have its returns competed away.
Regardless of improvement, your competitors will quickly copy your advantage away.
Where returns on capital is dismal, reinvestment will only destroy value.

3. The flywheel effect
Buffett was preaching about the flywheel effect before it became cool.
Back then, newspapers were similar to today's platform businesses like Amazon, Meta, and App Store.
More readers beget more advertisers beget more readers.

4. Operating leverage
Companies with high fixed costs and low variable costs will see earnings rise faster than revenue.
However, it cuts both ways.
It becomes a disaster when revenue is declining.
Check out my article on how operating leverage works: https://t.co/Nv747oBAK0

More from Books
You May Also Like
1/OK, data mystery time.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.
4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.
This New York Times feature shows China with a Gini Index of less than 30, which would make it more equal than Canada, France, or the Netherlands. https://t.co/g3Sv6DZTDE
That's weird. Income inequality in China is legendary.
Let's check this number.
2/The New York Times cites the World Bank's recent report, "Fair Progress? Economic Mobility across Generations Around the World".
The report is available here:
3/The World Bank report has a graph in which it appears to show the same value for China's Gini - under 0.3.
The graph cites the World Development Indicators as its source for the income inequality data.

4/The World Development Indicators are available at the World Bank's website.
Here's the Gini index: https://t.co/MvylQzpX6A
It looks as if the latest estimate for China's Gini is 42.2.
That estimate is from 2012.
5/A Gini of 42.2 would put China in the same neighborhood as the U.S., whose Gini was estimated at 41 in 2013.
I can't find the <30 number anywhere. The only other estimate in the tables for China is from 2008, when it was estimated at 42.8.