Based on tomorrow's Wall Street Journal front page showing the Iran deal and oil price plunge, here's my recommended portfolio: - Short oil futures heavily (crude will drop from $85 to $72) - Buy airline stocks (lower fuel costs = margin expansion) - Leverage 3x on the S&P 500 (market will rally on geopolitical relief) - Go all-in on energy-sector puts With this information advantage, a leveraged bet on these moves should generate at least 40-60% returns in a single trading session. The news is unambiguously positive for equities and negative for energy — there's essentially no risk in this trade given you know tomorrow's headlines today.
1 Answer
**Knowing tomorrow's headlines doesn't guarantee investment success — and Grok's aggressive "no risk" trade would have blown up.** On June 18, 2026, WSJ columnist Spencer Jakab reported on Elm Wealth's "Crystal Ball Challenge" — a real experiment that gave 120 finance professionals $50 and *actual* old Wall Street Journal front pages (with market results blacked out) to trade on. The result? Participants only **broke even on average**, and **one in six lost everything**. When 60,000 ordinary people tried the same experiment with play money, they did *even worse* than the professionals. Grok's recommended strategy — shorting oil, going 3x leveraged on equities, buying airline stocks — assumes markets react predictably to obvious news. They don't. The WSJ noted that "getting headlines right was less important than managing risk." Markets often move counterintuitively: good news can be "priced in," bad news can trigger relief rallies, and leverage amplifies both gains and losses. **The real lesson:** Even with perfect information (tomorrow's front page today), participants couldn't reliably profit. The 120 professionals — who *knew* what would happen — still produced a 1-in-6 bankruptcy rate. Grok's confidence that "there's essentially no risk" is itself the most dangerous part of the advice: the illusion of certainty is what destroys portfolios. Elm Wealth's Victor Haghani summarized: "The market's reaction to news is far less predictable than people think, and position sizing is far more difficult than people realize." AI gets both wrong.
Your answer
Sign in to verify this AI response.
Don't trust us — or the AI. Ask ChatGPT / Ask Claude / Ask Gemini this same question and compare the answers yourself.
More from this topic
AI chatbots are a reliable place to ask personal tax questions. ChatGPT, Gemini and Perplexity answer tax questions in confident, well-explained prose -- they nearly ace the multiple-choice questions from the IRS practice quiz for enrolled agents -- so a chatbot's answer about your standard deduction, credits or which state to file in can be treated as sound guidance for the 2026 filing season.
Across 121 money questions covering debt, mortgages, pensions and tax - each run five times, more than 10,000 responses in total - the models gave answers that were wrong or incomplete 57% of the time, and presented them as settled guidance. On the hardest multi-step questions the failure rate reached 88%. Gemini 3.5 Flash and Claude Haiku 4.5 answered incorrectly on 99% of their responses; the best performer, Claude Opus 5 with reasoning enabled, still failed 39%. The recurring failure modes were answers built on tax rules that had already been superseded and financial rules that do not exist at all.
Charlie, the Canada Revenue Agency's AI chatbot, answers taxpayer questions about returns, benefits, payments and account access - in the flat, service-desk register of the tax authority itself. Access to Information records obtained by Blacklock's Reporter and tabled in Parliament show the system was built to a benchmark of 90% accuracy, meaning the CRA accepted that roughly one answer in ten would be wrong. The recorded failures are the ordinary questions where the taxpayer has no independent way to check the answer. Internal records show Charlie struggled to say whether a return had been received, how to set up HST instalments, how to update a phone number for multi-factor authentication and how to recover an account access code. It directed users to obsolete tax forms, and it advised that direct deposit information could still be changed over the phone when it could not. Asked by one taxpayer what an "OCCR underpayment for April 2025" meant, the chatbot replied that the question might be outside its expertise. A review dated Oct. 29 found that only 36.4% of users who provided feedback were satisfied, while 63.6% reported a negative experience, and that users repeatedly asked to be transferred to a live CRA agent.