The market exchanges two things every day: the visible ones are funds and chips, while the invisible but more important ones are information and logic, because the latter determines the former. Understanding the latter allows one to predict the former, and thus predict stock prices.

Information and logic are different; information is the tangible phenomenon, such as Company A planning to raise prices, Company B delaying new production capacity, Company C's chairman preparing to communicate with the market, and Company D's quarterly report likely exceeding expectations...

Logic is the investment viewpoint; it is the explanation of the phenomena. Company A's price increase indicates a worsening supply-demand imbalance, Company B's slow production launch indicates immature technology, Company C's communication represents an industry beginning to recover, and Company D's report exceeding expectations is merely a cyclical peak phenomenon...

If information is likened to bullets, logic is the gun.

Due to long-term excess liquidity, the thematic market in A-shares often runs ahead of the economic cycle, and thematic trends are driven by logic, existing in a gray area of 'blind speculation' and 'foresight,' accompanied by various seemingly reasonable logics and a plethora of mixed messages. The market gradually forms a consensus on certain industrial economic and social trends, and the phase of moving from divergence to consensus often triggers a thematic market.

All investors pay attention to information, but large funds also need to focus on viewpoints, because there are impact costs, requiring layout and advance prediction of the market. For the same piece of news, large funds need to hear various different viewpoints to make their own judgments.

Therefore, predicting thematic markets is essentially predicting one thing: what kind of logic can form a consensus? How is this consensus formed?