A 10% rise in a stock price is not the same as a 10% drop in a stock price. i.e.
if you bought a stock for $100 and it goes to $90, it has gone down 10% (you lose 10%).
In order to go back to $100 so you can break even, it now needs to go up 11.1% which seems a lot harder.
So what i dont get is, say you bought a stock for $100. After ASX announces a bad news, it has dropped 10% to $90. Say tomorrow, ASX said they made a mistake & retracted the bad news, should the stock price theoretically go back up to $100 or should it go up by 10%?
Cant really wrap my head around this.
——————— Edit
So many comments about "unknowns, uncertainties, what ifs, it depends" which is true but not the intent of this topic.
The market reacts to people's speculations and an uncountable number of variables that affect the stock price. Yes.
For this topic, I'm trying to paint a purely theoretical, 100% efficient market scenario for discussion. If a share drop is 100% purely attributed to a negative news announcement and if we completely reverse that negative news, ceteris paribus, in a 100% efficient market, without any transaction costs, no sentiment plays, all market players are machines, will the share price go back to original price or would it go back up based on % increase?
Think of this as a thought experiment rather than a practical discussion on your trades
Yes