People trying to invest and divest using the site's profit percentage as prime investment and divestment points are buying into the gambler's fallacy just the same as those who employ martingale gambling strategies not in that they're trying to invest and divest multiples of anything but rather in that they believe the past will influence the future.

For example, some one might choose to divest when the site is up in total profit by 1.5% and re-invest when the site drops to -1.5% or perhaps they will choose some manner of determining when the site's profits have been eaten into a sufficient amount to make investment statistically better than before.  

Whatever the case, it's something of a follie I think though I'm happy to be corrected. It seems to me that even if the site dips to -1.5% profit, there's nothing to say that it's not just as likely at that time for the site to go to -5% as it is to increase by the same number of points (3.5 points) to +2% profit

I don't have anything against this of course.  I'm happy to keep my pitiful little chunk in there no matter the variance and it seems to me that strategic investing/divesting is just trying to predict random chance as the site's retail side investors are doing.

I dunno.  I could be full of crap.  Did I miss something here?