The problem I have with #4 is that you're picking a false expert. The word "expert" is supposed to mean something. Experts are usually not the people that do television for a living.
And with #3 above #4, you're essentially considering yourself as the top expert. Those should be flipped, and greater care taken to identify and qualify expertise.
Distinguishing between a false expert vs a true expert is the same problem as picking a good stock vs a bad stock. There have been an unlimited number of studies done on the matter, and the overwhelming consensus is that professional stock pickers as a whole can be beaten by goldfish when it comes to making predictions.
The real experts are not the people making predictions about price movements. The real experts are usually making below-average salaries as postdoctorate fellows. I'm not sure that they're that hard to identify.
Why would you believe that? A post doctoral fellow would have very little knowledge of the markets.
Markets are not just random walks, there is edge to be gained with information and that information can be quite expensive to acquire and refine. A fellow would not have the resources to do that.
And with #3 above #4, you're essentially considering yourself as the top expert. Those should be flipped, and greater care taken to identify and qualify expertise.