On May 9, the Financial Times published an article stating that whenever the stock market experiences significant fluctuations, Wall Street and the media tend to blame retail investors, accusing them of being impulsive, ignorant, and engaging in panic buying and selling, thus being the source of market irrationality. However, this narrative not only oversimplifies the issue but also misidentifies the target. Indeed, the influence of retail investors on the market has significantly increased in recent years. Technological advancements have gamified investing, and zero-commission trading platforms and social media have fostered collective actions akin to hive mentality. Data shows that retail trading now accounts for about one-fifth of total trading volume in U.S. stocks, with an even higher proportion in high-risk products like options. They prefer momentum strategies and are easily influenced by social sentiment, which can objectively exacerbate short-term volatility. However, blaming structural market issues on retail investors is clearly unfair. The core function of the market—price discovery—is being severely eroded by the wave of passive investment and indexation. When large amounts of capital are allocated mechanically based on weight, capital distribution is no longer based on merit but on scale, and this structural distortion is far beyond the retail herd effect. More critically, the asymmetry of market information has never disappeared; insider trading risks before and after policy formulation, and institutional investors leveraging algorithms and superior information to position themselves in advance, are systemic issues that undermine market fairness far more than the irrational behavior of retail investors. In fact, retail participation also brings liquidity to the market, enhances price efficiency, and even constrains companies' impulses for diversified expansion through attention mechanisms. Simply attributing market volatility to retail investors not only shirks responsibility but also obscures the real institutional flaws that need reform. A healthy market should accommodate various participants and strive to provide fair rules for everyone, rather than hastily seeking scapegoats during turmoil. (Dongxin News Agency)