This is aITLE: An incident my acquaintance experienced. ¶
SENTENCE: (your original sentence)

Unlike sentences, titles usually have no period at the end.

Several years ago, she bought stocks based on posts froma friend of mind bought stocks on the suggestion of a famous Japanese female influencer, whom I’ll refer to her as a ‘con artist A.’ on aShe former Twitter who postsly posts on Twitter about stocks.

‘A’ made posts on the former Twitter, hinting at the potential for the stock price to rise, with comments such as 'money is flowing into this stock.’ Orwith words to that effect.

SheMy friends dipped into her nest egg: Shesavings: withdrewawing her fixed-term deposit and allocatedthen putting her money to theat stock.

A few days later, the stock price saw a small gain, but it wasn’t long before the stock hit the limit-down plummeted twice in a row.

This is just myAlthough it is speculation, (no pun intended, but A’s entourage) I think A’s group might have bought the stock beforehand, madeking the aforementioned posts to lure in the ‘locust’ investors, and then cashed out on the price spike.

Or they mightAnother possibility is that the have shorted it at the top.

SheMy friend clicked the "sell" button with shaking fingers.

SFortunately, she cut her losses on that stock.

TFraudsters are rife in the Japanese investor community is rife with fraudsters for sure.

This is an incident my acquaintance experienced.

A good sentence, but typically for titles each word is capitalized (with the exception of articles and a few connecting verbs like "is"), without a period.

This is an Incident My Acquaintance Experienced

Several years ago, she bought stocks based on posts from a famous Japanese female Twitter finfluencer, whom I’ll refer to her as as ‘con artist A’ on a former Twitter who posts about stocks.

as a ‘con artist A’ -> as 'con artist A': the article "a" here doesn't make grammatical sense as we're talking about a specific label you're giving to her.

on a former Twitter who posts about stocks. -> a famous Japanese female Twitter finfluencer: The beginning half of the sentence already specified this, so we can remove all the redundancy and simply put "female" in the adjective chain.

"Finfluencer" is a very recent slang term (mostly used by social media people) that refers to a 'finance influencer' -> f[inance]influencer -> finfluencer. This term is specific to only people/influencers who post finance on social media.


***Because of the huge unpopularity of the name change of Twitter, most people just call it Twitter still, so there's no need to specify that Twitter was the former name. Even if you did specify that, you'd have to mention it like this:

X (formerly Twitter)

for it to make sense. Saying just "formerly Twitter" raises more questions to people who don't know about it because it'll raise the question of "what was it formerly called anyways?", which distracts from the premise.

For the sake of conciseness, I'm just going to treat this as an unnecessary addition and refer to X as Twitter, but if you did want to specify X (formerly Twitter), that's fine as well.

‘A’ made posts on the former Twitter, hinting at the potential for thea certain stock's price to rise, with comments such as 'money is flowing into this stock.,’ Or words to that effecand things similar to that.

for the stock price -> for a certain stock's price: we're talking about a singular stock, not just "stocks" in general.

Or words to that effect -> and things similar to that: [effect] is implied at the end of the correction, and this is the more natural way to say it.

She dipped into her nest egg: She and withdrew hera fixed-term deposit and allocated her money toto buy the stock.

: -> X : colon is not needed here

She withdrew her fixed-term deposit and allocated her money to the stock -> and withdrew a fixed-term deposit to buy the stock.: more natural way to say it. Additionally, it's unclear what this "fixed term deposit" is referring to. I corrected it assuming it was a fixed-term deposit to a loan, so I corrected it that way. If you're talking about something else like withdrawing a fixed-deposit to a mortgage, breaking that contract JUST to buy the stock, you'd structure the sentence like this:

She dipped into her nest egg and broke her mortgage contract, withdrawing her fixed-term deposit to buy the stock.

A few days later, the stock price saw a small gainThe stock did see small gains for a few days but it wasn’t long before the stock hit the limit-down twice in a rtanked twice into an all-time low.

A few days later, the stock price saw a small gain -> The stock did see small gains for a few days: more natural way to say it

but it wasn’t long before the stock hit the limit-down twice in a row. -> but it wasn’t long before the stock tanked twice into an all-time low: More natural way to say it.
"Tanked" is a casual way to say it, but it's also a catch-all verb to describe anything that suddenly drops in value. "Crashed" would be the more specific way to describe this as it's the verb to describe financial declines ("stock market crash", etc.)

This is just my speculation, no pun intended, but A’s entourage might have bought the stock beforehand, made the aforementioned posts to lure in the ‘locust’ investorspeople in, and then cashed out on the price spike.

made the aforementioned posts to lure in the ‘locust’ investors, and then cashed out on the price spike. -> made the aforementioned posts to lure people in, and then cashed out on the price spike..: Many of the deletions here are because the sentence implies it already. We don't need to say "investors" as anyone who feel for this scam automatically becomes an "investor".

*good pun.

She clicked the sell button with shaking fingersMy friend quickly sold the stock to cut her losses, but within two nights she lost the equivalent of a normal Japanese person's annual salary on this scam.

Combine this sentence with the next two for a more natural sounding sentence.

It's also strange that we go from talking about your friend's experience to narrating a story where she's the main character. While this can be used in aesthetic, poetic reasons, for the purpose of the entry it's not appropriate and it's not something poets use much anyways.

She cut her losses on that stock.

Within two nights, she lost an amount equivalent to the average annual income of a Japanese person.

This is aAn incident my acquaintance experienced.

This is kind of nitpicky, but we wouldn't really use a full sentence as a title here.

Several years ago, she bought stocks based on posts from a famous Japanese female influencer, whom I’ll refer to her as a ‘con artist A’, on a formerthe site formerly known as Twitter who posts about stocks.

"a former Twitter" implies there's multiple twitters, I think you're hinting to it being renamed X. Alternatively if you meant a twitter account, you need the word account here.

‘A’ made posts on the former Twitter, hinting at the potential for the stock price to rise, with comments such as '"money is flowing into this stock.’ O" or words to that effect.

You don't need to repeat the former bit here, it's established in the prior sentence and makes the sentence a bit more awkward.

I think you captialised "Or" as it's following the full stop in quotation marks, but "Or words to that effect" isn't really a full sentence, so it's better to combine that with the previous sentence. Because of that, I removed the full stop inside the quotation marks.

She dipped into her nest egg: She withdrew her fixed-term deposit and allocated her money to theat stock.

A few days later, the stock price saw a small gain but it wasn’t long before the stock hit the limit-down twice - it dropped two (days?) in a row.

You need to specify the intervals for twice here.

This is just my speculation, no pun intended, but A’s entourageassociates might have bought the stock beforehand, then made the aforementioned posts to lure in the ‘locust’ investors, and thenfinally cashed out on the price spike.

entourage is more closely associated with groups that are together in person.

OrAlternatively, they might have shorted it at the top.

"Alternatively" sounds a bit better than "or" for starting a sentence, unless you're going for a very casual/conversational tone.

Several years ago, she bought stocks based on posts from a famous Japanese female influencer, whom I’ll refer to her as a ‘con artist A’ on a formerly Twitter, who posts about stocks.

‘A’ made posts on the former Twitter, hinting at the potential for the stock price to rise, with comments such as 'money is flowing into this stock.’ Or words to that effect.

You already mentioned that it was formerly Twitter, so I wouldn't mention it again!

This is an iIncident my aAcquaintance eExperienced.

Several years ago, she bought stocks based on posts from a famous Japanese female influencer on the former Twitter , whom I’ll refer to her as a ‘con artist A’ on a former Twitter who posts about stocks.

Seems a bit repetitive.

‘A’ made posts on the former Twitter, hinting at the potential for theof a stock price to rise, with comments such as, 'money is flowing into this stock.’ O', or words to that effect.

She dipped into her nest egg: Sshe withdrew her fixed-term deposit and allocated her money to the stock.

A few days later, the stock price saw a small gain but it wasn’t long before the stock hit the limit-down twiceits lowest level two times in a row.

This is just my speculation, no pun intended, but A’s entourage might have bought the stock beforehand, made the aforementioned posts to lure in the ‘locust’ investors, and then cashed out on the price spike.,

Oor they might have shorted it at the top.

Join these two sentences together.

She clicked the sell button with shaking fingers. and

She cut her losses on that stock.

Join these two sentences together.

Several years ago, she bought stocks based on posts from a famous female Japanese female influencer, whom I’ll refer to her as a ‘con artist A’ on a on the formerly Twitter who posts about stocks., whom I’ll refer to as "con artist A."

‘A’ made posts on the formerly Twitter, hinting at the potential for the stock price to rise, with comments such as 'money is flowing into this stock.,’ Oor words to that effect.

She dipped into her nest egg: She, withdrew her fixed-term deposit , and allocated her money to the stock.

A few days later, the stock price saw a small gain but it wasn’t long before the stock hit the limit-dan all-time lown twice in a row.

Several years ago, she bought stocks based on posts from a famous Japanese female influencer, whom I’ll refer to her as a ‘as "con artist A’," on a formerthe site formerly known as Twitter who posts about stocks.

I would rephrase slightly to make this sound more natural: Several years ago, she bought stocks based on posts from a famous Japanese female influencer who posts about stocks, whom I’ll refer to as "con artist A," on the site formerly known as Twitter.

A made posts on the former Twitter, hinting at the potential for the stock price to rise, with comments such as '"money is flowing into this stock.’" Or words to that effect.

She dipped into her nest egg: She withdrew her fixed-term deposit and allocated her money tobought the stock.

This is just my speculation, no pun intended, but A’s entourage might have bought the stock beforehand, made the aforementioned posts to lure in the ‘"locust’" investors, and then cashed out on the price spike.