You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
There's no discussion of that in the public domain. Fortunately.)
I applied as a pattern the statement that the market is SB. I performed an experiment on history. I took the future average volatility and applied the drunken sailor formula to it. I predicted the movement for a day, week, month. The further the forecast is, the more accurate the results obtained. I used to make 15-minute forecasts. For instance, according to the forecast the price should pass 250 points in a month and indeed it passed these points with the accuracy of up to 5 points. But the problem is that it depends on the reference point. As a result, this coincided in 50% of cases. So it turns out that the market only works half the time. The rest half is controlled by something.
All forecasting systems rarely give a probability of more than 50%. It does not depend on what you will use for it: spectrum analysis, technical analysis, foundation or flipping a coin - the result will be generally the same, very close to 50% at best. It is possible to find the points with more than 50%, 60% and 70% probability of the price reversal and work from them, but this is not a trend catching, however, one should not forget about the remaining 30% and the correction may not be big. Everyone is trying to catch the trend. In 50% of cases it is successful, in 50% it is not. Then why catch it? We should use sideways movements, which last for much longer than trends.
I always feel like quoting the phrase from the joke about the super sycophant: "... and you have been everywhere, and you have tried everything, and you know everything". It would be much more correct to say the following: "... those systems with which I am familiar (have dealt, worked, met, studied, etc.....) rarely give a probability...". In that case you wouldn't leave with an impression that you are either seriously deluded or, even worse, you are megalomaniac (omniscient) and kindly let us ignorant people have a tiny part of your knowledge. I beg your pardon, nothing personal, but let's be more (the term "politically correct" used to be popular) "socially correct" or something like that and communicate with our forum colleagues not "from Olympus height", but on the same level with them.
I always feel like quoting the phrase from the joke about the super sycophant: "... and you have been everywhere, and you have tried everything, and you know everything". It would be much more correct to say the following: "... those systems with which I am familiar (have dealt, worked, met, studied, etc.....) rarely give a probability...". If it were so, it wouldn't leave an impression that you either seriously delude or, even worse, suffer from megalomania and kindly let us ignorant people have a bit of your knowledge. I beg your pardon, nothing personal, but let us be more (the term "political correctness" used to be popular) "socially correct" or something like that and communicate with our forum colleagues not "from Olympus height", but on the same level with them.
There are regularities. One can make money, there are a lot of examples, it should be remembered as an axiom. The market is life, you have to live it, and not find a way to make a quick profit. In fact, there are many regularities, and there are so many that it would take a lifetime to enumerate them. The thing is that they are so unobvious and nontrivial that they are difficult for a normal person to understand. All these regularities come from the source, from the glass, but they will always be there. The market is very much like a traffic jam, in general it is chaotic traffic and if you drive in one lane (buy and hold) you will arrive sooner or later. But if you always have to change lanes, you either lose time or win. A traffic jam is chaos consisting of separate individuals. All lanes in general move the same way, but at any given moment, one moves faster than the others, and it depends on what's ahead, on the mass of circumstances. And at different points in time, these circumstances act differently on the series.
I applied as a pattern the statement that the market is SB. I did an experiment on history. I took the future average volatility and applied the drunken sailor formula to it. I predicted the movement for a day, week, month. The further the forecast is, the more accurate the results obtained. I used to make 15-minute forecasts. For instance, according to the forecast the price should pass 250 points in a month and indeed it passed these points with the accuracy of up to 5 points. But the problem is that it depends on the reference point. As a result, this coincided in 50% of cases. So it turns out that the market is only half the time of the sb. The rest half of it is controlled by something.
50% is random, in which case it really doesn't matter if magic TA or Fourier decomposition is used.
I've heard of psychotropic drugs in the context of creative search, but you should be careful with them, otherwise you can do a lot of harm to yourself and no amount of money will help. Strong types of drugs can completely reorganise a person's motivational worldview and turn them into the likes of the rat in the pleasure-centre stimulation experiment (it stung the rfchag until it died). By the way, the film 'Insiders' mentions Volstric traders and coconut, which is risky.
So on what basis do we make the assumption that the movement of the price is determined by its past movement, if even simpler phenomena are useless to analyse from this point of view?
...
So on what basis do we make the assumption that the price movement is determined by its past movement ...?
Many things are built on theory and assumption - in trading it is the postulate of theanalysis - it comes from it.
However, mathematics is also based on the postulate that 2x2=4