Market theory - page 136
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
A sound wave is a sine wave. Cotiers are not stationary and subtracting the trend does not really change the picture,
Although econometricians will say that increments are stationary ))))
MA2 (simple MA2) is calculated as kloz+lag1cloz/2... ...i.e. the past values are used.
You can try to remove the lag by prediction... with a neural network or the like... but it still won't work...
Yuri! Good day to you! Don't sweat it.
Leopards rule here. :-)
Waiting for Yusuf's article. The dough is charging!
We know the Grails are real.
Hi. I'm not bothered, I just follow this thread as it is the only thread where a person comes up with something new.
Depends on what you mean by grail, I meant ideal. But then, of course, everyone has their own skeleton grail in the wardrobe).
You once looked into my theme, got interested in the essence. I can reveal it to you on old friendship).
The logic is simple: if the calculations show a grail, but we know that there is no such thing as a grail. Conclusion: - somewhere in the calculations is an error).
Carefully tried to avoid such mistakes, but, one crept in and the shift showed that there is still hope for the principle: Leo above price - Sell, below - Buy, which is associated with significant drawdowns:
Conclusion: you need to have a deposit commensurate with expected profits. Why is there no grail? Because, the market does not give a theoretical possibility of their existence, organizing, alternately, trade around 3 levels of break-even. The trader has to rely on the "mistake" of the market in the long term. I have no doubts about the correctness of the theory, but the use of its conclusions requires further study. One must be amazed at the phenomenal accuracy of market mechanisms - the market always determines all three breakeven levels with great accuracy, and I have never met a price that has a value different from the calculated value of these levels. The market manages to withstand all participants operating in the whole range of the price field. If you enter the market with any price you will find yourself in an extremely unfavorable trading environment! Your price will immediately turn out to be equal to Ц1, Ц2 or Цopt in its worst variant. Theoretically and practically there is no 4th, profitable variant.
Carefully tried to avoid such mistakes, but, one crept in and the shift showed that there is still hope for the principle: Leo above price - Sell, below - Buy, which is associated with significant drawdowns:
On the filter and lagging, you still haven't answered. I understand that you are trying not to filter. But I, for instance, decided to filter. Does it threaten me with delays? Or will it cause 10 ms lag as the guys above said? How much delay can a filter have?
So - there is no grail? ((
You still haven't answered about the filter and lags. I understand that you are trying not to filter. But I, for instance, decided to filter. Does it threaten me with delays? Or will it cause 10 ms lag as the guys above said? How much delay can a filter have?
Don't torture the man, he is a PhD candidate and his field of work is not related to filtration. Ask Prival-2 for advice- he is an expert in this field.
So no grail? ((
On the subject of filtering and lags, you still haven't answered. That you are trying not to filter it is understandable. But I, for instance, decided to filter. Does it threaten me with delays? Or will it cause 10 ms lag as the guys above said? How much delay may a filter have?
Carefully tried to avoid such mistakes, but, one crept in and the shift showed that there is still hope for the principle: Leo above price - Sell, below - Buy, which is associated with significant drawdowns:
Conclusion: you need to have a deposit commensurate with expected profits. Why is there no grail? Because, the market does not give a theoretical possibility of their existence, organizing, alternately, trade around 3 levels of break-even. The trader has to rely on the "mistake" of the market in the long term. I have no doubts about the correctness of the theory itself, but the use of its conclusions requires further study.
This picture is already more like reality. I think that not all options for organizing entry and exit from the market using your theory have been considered yet.
state at the opening of the session on 17 June:
I don't know who didn't make it - now it's up to me - shudder, Bandar-logs