Classical thechanalysis doesn't work any more. What works, maybe quantum? - page 15
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
The audience is at your feet - what do you mean by "classic TA".
That was my question.
You were the first to say that "classical thechanalysis no longer works", so state WHAT it is that doesn't work and WHAT it was when it did work. There's no need to turn this around.
Folk wisdom: "look for fools in the mirror", like you started it.
You can't agree with that. I'm talking about primacy.
There's no logical contradiction there. That theory is not always true. It's true for stationary things and not true for non-stationary things. On non-stationary, it's no better than guessing. But it is not worse.
You can't agree with that. I'm talking about primacy.
I didn't get my hopes up. I was assured of that by another proverb - the straw in someone else's eye.
There's no logical contradiction there. That theory is not always true. It is correct for stationary things and not for non-stationary ones. It is no better than guessing on non-stationary. But it's not worse.
How awful. Did Markowitz and all his followers consider (and still do) market prices to be stationary? I admit of course that I didn't study well enough, but not to the point of missing the point.
If prices were stationary, no Markowitz would be needed, Orsten and Uhlenbeck would suffice. But prices seem to bounce back and forth - have to make do with Markowitz and Sharp.
1. >> Finally. So these are the prices from ashcuch after all? Admit it. There's nothing else on this market but prices and volumes. There just isn't. At least in those quantities on which you can work with M1.
Have you tried to bend EURUSD in Fourier and compare its images? Wasn't there a similarity between the quantum and the fourier?
2. I don't want to get into a terminological argument. But you, as the author of the topic, will probably have to communicate your own vision of the term.
I didn't get my hopes up. Another proverb, about a straw in someone else's eye, assured me of that.
Don't try to look stupider than you are. Attempts to make a nickname up in any normal place are taken unequivocally.
If prices were steady, no Markowitz would be needed, Orsten and Uhlenbeck would suffice. But prices are going round and round, so we have to make do with Markowitz and Sharp.
No need to make it up. Try to find something in Markowitz about non-stationarity. And at the same time refresh the subject of his theory.
No need to make things up. Try to find something in Markowitz about non-stationarity. And refresh the subject of his theory as well.
What am I making up? Try to find anything in Markovets about stationarity. And refresh the subject of his theory as well.
What does stationarity have to do with anything? Markets are non-stationary by definition. Show me stationary prices and I'll leave here forever in the direction of those prices.
What does stationarity have to do with anything? Markets are non-stationary by definition. Show me stationary prices and I will leave here forever in the direction of those prices.
Comrade Markowitz's theory does not take non-stationarity into account. That's what it's about, not finding a stationary price. He simply has not thought about it. He has, roughly speaking, profitability and risk, which invariably look to the future. The risk, is the trivial ERR. Also, correlation, which is also constant. And, he's talking about stocks, I suspect US stocks, nothing else.
Analysis (from Greek ἀνάλυσις"decomposition, dissection") is an operation of mental or real dissection of the whole (thing, property, process or relationship between objects) into its component parts, performed in the process of cognition or object-practical human activity.
In addition to synthesis, the method of analysis provides information about the structure of the object of study.
https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A2%D0%B5%D1%85%D0%BD%D0%B8%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%B9_%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B8%D0%B7
Technical analysis is forecasting of price changes in the future on the basis of analysis of price changes in the past. It is based on the analysis of time series of prices and their charts . Besides price series technical analysis uses information on trading volumes and other statistical data. Technical analysis methods are most often used to analyse prices that fluctuate freely, for example in stock markets.
Technical analysis has developed many different tools and methods but all are based on the assumption that recurring patterns and trends can be detected by analyzing time series and trading volumes to determine the overall market condition.
Technical analysis and its traditional counterpart fundamental analysis are the main schools of equity analysis. Technical analysis dominates in the analysis of the Forex market.
There are differences in the methods of technical analysis between the Forex market and the stock market. For example, at currency market deals are made between banks and volumes of transactions are not published; each bank can publish its own quotations only, deals can be made round the clock, except for weekends. On exchanges, prices and volumes are published by special commissions and are traded during trading sessions. Nevertheless, the general principles of technical analysis are the same in all markets.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Technical_analysis
Technical analysis is a security analysis discipline for predicting the future direction of prices through the study of past market data, primarily price and volume.[1] In its purest form, technical analysis considers only the actual price and volume behaviour of the market or instrument. Technical analysts may employ models and trading rules based on price and volume transformations, such as the relative strength index, moving averages, regressions, inter-market and intra-market price correlations, cycles or, classically, through recognition of chart patterns.
Technical analysis stands in distinction to fundamental analysis. Technical analysis "ignores" the actual nature of the company, market, currency or commodity and is based solely on "the charts," which is to say price and volume information, whereas fundamental analysis does look at the actual facts of the company, market, currency or commodity. For example, any large brokerage, trading group, or financial institution will typically have both a technical analysis and fundamental analysis team.
...
In the foreign exchange markets, its use may be more widespread than fundamental analysis.[7][8] While some isolated studies have indicated that technical trading rules might lead to consistent returns in the period prior to 1987,[9][ 10][ 11][ 12] most academic work has focused on the nature of the anomalous position of the foreign exchange market.[ 13] It is speculated that this anomaly is due to central bank intervention.[ 14] Recent research suggests that combining various trading signals into a Combined Signal Approach may be able to increase profitability and reduce dependence on any single rule.[ 15].
Comrade Markowitz's theory does not account for non-stationarity. That's what it's about, not finding a stationary price. He simply hasn't thought about it. He has, roughly speaking, profitability and risk, which invariably look to the future. The risk, is the trivial ERR. Also, correlation, which is also constant. And, he's talking about stocks, I suspect American stocks, nothing else.
I read and mentally say "yes" to every sentence. That's right, everyone knows these simplifications, I could cite many more. My favourite is rationality and homogeneity of investors, which is not really there either. It's only a model, it doesn't have to take absolutely everything into account, it's impossible. And it is a workable model.
What it has to do with non-stationarity, and non-stationarity of what, actually - I still don't understand. Where should the returns be looking, backwards?
I read and mentally say "yes" to every sentence. That's right, everyone knows these simplifications, I could cite many more. My favourite is rationality and homogeneity of investors, which is not really there either. It's only a model, it doesn't have to take absolutely everything into account, it's impossible. And it is a workable model.
What it has to do with non-stationarity, and non-stationarity of what, actually - I still don't understand. Where should the returns look, in the past?
What would be the variance of a non-stationary series? Can it be calculated at all? The same goes for the yield.