Is there a need for a T.A.? - page 7
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
I understand, there is a handbook on how to program in MQL, an English textbook, a workshop Photoshop, a guitar self-learner... You read these books, study, practise - and you can actually do some, at least simple things.
Regardless of the vocation! Apart from their basic abilities. Yes, not everyone becomes a pianist like Richter, but everyone can play a simple and lovely waltz for themselves and their families!
It's something you can really learn.
What exactly do you need to be able to do in forex?
You make a strange reasoning. According to you, if you learn notes and know how to play the dog waltz, that means you really know how to play. And if you know how to open a position, interpret indicators, calculate risks, etc., does it mean you can speculate in the market?
If you know notes, but have not become a Richter - this is normal and notes have nothing to do with it. But if you cannot earn on Forex, it means that the TA does not work.
TA= the past can predict the future. Denying such a fact is a weak form of market efficiency. The strong form of market efficiency is what you wrote about everything being built into the price. From the strong form follows the weak form.
TA - past price and volume can predict future price and only they. And nothing else is needed. Right?
That's a strange way of looking at it. If you learn notes and know how to play the dog waltz, it means you really know how to play. And if you know how to open positions, interpret indicator readings, calculate risks, etc., it does not mean you know how to speculate in the market?
According to you, if you know notes but did not become a Richter - this is normal and notes have nothing to do with it, but if you cannot earn on Forex, it means that the TA does not work.
Who has made money in the market with TA?
A profitable TS WITHOUT SPEED ACCOUNTING? A profitable TS is a half-yearly trade report, that's what it is.
Successful history testing is not a profitable TS.
This system will work on all pairs and assets and on all history, moreover there are infinitely many systems, but on the condition that the spread (commission) is not charged .
TA - past price and volume can predict future price and they alone. And nothing else is needed. Is that right?
Yes, that's the definition of TA, it seems to be generally accepted. Financial math starts from the opposite position - past cannot predict future, hence future=historical growth.
This system will work on all pairs and assets and on all history, moreover there are an infinite number of systems, but on the condition that the spread (commission) is not charged .
So this TS will work in a perfect world in a perfect market? I'm not there! Unfortunately.
How would this TS work for a real market maker? Is it where the spread is floating and can reach 10 or 20 or 50 pips?
Yes, I use that definition of TA, it seems to be generally accepted. Financial mathematics starts from the opposite position - the past cannot predict the future, hence future=historical growth.
slander of financial mathematics! Don't you dare! Where did you read that?
Who has made money from TA in the market?
So this TS will work in a perfect world in a perfect market? I'm not there! Unfortunately.
How would this TS work for a real market maker? Is it where the spread is floating and can reach 10 or 20 or 50 pips?
You misunderstood - the system will fail in the tester and in real, because we pay commission=spread for each trade.
Without the spread, the system will be profitable :) - This is what disproves the efficiency of the market.
You misunderstood - the system will fail in the tester and in real life, as we pay commission=spread for each trade.
Without the spread, the system will be profitable :) - This is what disproves the efficiency of the market.
Isn't the commission part of the market conditions?
Not part of the market conditions...
Everything and everyone is efficient.
;)