Zero sample correlation does not necessarily mean there is no linear relationship - page 34
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
Only a moron would draw such a conclusion. It does not follow from BP1 and BP2 being highly correlated that BP3 = BP1 / BP2 is in a flat.
And who wrote this -
Well here again it is simple. Since AUDUSD and NZDUSD are highly correlated, the simplest conclusion is that AUDNZD is "returnable" or "flat".
Wouldn't you rather look at the AUDNZD chart instead of drawing such conclusions?
Can we read?
Since AUDUSD and NZDUSD are highly correlated, the simplest conclusion is that AUDNZD is "returnable" or "flat".
hrenfx:
Not to provoke a terminological discussion.
Only a moron would draw such a conclusion. It does not follow from the highly correlated nature of BP1 and BP2 that BP3 = BP1 / BP2 is in a flat.
Ok. You have discovered that there are currencies in forex. And some of those currencies are highly correlated.
And I also told you that almost all of them are highly correlated.
And you also learned that the correlation coefficient for ALL currencies changes over time. So what does that imply? How do you use it?
In fact, people have been surprised to find out that in financial markets, the correlation coefficient between instruments can CHANGE THE SIGN Opposite over the long term!
what do you suggest we do about it?
Can we read?
That means it's not your conclusion, but you've decided for someone else to draw that conclusion? As you can see, so far no one in the thread has drawn it, but rather the opposite.
You create a topic - it means you invite to discussion. You do not want your attention to mistakes in your statements - write in a diary under a blanket.
What fucking mistakes?! Can you point out one? The verbiage is one. I also wrote "milking" the market. At least I put it in inverted commas. Otherwise there would have been a comment that the market cannot be milked, because cows, goats, etc. are milked.
So, take any terms you don't like in quotes and that's it. The real errors may be in something mathematically sound. That's where you find them. Not a pissing contest with terminology. Market efficiency theory has nothing to do with the term efficiency in my post. Because I even defined it there.
Also, you're so smart. Everyone was saying that it's impossible to get a combination of non-stationary BPs with other properties. I gave you such combination. Where are your tests? Where is it all? I don't fucking need it from you. What the hell do I need you to prove you're not a camel. If you actually looked at the simple combination you suggested, you could see that it was stationary. But I do not need it from you to please my ego.
hrenfx, do you see the two lines, red and blue? I bring to your attention that the correlation coefficient between them is 1.
Ok. You have discovered that there are currencies in the forex market. And some of those currencies are highly correlated.
And I also told you that almost all of them are highly correlated.
And you also learned that the correlation coefficient for ALL currencies changes over time. So what does that imply? How do you use it?
In fact, people have been surprised to find out that in financial markets, the correlation coefficient between instruments can CHANGE THE SIGN Opposite over the long term!
what do you suggest we do about it?
Your post is drenched in moronism. You were shown a video which fully reflected the behaviour of QC for all intervals. Moreover, the video was followed by charts with "confidence" intervals and some rudimentary conclusions.
I wrote an example of the simplest usage above. If you and company see nothing in these studies, then I am sincerely happy for you.
That means it's not your conclusion, but you have decided for someone to draw such a conclusion? As we can see, so far no one in the thread has drawn it, but rather the opposite.
Ask people who trade AUDNZD. Perhaps with their stats and some comments on AUDNZD peculiarities they will be able to give you something useful.
If your research is unable to show the difference between EURUSD and AUDNZD, there is nothing good about it.
Market efficiency theory has nothing to do with the term efficiency in my post. Because I even defined it there.
... You were saying that it is impossible to get a combination of non-stationary BPs with other properties. I gave you such a combination. Where are your checks?
1) you have not proved the non-stationarity of the initial BPs (just don't blather on like "non-stationarity is visible to the naked eye": it has to be proved, and I have not seen any such proof from you or from anyone else, and not even in clever books).
2) I didn't find anything substantially new in the synthetics you cited according to the criteria I pointed out in that thread (unconditional and conditional densities and correlogram to begin with). All these characteristics have remained the same. Including the lack of evidence of (un)stationarity.