What is not understood and taken into account when discussing the random walk model (RBS) - page 3
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
Where do you want to find out what is going on - in the media...
Please continue with the topic, show the results of theory application in practice, application in trading, tester, demo or real, to make it all sound convincing.
I am interested in it
;)
The author of the thread should follow the example of AK2 and his TIP thread. (Prove your thoughts with pictures and descriptions, rather than "build it yourself"). He ate a dog there on increments and not one, with a cat in addition.
It is common to discuss the original premise:
But they don't consider the continuation of the text at all:
Here's the main thing that all the debaters fail to consider:
SB is a discrete random process with independent STATIONARY increments.
Stationary increments are random variables with ZERO MOTION.
And their DISPERSION is LIMITED.
That is why SB will always be similar to price movements of currency pairs and in general to price movements of ALL financial assets and can always be used scientifically as a model of price movements of any financial akitv, including currency pair quotes on forex.
At present, the most adequate model of price movement can be considered a NON-STATIONARY random process with STATIONARY random increments.
A non-stationary random process with STATIONARY random increments.
This means that the mean (mathematical expectation) of the increments is always (not exactly, approximately) zero.
One way to tradea NON-STATIONARY random process with STATIONARY random increments is to trade
- is to trade on the return of increments to the mean, i.e. to zero and crossing over zero.
Example: the currency pair NZDUSD. We take an interval of 5 trading days between points to make calm and unhurried, but profitable trading.
NZDUSD
14.02.2020 0.643191 0.003151
21.02.2020 0,635123 -0,00807
28.02.2020 0,625104 -0,01002
06.03.2020 0,635806 0,010702
13.03.2020 0.605998 -0.02981
20.03.2020 0,569879 -0,03612
27.03.2020 0,603034 0,033155
03.04.2020 0.585799 -0.01724
10.04.2020 0,608408 0,02261
17.04.2020 0.600439 -0.00797
The first graph is the price increments of the currency pair NZDUSD.
The second graph is the chart of the currency pair NZDUSD. The dates are given.
One of profitable strategies (not the most profitable, but it will do for example)
- It is to sell when the increment is positive and to buy when the increment is negative.
WARNING: this information is NOT a trading recommendation. Applying the above strategy does not guarantee profits and can lead to losses. Everyone who applies this strategy does so at their own risk. The author is not responsible for the actions of others that led to losses when trying to apply the above strategy.
it's only when it's flat.
In a flat, we earn. At the beginning of a trend, we lose everything.
Small correction: you are the one who is losing.
I am making money from this method.
Let everyone speak for themselves.
Don't speak for everyone.
OK, OK. Don't get so boisterous, Oleg.
I am not Oleg and some long-time members of this forum can attest to that.
I strongly advise you to communicate only on the topic of the thread and not to get personal.
Otherwise I will stop communicating with you.
OK, OK. Don't get so boisterous, Oleg.
1. There is no concept of "dispersion limited" in TV. Limited by what? From minus infinity to plus infinity? Or from minus a million to plus a million? The variance of a stationary process must be a constant.
2. There are no outliers in one-dimensional discrete random walk - look at the increments. What kind of outliers if the increments can only be plus or minus 1?
3. Nowhere did I write "necessarily be negative". The sum of SB increments can be negative, the sum of the increments of a range of market prices under normal conditions cannot be negative.
Well, the eurik went up to 1.7, after that there were a lot of increments, both positive and negative. Slipped to 1.1, the sum of increments is -0.6. Abnormal conditions?
Well, the eurik went up to 1.7, after that there were a lot of increments, both positive and negative. Crawled down to 1.1, the sum of the increments is -0.6. Abnormal conditions?
Is it difficult for you to show on a graph what you are writing about?
I have not been lazy and have drawn graphs.
And I explained it clearly.
Is it difficult for you to graph what you are writing about?
I have not been lazy and have drawn the graphs.
And I explained it clearly.
I didn't think you'd be interested, but whatever you want for your money.
I'll do it.