Search results

I have read both his book and his articles on S&C. There's no real difference between the book and articles. The book = articles + hundreds of pages of tables filled with numbers.

I read it. The answer to the question of why there is no historical data is because the system is not too mechanical and backtestable. For instance, the rule of waiting half of the opening range after A point is broken to confirm it is already quite discretionary. Another one - if price goes...

The confusion is probably due to winning trades becoming negative and losing trades becoming positive. If you have average winning trade of 100 with stdev of 200, then you will get negative values too when generating trades for monte carlo. The question of thread starter was probably this...

On the other hand, it's much cheaper for us Europeans to buy stuff from the USA. So you get our euros and things will be ok provided you produce anything of value. As for me personally, I only buy books and DVDs from the USA. Everything else is from China, Europe and Japan, sorry :)

It's very simple: "fire tonn" :)

There is, we just don't have the technology yet. See here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_power#As_a_sustainable_energy_source This is where hundreds of billions of dollars and euros should be invested instead of fighting oil wars in the Middle East. I never understood why this...

There are a few trustworthy FX brokers. One of them is Oanda. Although I suspect my stops were taken out a couple of times in a fishy way, but in overall it's good. Once there was a fat-finger incident during NFP Friday, where they usually rise GBP/USD spread to 20 pips, someone messed up and...

So isn't this just another form of TA? Since you're using price data (or whatever other data) to find opportunities?

No, there are so called hardware random number generators. Software (program code)? Yes, it is deterministic, but since most of the algorithms use the so called "seed number" and most of the time it is taken from computer's clock (nanotime), they are not as non-random as you might imagine. More...

You are talking about such trivial stuff. Yes, computers generate pseudorandom numbers, not completely random. The algorithm takes in a seed number, which defines starting state. Random seed is usually taken from computer's clock. So basically, chance of getting equivalent series of pseudorandom...

I don't doubt or question your success or anything like that. The whole point was that people tend to see what isn't there. Just google around and you will find lots of TA market "analysis" :) I'm not denying that there are some dependencies and non-randomness in the market data at some...

No, I did not use real market data. I described the process how I generated data in the post in this thread. All I was trying to show is that people can see "trends" in the data where there are none. There are no real trends in randomly generated data. This is only to answer to the thread...

Non-stationarity means that the rules by which time series was generated change. In other words - statistical properties do not stay the same all the time.

You are thinking about individual case. But what happens when you add up million individual cases? You get random distribution.

Try looking at the browser history.

Then you are assuming stationarity and the system will only work on the same market conditions that you are simulating. But market data is not stationary and distributions change over time.

Here, only three charts, because creating random data charts is quite boring and dull work (I prefer video games) :D You can see there are lots of "tradeable trends", lol :D

Here's OHLC data for the above chart.

You just completely misunderstood my post. It was just a sarcasm. The next chart shows what happens when a tiny bias is introduced. It was generated using the same process (without gaps) and a 1% of upside bias, which means probability of up tick is 50.5% and down tick is 49.5%. In this...

Yes, I can post a few more later if you wish :) I think that when one thinks about "tradeable trends", he just fools himself by applying trend-following concept to the parts of the data and ignoring the rest of data where the trend-following concept fails miserably, especially when you...