Algo's are pushing every market toward randomness - God help us traders

my 2 cents to this debate is IDK IDC...
randomness is what the market does best. like a drunkards walk... we - humans try to dig out a pattern -too much confirmation bias. and when it does work. we believe. when it doesnot.. we complain..
the markets are a reflection of alll the millons of traders.. even the ALGOS have been written by these quant Phds who are humans..

50000 ft view.. if there is a new technique which has an edge. it is bound to be discovered and used so much that there will be no edge left...

we can spend next 1 month beating this to death and ha ha.. market will keeping doin what it does.. ie. max pain for all participants...

JUST when you thought this could not happen. hell YA.. it HAPPENS.. .. i see it everyday on stocktwits.. so many traders in anguish and digust....
 
The edge is:

1) diversification
2) reward a multiple of risk
3) risk limited to each individual position being no more than 0.5% of capital
 
Rather than random, I think that the ecosphere of competing AIs will learn and grow to a point where they will reach consensus very quickly on stock valuation. Any attempt to wrench them away from homeostasis will be gobbled up instantaneously and the price will settle again at a realistic valuation. Human trading to move markets dies. We are back to buy and hold and collect the dividend, no more gaming. That actually sounds pretty good to me.
 
@jimmiebarton im not sure why you think that every price level being challenged is inherently random. Just the fact that backing and filling exists makes the market nonrandom and should give you more opportunity as a retail trader. Just enter passively with a limit order at a level which you think the alleged challenge will cause reversion to and all of a sudden your starting position starts looking a lot better than if you're a price taker a couple tick above. What I've described to you is a crude basis for market making...ostensibly the game of the mathematicians some folks seem to be concerned about. I'm only a young mathematician, but the scenario you describe as random sounds like it could be extremely lucrative.
 
Good traders adapt, trade as what your signals tell you to do, whether computer programs, other good traders or losing traders, it all the same. Those who can't adapt become whiners and lose more. If you don't like computers, get educated and join them. Most of how I trade is coat tailing how other good traders and computer programs trade, why re-invent the wheel. Does anyone believe the biggest of traders trade on something they read over the weekend? They back test the crap out of it, why should you be any different? You might think you have discovered a new way to trade, am very sure others before you came up with it.
 
Interesting conversation, but what exactly is different now than it was before? Volatility?, spreads?, volume? If we knew what was changing we might know how to react.
 
Interesting conversation, but what exactly is different now than it was before? Volatility?, spreads?, volume? If we knew what was changing we might know how to react.
from what I can gauge, 10 years back there were some market inefficiencies and predictable patterns.. NOW they are SO efficient.. NOTHING WORKS..
best example was 2 days back this FRIDAY.. THU - we spiked up.. everyone took directional bets. .and.. NUTHIN freaking happened on FRIDAY... dead as a dodo....
 
from what I can gauge, 10 years back there were some market inefficiencies and predictable patterns.. NOW they are SO efficient.. NOTHING WORKS..
best example was 2 days back this FRIDAY.. THU - we spiked up.. everyone took directional bets. .and.. NUTHIN freaking happened on FRIDAY... dead as a dodo....

Hey man, everyone's frustrated due to general lack of volatility, but you should consider diversifying the instruments you trade as well. Not sure what you trade.
 
Back
Top