Article in Forbes about TA

Classic TA has always been viewed in a negative light going back long before most traders around today were even born. Yet the one classic TA trader I keep an eye on cleared over 50% in 2016 - just a hair over his average over the last 3 decades - This makes him of one of the most winning trader of all times - His only rivals I believe would be Soros and a his peer group of fellow wizards that are also using classic TA.

2015 was an incredible year for classic TA - few failed signals, a lot of breakouts rocketing to their measured moves faster normal. The more people that stay out of classic TA the better it seems to work. So, please keep on hating on it - the more it's hated the more bank us practitioners of it make.
 
Harris goes on and on about (according to him) how knowledge of popular TA techniques *informs* the market, which dilutes the effect. This is a well-used turn on the Efficient Markets Hypothesis, and sensibly poses "Well, if I know that the price of JKL equity will be rising above $X a share tomorrow, why don't *I* just buy it up to X now, and sell it at X+ tomorrow??"
A fine self-fulfilling prophesy. But doesn't that herd-quantifying behavior *substantiate* the utility of TA?

What about the countervailing, just-as-available *oscillators* where, as price and/or volume components reach given ratios, market pauses (usually accompanied by the turn itself) grow more probable. If I'm looking to enter JKL, but it's oscillator(s) indicate an overbought market, and price will likely decrease in the next market day, wouldn't I pause in my JLK buying?? And what, then, happens to price, when the rest of the (well-informed) market dies off?? Volume decreases, and sellers take the offer closer to bid, and market price falls, fulfilling another TA guess.

Hell, the only pieces of data we have are price and volume, and the author discounts half of that immediately, just by espousing "price action is all you need."
Well, that's a Grade F. right there.
 
TA works but the f**k up happens when the trader's mind goes off the planning i.e. signals.

Problem is with the operator not the machine.

It is the battle of the mind, not the mechanics.
 
Not a bad article actually, addresses few good issues, especially either complete absence of PRM or its neglect, yet PRM is probably more important than methodology, saying that my methods of trading/betting are so closely integrated with PRM that I dare say that I predominantly use PRM. Also, I've given up on trying to 'code my brain', I like to be in charge whether it's green or red light. Let's not forget that we are humans and so much that concerns our process of thought remains to be discovered, how can a computer imitate that is yet to be discovered? Anyhow, IMHO not a bad article, can't be related to every single person of course, we all wipe our bottoms differently.
 
comagnum said:
Classic TA has always been viewed in a negative light going back long before most traders around today were even born. Yet the one classic TA trader I keep an eye on cleared over 50% in 2016 - just a hair over his average over the last 3 decades - This makes him of one of the most winning trader of all times - His only rivals I believe would be Soros and a his peer group of fellow wizards that are also using classic TA.

2015 was an incredible year for classic TA - few failed signals, a lot of breakouts rocketing to their measured moves faster normal. The more people that stay out of classic TA the better it seems to work. So, please keep on hating on it - the more it's hated the more bank us practitioners of it make.
More...
It would be good if you could reveal the trader. Unless you have a good reason why you couldn't, and I would like to know the reason.
 
toc said:
TA works but the f**k up happens when the trader's mind goes off the planning i.e. signals.

Problem is with the operator not the machine.

It is the battle of the mind, not the mechanics.
More...

Yes indeed, must reprogram one-self to get over this hurdle. If we treat it like a job and work specific hours than it becomes easier to deal with, but with out solid parameters, Its all for not.
 
toc said:
Top market beater hedge funds like SAC, Renaissance etc. use heavy loads of TA and QA to gain edge over others.
More...

FYI SAC is no longer around. Rennaissance uses data mining and machine learning. That is not classic TA.
 
Last edited:
Actually I thought the article was very good and painted a realistic picture of TA. I also highly recommend the author's book Fooled By Technical Analysis. There is a lot of value there especially for trading system developers.
 
Forbes has printed articles on both sides of the coin.

If it works, use it and if it doesn't work...don't use it. Yet, don't let a magazine tell you what to do especially one that has printed articles on both sides of the coin in its history.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top