So let me ask you this: if you could take advantage of a free offer, a free car, or someone told you you can make solid coin trading with this new algorithm and approach to trading then you will say thanks, no, because that's not your way? Give it a break, your point has been completely defeated.
can price action predict market moves
- Thread starter geth03
- Start date
No, I would not pass on such an offer. But then you can show me how to build a Tesla for free, it may not be my cup of tea, as they say in England.
Extra edge and more potential profits is the cup of tea of every professional trader, if you get my drift.
1. Can you link that research?
2. Classical chart patterns (which I don’t generally use) is just one subset of chart analysis (which there are as many as there are chart settings).
3. There are plenty of academics who claims the market to be random, yet it’s obvious that profitable market participants have found them to be otherwise. Is it possible that markets (and charts) only seems random to the uninformed, but actually is not?
Is it possible that markets are random some of the time, but not all the time?
4. Is skill/experience/talent something to consider?
Finally, it’s my firm belief that anything of true value would not be taught in public or sold, but traded for private personal gain. That’s why the answers to the questions that matters will never be freely or readily available. And that’s where you’re currently at.
1.there are various research papers on that matter out there,
here is a link from one of those, if you want to find additional sources, follow the cited papers.
http://www.technicalanalysis.org.uk/reversal-patterns/ChOs99.pdf
3. i know that there are academics that believe in Efficient Market Hypothesis. it is also true, that if markets were 100% efficient, hedge funds should not be able to outperform the S&P.
but most hedge funds even struggle to outperform this market index, and there is no consistency among the outperformers. yeah, i know Simons, Dalio, Icahn, Buffet, that is a really small percentage of the guys that try to beat the S&P, and i think the safer way for the retail guy would be to stick to ETF's with a time horizon of at least 10 years. yeah, i know that many think they can do better day trading, but 95% lose, and the other 5% struggle.
-. yeah, some of the time markets are not random, thats true. i can tell with 90% certainty that lots of retailers put their SL behind a recent swing high/low. when price reaches that point, i know there will be a flush of stop orders executed. charts can show that!
-. i don't fully agree with you on the last part. i became an engineer by studying the works of other people, i earn good money. i am currently at work and i can type in those words and interact with you guys. that is what i've got from publicly available knowledge.
It could go up slow or otherwise fast but it could also go down and if it breaks it could go down fast or it could go sideways. That perfectly exemplified everything there is to know about chart trading.
do i see a head and shoulder pattern right there xD
Well - did you read it?
I only took a quick look, but the conclusion does say the head and shoulder pattern is profitable for 2 of the 6 currencies tested.
Usually, you find proof of what you want to find. You have decided that TA or charts have no predictive value, so that's what you'll find.
Personally, I prefer my own research and that of other market participants (see for example Market Wizards by Schwager), but there actually seems to be a good amount of academic research suggesting TA have some merit.
The profitability of technical analysis: Evidence from the piercing line and dark cloud cover patterns in the forex market
We examine 112,792 daily candles using more than one million spot quotes among 24 currency pairs between 2000 and 2018. We find that chart patterns are profitable. Relying on these visually based patterns achieves returns of more than 600% after accounting for the transaction costs.
The Profitability of Technical Analysis: A Review
Among a total of 92 modern studies, 58 studies found positive results regarding technical trading strategies, while 24 studies obtained negative results.
Not quite correct. Those who outperform have usually been remarkably consistent, too.
The last decade have been remarkable.
Regardless, nobody is in disagreement with the fact that 'beating the market' is difficult. The high failure rate in trading is known.
Maybe you have something to build on there, then...
I happen to be an engineer as well. Not even remotely comparable to learning trading (as an outsider). As an engineer or any other academic field the curriculum is widely known, available and presented in multiple angles with multiple people who can help you. And when you graduate you can do a sloppy job and still get paid.
In trading, you'd need to spend years just trying to figure out what the curriculum is. And there's not much room for error.
Meanwhile, you have trading educators who are ready to sell you their books and systems who if they were any good wouldn't be sold, but traded. That's why Simons and similar wasn't into the teach-people-to-trade business, but make-myself-filthy-rich-from-my-own-ideas business.
That has nothing to do with chart trading or reading. I read through the entire paper. Did you? Also it does not appear where the authors post profitability and risk levels at different transaction cost levels. And the study focused on Brics only. Nicely picked to suit some of your talking points but unfortunately it has nothing to do with chart interpretation as the authors used an automated system that focused on TA indicators, and even that with a highly questionable approach.
But if you like to stir the discussion towards price action per se then yes sometimes price action has predictive power. Definitely not some chart patters above and beyond random probability.
But if you like to stir the discussion towards price action per se then yes sometimes price action has predictive power. Definitely not some chart patters above and beyond random probability.
Well - did you read it?
I only took a quick look, but the conclusion does say the head and shoulder pattern is profitable for 2 of the 6 currencies tested.
Usually, you find proof of what you want to find. You have decided that TA or charts have no predictive value, so that's what you'll find.
Personally, I prefer my own research and that of other market participants (see for example Market Wizards by Schwager), but there actually seems to be a good amount of academic research suggesting TA have some merit.
The profitability of technical analysis: Evidence from the piercing line and dark cloud cover patterns in the forex market
We examine 112,792 daily candles using more than one million spot quotes among 24 currency pairs between 2000 and 2018. We find that chart patterns are profitable. Relying on these visually based patterns achieves returns of more than 600% after accounting for the transaction costs.
The Profitability of Technical Analysis: A Review
Among a total of 92 modern studies, 58 studies found positive results regarding technical trading strategies, while 24 studies obtained negative results.
Not quite correct. Those who outperform have usually been remarkably consistent, too.
The last decade have been remarkable.
Regardless, nobody is in disagreement with the fact that 'beating the market' is difficult. The high failure rate in trading is known.
Maybe you have something to build on there, then...
I happen to be an engineer as well. Not even remotely comparable to learning trading (as an outsider). As an engineer or any other academic field the curriculum is widely known, available and presented in multiple angles with multiple people who can help you. And when you graduate you can do a sloppy job and still get paid.
In trading, you'd need to spend years just trying to figure out what the curriculum is. And there's not much room for error.
Meanwhile, you have trading educators who are ready to sell you their books and systems who if they were any good wouldn't be sold, but traded. That's why Simons and similar wasn't into the teach-people-to-trade business, but make-myself-filthy-rich-from-my-own-ideas business.