Do large banks and institutions use TA to profit?

[Redneck]

No I wouldn't, because of my systematic approach I know I will have X % of losing trades.

The example is not a good one, because in every successful system there are still losing trades. So even the best trader in the world could be shot.

A systematic approach does not mean only winning trades. It means that you know why you take a trade.

If you depend on luck you just take a trade but have no clue and hope to be lucky.

Good stuff

RN

 

[Mtrader]

When you are putting on a trade there is absolutely no definitive way of knowing whether it will be stopped out, whether it would run after it stopped you out, whether it would run for a lot less what you expected or whether it would run substantially more than expected, you have no influence over it or inside information. So it's based on luck.

NO, again wrong.
I have a systematic approach based on statistics and probabilities. So I know my chances already in advance, it has nothing to do with luck. But you should not see each trade seperately, that's the error you make. Weather can be predicted fairly accurate for 1 week or even longer. They use past data to predict. What I do is similar.
If I do 100 trades I know already in advance how many trades will be profitable, how many trades will be losses, how much my average profit will be and how much my average loss will be, with very hig probability. So what I do is intentional, not because I think I will be lucky, it is based on math. And if the math is good, and I follow for 100% the systematic approach, the result will be very close to the statistical calculated predictions.
I have 100% influence over the result, because I decide when to trade and how to trade. I know also very well WHY I trade. It is dictated by my system. And that system calculated already in advance where I will be in 100 trades.

 

[romik]

NO, again wrong.
I have a systematic approach based on statistics and probabilities. So I know my chances already in advance, it has nothing to do with luck. But you should not see each trade seperately, that's the error you make. Weather can be predicted fairly accurate for 1 week or even longer. They use past data to predict. What I do is similar.
If I do 100 trades I know already in advance how many trades will be profitable, how many trades will be losses, how much my average profit will be and how much my average loss will be, with very hig probability. So what I do is intentional, not because I think I will be lucky, it is based on math. And if the math is good, and I follow for 100% the systematic approach, the result will be very close to the statistical calculated predictions.
I have 100% influence over the result, because I decide when to trade and how to trade. I know also very well WHY I trade. It is dictated by my system. And that system calculated already in advance where I will be in 100 trades.

I don't buy that, sorry.

 

[Mtrader]

I don't buy that, sorry.

You cannot buy it because it is not for sale.

Maybe you don't understand it.

 

[d08]

NO, again wrong.
I have a systematic approach based on statistics and probabilities...

Exactly. I always cringe when traders talk about one trade as if that is in any way relevant, performance is judged on hundreds or better yet, thousands trades.
Losses are part of any approach and relying or even thinking about luck means there are unresolved issues with the system.

 

[Mtrader]

I don't buy that, sorry.

You can do a small test at home to see how statistics and probablities work:

1. Hit your wife and note down how she reacts.
2. Repeat this 20 times and note down each time her reaction.
3. Then before hitting her for the 21’st time again, try to predict how she will react.

Much chances that you will predict it correctly. This shows the “force” of statistics and probabilities. Especially if you know that women can be very unpredictable! At least that is my experience.
And now I also know statitically how big the damage to my face will be.

 

[Visaria]

Can you name a single fund of significant size managed by discretionary chart-reading that has a consistently profitable record? Yes, I know every TA enthusiast on ET is running a super double secret fund that always makes money, but is there even a single large fund with a verifiable record of success?

yes. peter brandt runs a sizeable fund. verified 40 per cent pa over decades. uses exclusively old school ta, edwards and magee stuff.

i only needed one example to destroy the ta doesnt work hypothesis. i have provided this.

my work is done.

peace

vis

p.s. debitspread, r u surf's wife?

 

[Visaria]

If you're constantly "unlucky" then your method is wrong. Luck belongs to gamblers, not traders.

there was a quote in the market wizard books, i would rather be lucky than good. maybe rich dennis said it? didnt understand it. i think i do now. totally agree with it.

 

[romik]

You can do a small test at home to see how statistics and probablities work:

1. Hit your wife and note down how she reacts.
2. Repeat this 20 times and note down each time her reaction.
3. Then before hitting her for the 21’st time again, try to predict how she will react.

Much chances that you will predict it correctly. This shows the “force” of statistics and probabilities. Especially if you know that women can be very unpredictable! At least that is my experience.
And now I also know statitically how big the damage to my face will be.

You are a fucking idiot that just all talk & no substance.

 

[marketsurfer]

The purpose of a good system is to replace luck by a systematic approach. Luck should be banned to the max out of your system. System is the opposite of luck in trading. System means know what you do and why. Luck is have no clue but make money by accident. Till one day a real accident happens and you run out of your luck too (wiped out).

This is very wrong. Your system should keep you in the market and solvent until luck blesses you with an outsized move or true positive black swan in which u will make 10 or even 100x your capital.

If your system prevents you from huge gains, you might as well be flipping burgers or on the dole since u are wasting your life staring at screens. ( im talking about folks starting with a modest amount of capital-- if u are already wealthy - then its another story).