Quote from Texasdj:
Any tests I have seen show zero trending behavior in stocks.
Would you like to enlarge your scope and bounds of testing? If you stay focussed on a proof of something not working, will continue the dilemma you have created.
Please examine the logic of repeating tests that suggest something doesn't work. Science does test sets of alternatives to prove that an alternative works when all other altenatives do not work.
You may wish to examine trend failure and the consequences of trend failure., for example.
Give yourself a treat today and have your first experience of seeing the consequence of discovering that trends fail. Is this valuable to know?
Goodman tests for m dependent time series, serial correlation coefficient are all built to find trends. Run these tests on stocks and no trend exists.
You may be referring to GS and do not know the names. Running the wrong tests proves nothing except to not use the tests. As you probably figured out, you are finding my post is a "long slow curve". Ostgaard fits into your resource spectrum. He tracked and named at least 29 famous participants in the creation of trend mo0nitoring and analysis. All were successful decisionmakers and traders as well. None of them used what you refer to above. But they did use alternatives outside of your realm of experience or admission.
Most of them examined the failure of trends. they did it for ggod reason.; they knew that when a trend was failing it was a good time to take profits.
Let me get you to think for a moment. Does GS know when to get out of a trade? Is there any corrolation with these exits and their making money.
What would the value to a "long only" stock trader to know when a "short" period ended for a stock? Dow and Livermore had common intersts. Dow advocated HH's and LL's while Livermore extolded on connecting highs and calling the line a "supply line"; similarly he called the line connecting lows the "demand line". Both were barriers to be broken according to Livermore. Why was going from one of these lines to another found useful by Livermore? When did Dow or Livermore get out of a trade?
What wasn't happening or WWT?
Can you name one statistical test showing trending behavior?
Give yourself a break and assume we all agree that no statistical tests are available to your clientel and associates and colleagues.
When all others are considered there are endless numbers of tests available. read Ostgaard and high lighlite them page after page. You will find about 150 in about a dozen pages. One common theme is the detection of trend failures. Trend monitoring and analysis has too major concerns: beginnings and endings. One of the most fortunate aspects of this is that trend endings and beginnings are identities.
What is the true and deep test of a trend ending or a trend beginning: IT IS THAT THERE IS NO TREND AT THAT MOMENT. Maybe some of your colleagues are explaining to you that they do tests at the precise time there is no trending. This is not true, of course. What is true is that they are using statisitcs and cannot get any meaningful results.
Trend testing is done by monitoring and analyzing using other than statisitics. Wikipedia struck out as did GS.
What has to end this type of insanity? Tests have to be done using logic and the tests have to involve the market variables.
The simplest and most effective measure is the one provided by Dodd and Granville. I have used it successfully for 53 years.
I'm always open to new insight.
We all agree that your are here and posting and getting banned day after day. The insight you failed to get here was that being banned happens if you fdo not follow the site rules.
I am providing you with some thoughts that refute your viewpoint. My thoughts are based upon the work of the successful contributors to trend monitoring and analysis over 200 hundred years. All of these people knew when a trend ended and jnew that this was the time to take profits.
Money is made through price change and the cause of price change is NOT price. In 1790, Ricardo spoke of one salient factor: not liquidating. He said first: "cut losses and let your profits run" as he spoke of the topic "not liquidating". When do you "get it" that money is made through price change and that price change is a defining effect of the human nature of market participants. Do you know how market participation is measured? Why did Dodd and Granville present their relationship of the market variables?
You need to consider accepting the insights of all the creators of the origins and nature of how and why markets work. This is what these people measured to determine the way to make money in markets.
You think money is made by keeping up with the changes in how edges work. This is only what big money does where the name of the gane is commissions and fees and primarily marketing services. Big money has no effectiveness and efficiency in any way whatsoever. Why did these guys lack the insight to see how markets work?
Thanks.
