harrytrader wrote:
Current academics' stochastic process models are non-EMH (and subsume Technical Analysis). Just browse Quantitative Finance for example, or how technical and fundamental traders effect the stochastic process of the market - http://www.santafe.edu/~jdf/papers/jebo.pdf
Are any of these models correct or even good for anything? One thing I am convinced of: the most complex stochastic models (including HMMs) are developed deep in the bowels of hedge fund firms and are not published, for the obvious reason.
Happily for EMH propagandists I'm not an academics and at the moment all academics work on stochastics models, the rare ones that work on determistic model are using analogy with quantum/fractal theory which are just as esoteric as Gann or Elliott since they only formalise the form they don't really know the cause.
Current academics' stochastic process models are non-EMH (and subsume Technical Analysis). Just browse Quantitative Finance for example, or how technical and fundamental traders effect the stochastic process of the market - http://www.santafe.edu/~jdf/papers/jebo.pdf
Are any of these models correct or even good for anything? One thing I am convinced of: the most complex stochastic models (including HMMs) are developed deep in the bowels of hedge fund firms and are not published, for the obvious reason.
cannot correctly judge about "efficient vs. inefficient" because the underlying thesis/assumption about market behaviour & pdfs is wrong?
.