Or precisely, I can follow the market train containing infinite coach, without knowing in advance its direction, but not always sit in the same coach since I need to get out for lunch and dinner, then come back to sit in another coach. There's nothing wrong to sit in another coach as long as I continue to move forward with the market train. So I don't need to predict the market direction, the only thing I need to do is that I shouldn't go for lunch or dinner when I'm hungry (it's not up to me), I must wait for the market signal to tell me when the right time to go for eating.
Enough already! It's not random
- Thread starter kut2k2
- Start date
My only beef with brownian motion is this: it isn't gas molecules, which are accurately modeled with brownian motion, that all rush to exit when the top of a box is lifted -- only humans rush in that sort of unorganized behavior... but maybe that is what you mean when you say 'volatility in markets is time varying'...
kut2k2
I suggest you google "GARCH" and "Engle"
He won a Nobel prize for devising models that find non-linear structure in time series. Everyone knows that volatility of the S&P 500 has structure. But you aren't going to find it by spotting some chart pattern by looking at it.
I suggest you google "GARCH" and "Engle"
He won a Nobel prize for devising models that find non-linear structure in time series. Everyone knows that volatility of the S&P 500 has structure. But you aren't going to find it by spotting some chart pattern by looking at it.
I know the feeling. Ever since I was young I wanted to be involved in finance since I thought that would lead me to the market and success.
Ive been in college for 4 years now and been a senior for the last 2, less than 20 hours to me degree. LOL. I take 1 class a semester because I am not motivated at all anymore.
Financial motivation? I make more now than I would with a degree out of college, more than double....
Educational motivation? What I learned in school would have meant I would never succeed as a trader. Glad that was proved wrong.
Quote from kut2k2:
It's the path that actually happened, as opposed to countless "alternate-universe" paths that didn't.
Bullshit. You're clutching at straws, strawman.
Your complete lack of counter evidence is duly noted, nitwit.
Please read the paper attached that I wrote about 5 years ago.
I have a little hope that you will actually understand it, but who knows ...
I used to think that the markets were NOT RANDON because I could objectively lay out chart environments to read (I use the term âreadâ simply because I detest the term "predict") the price direction, in real time of any chart I created with wonderful consistency. Not perfect consistency because nothing in trading is perfect.
My thought process was, "how can the markets be random if I can create environments to consistently read and profit from them"? That was the beginning where the light bulb of discovery turned on.
Every market is made up of either; institutional traders, fund traders, market makers, large independent traders or small independent traders . . . or all of them or some of them. In any case these individuals or groups first, do not communicate collectively their reasons or decisions for taking positions or trades and second, their systems or methods very as much as their numbers. To say that their decisions, reasons, systems or methods for taking positions or trades and the executions that results from them are not random, as it relates to the whole of the market they are trading in, is foolhardy.
The markets are absolutely RANDOM . . . but that does not say that individuals haven't created edges to consistently profit from that randomness. I know lots of individuals that have. I do! I also know lots of individuals that have and do profit from trading on statistical and mathematical models and use little or nothing related to Technical Analysis. I couldn't and never will use strictly math or statistics in my decision process for personal, financial and psychological reasons but others do and do successfully.
What irritates me are the individuals that run to any thread where TA is mentioned and start blasting it as the next edition of the "magical mystery tour". Then you have those that run to any thread where "Random Walkers" are hanging out and the TA people start throwing their barbs. Hey, I was in that latter group when I first came to ET almost four years ago but I've since grown to understand price so much better since then.
This is not meant as a slam of this thread or you personally, kut2k2. I can tell you are just as pissed as I am at one side of this argument as I am at both.
Iâd like to see traders come together and at least admit that itâs possible to create profit in both environments without the usual snide comments attached to it, even if the other camp doesnât agree with why they do what they do. Edges come in a variety of forms. I personally do not see why anyone would primarily use math and statistical information to trade from but if that is what they have found to give them the profit they require . . . more power to them.
My thought process was, "how can the markets be random if I can create environments to consistently read and profit from them"? That was the beginning where the light bulb of discovery turned on.
Every market is made up of either; institutional traders, fund traders, market makers, large independent traders or small independent traders . . . or all of them or some of them. In any case these individuals or groups first, do not communicate collectively their reasons or decisions for taking positions or trades and second, their systems or methods very as much as their numbers. To say that their decisions, reasons, systems or methods for taking positions or trades and the executions that results from them are not random, as it relates to the whole of the market they are trading in, is foolhardy.
The markets are absolutely RANDOM . . . but that does not say that individuals haven't created edges to consistently profit from that randomness. I know lots of individuals that have. I do! I also know lots of individuals that have and do profit from trading on statistical and mathematical models and use little or nothing related to Technical Analysis. I couldn't and never will use strictly math or statistics in my decision process for personal, financial and psychological reasons but others do and do successfully.
What irritates me are the individuals that run to any thread where TA is mentioned and start blasting it as the next edition of the "magical mystery tour". Then you have those that run to any thread where "Random Walkers" are hanging out and the TA people start throwing their barbs. Hey, I was in that latter group when I first came to ET almost four years ago but I've since grown to understand price so much better since then.
This is not meant as a slam of this thread or you personally, kut2k2. I can tell you are just as pissed as I am at one side of this argument as I am at both.
Iâd like to see traders come together and at least admit that itâs possible to create profit in both environments without the usual snide comments attached to it, even if the other camp doesnât agree with why they do what they do. Edges come in a variety of forms. I personally do not see why anyone would primarily use math and statistical information to trade from but if that is what they have found to give them the profit they require . . . more power to them.