hmm.no edges in the markets
- Thread starter chimera
- Start date
Chimera virus, jack explained 5 decades of inward trading psychoses as a paradigm with 3 applications.
I call what I have 3 methods, risk management, and probably his ultimately meaningful phrase of a paradigm capital management arbitrage.
The explanation is that I get to be QuantMaster forever.
When you distinguish right and wrong with lunacy, there won't ever be right or wrong so just don't trade, ok? Leave it to professionals and read more of the website.
You'll find who knows what and what's what and that's what's up, so come back to your thread when you have figured out who knows what's what cause I can tell you you don't know what's up and that's what's up.
Come back when there's recognition as to the nature of your question because we all trade based on expectations of expectancy but the extent to which we expect our expectancy to manifest is as much a part of faith as any religion.
When you've cleared up where real money is traded then talk to us about why there's success everywhere but around you.
Edge?
Algorithms have the edge. They are blunting every market and are providing very good liquidity at the margin.
It's a shame that most on here are still scratching their head trying to get the edge. Fact is that bots already have limit orders at these prices, based on some complicated maths, before you can even blink.
True edge is not personal or variable -; it just exists.
There's still money to be made in the markets if specs can price well and press on direction...
Yeah, like I (kinda) said already; the spec should not try be beat the MM. The Spec should put pressure on the MM
Perhaps someone who knows what the hell I'm talking about can write a tutorial for the masses - something like join bid or even outbid by a penny i.e: COMPETE. - Then we might get some better moves rather than shitty chop.
Algorithms have the edge. They are blunting every market and are providing very good liquidity at the margin.
It's a shame that most on here are still scratching their head trying to get the edge. Fact is that bots already have limit orders at these prices, based on some complicated maths, before you can even blink.
True edge is not personal or variable -; it just exists.
There's still money to be made in the markets if specs can price well and press on direction...
Yeah, like I (kinda) said already; the spec should not try be beat the MM. The Spec should put pressure on the MM
Perhaps someone who knows what the hell I'm talking about can write a tutorial for the masses - something like join bid or even outbid by a penny i.e: COMPETE. - Then we might get some better moves rather than shitty chop.
You are not fully understanding, so I'll explain. My argument is with TA, the self proclaimed price action traders who claim edge exists by watching price gyrations of a single instrument on a chart. These folks claim to rarely have losses and lure noobs to books and other snakeoil to learn these methods. Someone has to warn against the absurdity of these claims. There will and can never be edge by looking only at a chart for intraday trading
Investing , stat arb, etc. sure it can be profitable.
surf
If everyone got smart and used these methods then there'd be some good money to be had from being dumb.
Surf is misleading you and its just a facade when he says warn the noobs.
His arguments, attacks are specifically with 3 traders here at ET that say they trade exactly the way he has implied. Also, those particular 3 traders are not vendors but they do recommend many different authors that claim to be profitable traders via technical analysis...many of the books are old and can be gotten for free at any decent library.
Further, one particular person (ET member cornix) that surf frequently targets his debates too has a trade journal here at ET and that person clearly shows his "frequent" losses along with broker statements whenever he trades. Currently, I believe he's like a breakeven trader or small loss in his trade journal.
In addition, surf runs around here recommending (promoting) several vendors that he's closely affiliated with and one particular vendor gives him financial compensation...both vendors use price action or technical analysis in their trading. If that's not hypocrisy, I really don't understand the meaning of that word.
Everyone else that surf debates with do not trade a single instrument, do not believe technical analysis alone can be traded profitably by itself and frequently calls surf out whenever he promotes those that use TA or price action in their trading.
Continuing with the hypocrisy, surf himself uses TA but attempts to minimize his own use of TA via saying its for visual purpose only.
surf is also on record here in your thread in stating that the reason prop traders have an edge of retail traders is because retail traders use TA. That's misinformation. The fact is that some profitable traders at prop firms do use TA and/or price action trading but its not their most important trading tool. Therefore, the real reason prop traders have and edge over retail traders involves liquidity rebates, lower transaction costs, arb, compliant office (rules), access to proper capitalization, access to other trading tools that the typical retail trader does not have access too or underestimate the importance of such. My point is that it has nothing to do with TA.
Therefore, getting back to the issue of Gambling.
I strongly do agree with you that most retail traders are gambling because most retail traders are not properly prepared to trade and most retail traders do not manage their trading like a business as you'll typically see such being done as such at a prop firm, institutional firm and similar. By the way, prop traders also have a high failure rate. It would be very naive or misleading for me to suggest that they do not have a "real edge".
The real edge is the trader regardless if he/she is retail, prop, institutional or whatever. They all have a shelf life expectancy too.
With that said, I'm done with this thread...too difficult trying to keep up with the misinformation.
:eek: