hmm.no edges in the markets

[marketsurfer]

Amen, Nitro--- as the Price Action TA dreamers go scurrying back into their hovels when th light of logic is shined upon their delusions. PA TA has value as a descriptive contextual tool only--- all of the same patterns, trends, trend lines, SR exist in random data sets within the same parameters as the real market--- exist--- So these folks believe their automation can make profits from randomness?

The only price action or TA that matters is that which occurs after the entry for contextual reasons---

They all personally know the truth, even the leaders, yet they continue to Klingon to the ancient ideas. For god sake, men--- open your eyes!

 

[marketsurfer]

Quote from sheda:

To stay competitive and increase the edge on the timescale and method they have chosen to employ.



Hedge funds and instutitions use complex means of finding and analysing their trades and keeping their risk to a minimum, is that not expected with the amount of capital under managment and position sizes used? You say they use TA after they have entered to maximize a gain or contain a loss, they could do neither using TA if TA did not have the ability to show the market turning in the first place.

The typical TA day/swing trader can but does not need to employ those methods, they can monitor several products constantly or just go where the action is.

You are OWNED by Nitro. Really feeble response.


You really should listen to real pros like Nitro, and Brett steenbarger rather than keep losing money consistently by employing flawed methods.

 

[nitro]

Quote from sheda:
To stay competitive and increase the edge on the timescale and method they have chosen to employ.

Seriously? So, I can either put up a chart, spend $100/M on a good charting package and an IQFeed, or I can spend $100K a year on cross connect fees, untold millions on highly skilled programmers, millions on database fees, more millions on hardware to store it all, more millions to distribute the application, more hundreds of thousands on FPGA or ASICs or GPU, the list GOES on and on. So let me see

a) $1200/YR expenses to make a fortune. [hypothetically - everyone should be retired by now on ET]
b) $10,000,000/YR expenses and make a fortune. [done all the time]

Hmmmmm, seriously? On what planet would you EVER take b over a if a were true?

Hedge funds and institutions use complex means of finding and analyzing their trades and keeping their risk to a minimum, is that not expected with the amount of capital under management and position sizes used?

What? What does that have to do with the price of tea in china? If TA works every firm would hire a room full of them, period. In fact most institutions might keep one on hand, if that. It has nothing to do with size. If anything, TA and PA would scale infinitely, so that is a plus for it, IF IT WORKED.

You say they use TA after they have entered to maximize a gain or contain a loss, they could do neither using TA if TA did not have the ability to show the market turning in the first place.

The typical TA day/swing trader can but does not need to employ those methods, they can monitor several products constantly or just go where the action is.

That is a subtle point that I don't want to go into, however, your question/point is valid. But it is valid not from the point of view you think it does.

LOL. What am I doing wasting my time. Whatever.

 

[marketsurfer]

Good points Nitro. As a note of clarification when banks and financial firms have TA on staff, it's generally part of the marketing department and has nothing to with market research. In other words they use TA to describe to their old lady type clients what has happened. The market ignorance of these "gurus" is remarkable. Goes to show everyone is a genius in a bull market. It has embolden and made arrogant even the TA cult with their word games and long drawn out explanations that make no sense.

 

[igotcash]

true or not, there has been documentaries on wall street firms doing HFT because they admit guessing at market direction is not a good way to spend time. I think 10% (billion+) of revenue was derived from HFT, and the risk is very small. they are exploiting technology, and that is way smarter than guessing a H&S objective. why play the game with monkeys, when you can turn into your own exchange and reap billions. maybe that game is ending.....so maybe next game is selling bond instruments with no charts. oh yea, that game is ending too. OK, then maybe the next game is taking the other side of a big bank and then forcing them to go under. who knows. but guessing a trend line is not in the future......that is 1980's crap.

 

[nitro]

Quote from marketsurfer:

Good points Nitro. As a note of clarification when banks and financial firms have TA on staff, it's generally part of the marketing department and has nothing to with market research. In other words they use TA to describe to their old lady type clients what has happened. The market ignorance of these "gurus" is remarkable. Goes to show everyone is a genius in a bull market. It has embolden and made arrogant even the TA cult with their word games and long drawn out explanations that make no sense.

Yeah, the most amazing thing is, these people continue to trade using these methods, with their $25,000 account, maybe taking in $25000 a year after expenses. And that is the really good ones. And then they say it works, not taking into account the other years they lost or the risk they took to extract that from the market. The capacity of the human animal to self-delusion never ceases to amaze me.

To TA&PA people, once and for all. It takes money to make money. You need some sort of edge on entry, and TA may work in certain circumstances if you are lucky enough to have access to those types of markets that are still inefficient (like over the counter). Even then, you need to put on size, and the risk is not trivial. Forget about 99% of it on index futures, equities, options on either of them. If you do find it, it is a needle in a haystack, and it can stop working at any moment. TA&PA may have slightly more validity on FOREX if you had access to special liquidity and the right structure, but even there it is questionable and probably only works in very special cases, sporadically. Nothing to build a business on, and it is gambling with the thinnest of edges if that.

 

[marketsurfer]

Nitro,

You mean 2500 per year, right :eek:

 

[nitro]

Quote from marketsurfer:

Nitro,

You mean 2500 per year, right :eek:

No I mean $25000. I have seen people do that using TA style analysis on a $10000 account and make $25000. Larry Williams did far more right?

It is possible. The problem is that it is not consistantly repeatable and NOT A WAY TO BUILD A BUSINESS. You are gambling that one year you lose money, and now, unless you started with a bunch of money so you can sustain your gambling habit, you are screwed. You can trade this way if your income comes from somewhere else, but it better not be your only source of income.

The real players MAKE LOTS OF MONEY EVERY DAY, like clockwork.

 

[igotcash]

with "zero" funds, play poker. $25 turned into 9 million for that moneymaker guy. and plenty of times guys have cashed at the big table for a nominal fee. poker is much better gambling than trading with 25k, or less. turning 25k into 50k is great, but in poker you can make far more with far less. of course you can lose it all faster, or just as fast. I am inferring you are a good gambler. so, yes, if you have under 50k for futures and 100k for stocks, I would recommend poker. trying to trade is delusional. in over 10 years my best trade turned a 60k investment into 150k. after taxes, etc....minus losses elsewhere, etc.... yea, you don't get rich doing that. and no, i'm not going to gamble playing poker. but for people with little money, I think they should not trade and go all-in. or not gamble at all.

 

[sheda]

Seriously? So, I can either put up a chart, spend 100/M on a good charting package and an IQFeed, or I can spend $10M a year on cross connect fees, untold millions on highly skilled programmers, millions on database fees, more millions on hardware to store it all, more millions to distribute the application, more hundreds of thousands on FPGA or ASICs or GPU, the list GOES on and on.

You can do what you want, but if you want to put the premise to me that the only hedge funds and insitutions left trading are all in the constant habbit of spending fortunes to gain micro seconds, I will laugh at you. However, if your method is on such a timescale it requires microseconds, I agree, to stay competitive and keep their edges they Have to spend a fortune to keep up the with technological arms race.

Have all other market participants and methods disapeared? No.

What? What does that have to do with the price of tea in china? If TA works every firm would hire a room full of them, period. In fact most institutions might keep one one hand, if that. It has nothing to do with size

Am I speaking to an IT coding monkey who has never traded in their lives? Ok it has nothing to do with size, sending one billion to work in the market is exactly the same as flipping 100 futures or 1000 shares, you can use exactly the same market surveillance to locate trades and the exact same methods to address risk, its not as if managers with different goals managing vastly different amounts of capital using different strategies face different challenges and use differing methods and approaches to over come them.

That is a subtle point that I don't want to go into, however, your question/point is valid. But it is valid not from the point of view you think it does.

LOL. What am I doing wasting my time. Whatever.

You have a valid point but I dont want to go into it, and its not valid in the way you think it is, LOL why am I wasting my time "whatever"

Ok. . .