How to determine the strength of a trend

Quote from Charlie Dow:

Ask your mechanic how many tools does he use at one time to diagnose a single problem on that car. ONE

An automobile of any value is a far more complicated an object than the Market. You don't think so because you have created a complicated environment out of it. You are comparing something with hundreds of moving parts and hundreds of specific functions to something that has only one function and two directions. The Market only goes Up or Down, even in consolidation it only goes Up or Down but in tighter and tighter ranges until it breaks out. The Market (the Indices specifically)never flat lines. How many tools do you need to verify the direction price is going on any single chart at any given time? Traders are their own worst enemy and purposely complicating it, confirms that.


I guess I better give back ALL this money then huh!

:D
 
Quote from Samson77:

I guess I better give back ALL this money then huh!

:D

I didn't say it couldn't work for you. You have gotten used to trading in a complicated environment but it is more than evident that traders, as a whole, can not. The failure rate for traders is staggering and you only need to look at what they are being instructed to do to see why.
 
Quote from primemover:

spike,

i am merely quoting the main proponent of trend following. definately not a non believer. this was found on his site.

prime :D
Oh, there is a "main" proponent? Well, then, he certainly speaks for everyone across the land, doesn't he?

As Bugs Bunny would say, "What a maroon." With that in mind, may I suggest that your next handle, when your current one invariably gets banned in due course, be primemaroon?
:D
 
Quote from primemover:

any rudimentary time series analysis applied to stockmarket price series will clearly show that trends do not exist, except in hind sight. for example, the weekly changes in the sp futures during the 1990's is about -0.08. the correlation between daily changes is about -0.04 meaning the chances of a rise following 2,3,4 or more consecutive declines is approximately 10% higher than normal. based on this simple analysis, tradeable trends do not exist.

if you can present ANY studies of ANY stock price movement that shows trends when randomness is accounted for, please show me. i am open to learn something new.

the simplistic trend following mantra of buying new highs and selling new lows is exactly what the public does, and guess who gets caught holding the bag? i even saw one of the main proponets of trend following state that most traders dont buy the highs( or sell the lows) and this is why they fail. how convoluted can one get?? by definition, most traders buy new highs or they would not be new highs.......

prime
Hark! primemaroon/hanksurfer is quoting "research" (by Victor Neiderhoffer?) much the same way that Tome Cruise quotes the "research" of Scientology. Do you even have a basic grasp of what you are referring to? Have you ever actually studied statistics? Or are you merely mimicking someone else's personal bias as your own and this, then, is your own "research?" As the alleged proponent of science that you claim to be, you are invariably aware that statistics can be tortured to say just about anything you want it to say. And VN seems to be no slouch in this regard.

Please do yourself a favor and don't be such a VN toady.
 
Quote from Charlie Dow:

I didn't say it couldn't work for you. You have gotten used to trading in a complicated environment but it is more than evident that traders, as a whole, can not. The failure rate for traders is staggering and you only need to look at what they are being instructed to do to see why.

Thank you for acknowledgement of FACT of MY income:p

I have tried many different SIMPLE approaches like 1,2,3 set ups to simple pattern recognition techniques.

Personally I found these to be very ineffective over THE LONG RUN (sure they can work for a while).

I respect the fact that you believe the market is just UP, DOWN and Sideways and it's a simple matter of supply demand.

To each there own!

It is still my belief that the market is very simple in it's reaction BUT very complicated in the CAUSES of that reaction.

Thus the market is a sophisticated, complex environment and a true professional will have a deep understanding of the process and reaction.

Sorry but I know how the BIG boys make decisions and they do not decide to BUY/SELL based on some simple factor and they are the ones that MOVE markets, not market makers and floor traders.
 
Quote from primemover:

any rudimentary time series analysis applied to stockmarket price series will clearly show that trends do not exist, except in hind sight. for example, the weekly changes in the sp futures during the 1990's is about -0.08. the correlation between daily changes is about -0.04 meaning the chances of a rise following 2,3,4 or more consecutive declines is approximately 10% higher than normal. based on this simple analysis, tradeable trends do not exist.

if you can present ANY studies of ANY stock price movement that shows trends when randomness is accounted for, please show me. i am open to learn something new.

the simplistic trend following mantra of buying new highs and selling new lows is exactly what the public does, and guess who gets caught holding the bag? i even saw one of the main proponets of trend following state that most traders dont buy the highs( or sell the lows) and this is why they fail. how convoluted can one get?? by definition, most traders buy new highs or they would not be new highs.......

prime

New alias eh Surf?

Now, I really think Surf is an intelligent guy; I'm not going to get into a flame contest here. But I seem to recall us going around in circles on this topic a while back for about 100 pages or so. So as not to beat a "dead horse", I'll just re-state my main point from that discussion.

Trends exist. They have to, or else no one would trade. If there are no trends, there are no profits.

When you place your trade based on your models and Gann channels, you are making a bet that the trend will form or continue in the direction of your trade. Period. There is nothing else to it. You tend to be a trend predicter, not a follower. Regardless, the underlying concept is the same; get on board the trend.

As I recall, no one could satisfy your claims. Severl people (myself included) tried to offer very basic trend following systems based on historical results as proof. Surf wants numerical, quantitative proof. Basic correlation tests and the like will not show the trend. But other methods will show the existence of trends.

Anyway, that's all I will toss out on the subject of trend existence. We already spent too much time arguing this one.
 
Algorithms can be designed to identify trends, and their assumptions, precision and revision determine their success.
 
Back
Top