ig0r:
>You are profitable due to well thought out money
>and position management.
Ok, I'll agree that the MM and PM strategies are carefully thought out, but if applied to randomly generated price/volume data, these same strategies are 50/50 (before transaction costs). We have tested over hundreds of thousands of years of this data and are quite confident of this finding.
The results of this testing would seem to invalidate your above claim.
ig0r:
>If not, then you are simply taking advantage of a
>temporary market characteristic that will soon be
>gone, impossible to predict when
This claim I will be unable to prove or disprove -- it just depends on your definition of the word "temporary". Is a system profitable since 1992 gaining only a "temporary" advantage? Of course it can be argued that is it, but I would be hard to argue that such a system is not stable enough to profit from during this "temporary" phase.
If a system can be devised such that through rolling optimizing and forward testing can profitably withstand over 50,000 stock years of real data (from only price/volume) and survives all tests against the random, I'd have to say that in my world the statement that price and volume isn't enough it just plain wrong.
JB