Trading profits are 2nd to dick size when it comes to most-lied-about topics.
So, you MIGHT know ONE person who has consistently made decent returns with canned indicators.
Further, I'm pretty sure you don't know anybody who makes those returns with, say, half a billion dollars.
So, you MIGHT know ONE person who has consistently made decent returns with canned indicators.
Further, I'm pretty sure you don't know anybody who makes those returns with, say, half a billion dollars.
Quote from nzbryant:
Ok, fact 1: These quants make 5-20% returns. Maybe 30% in the case of Renaissance.
Fact 2: Nitro and some others say 1 in 100 traders use indicators, rest use math edge.
Implication 1: 99 in 100 use fundies (and mutual funds do worse than the index) or quant methods (see returns above) - so 99 in 100 are NOT getting 40%+ returns consistently.
Implication 2: Basically noone gets really good returns trading.
New fact 1: I know some people who make 100-300% a year and have done for five years.
Implication 3: Dont listen to everything Nitro and Braswell say else you will end up in the 99 out of 100 who make 5-30% a year.
There is nothing special about 'quant data' that is 'better' than indicators. If there was then these "99/100" would be getting better returns than they do.
Question 1: Nitro - so you use quant methods unrelated to indicators? Some OHLC stuff? So you get the same average returns as all the other quants?
