Kudos to MMs

Quote from nitro:

You know, I have thought about this for a long time, looking under every nook and cranny for explanations, and I have come to one conclusion. Sometimes the only predictor of a market is itself. This can happen when there is chatter like QE2 and other government talk that while does not get actually implemented, the market believes will take place anyway. In fact, the government hopes that the market does it's job for it instead of having to shove it down its throat. Other times the government is sending up a test balloon.

The question becomes, how on earth do you model something that is not quantitative? Further, markets have a tendency to overshoot. How do you decide how much of something that has no tangible value has overshot?

I don't know the answers to these questions, but if I did, all it would change is the chain widths so that I would still be playing for convergence, but I would be doing it more conservatively on certain types of momentum. Using VIX, or at least traditional VIX does not appear to resolve the problem when the market is melting up, although it does when the market is melting down.

Anyway, I feel that NFV and particularly ANFV is very close to being "true", but this particular problem and the best way to model important "future news" is nagging at me.
More...

Look at "Why stock markets crash" by D Sornette he has a nice theory that sometimes markets feed on themselves and go parabolic (has nice equation for it) then a tiny insignificant thing happens and a crash results, basically the market has gone hyper critical. Although I am sceptical the S&P has gone parabolic unless of course you look at it from 666 the maybe it has.
 
Quote from dont:

Look at "Why stock markets crash" by D Sornette he has a nice theory that sometimes markets feed on themselves and go parabolic (has nice equation for it) then a tiny insignificant thing happens and a crash results, basically the market has gone hyper critical. Although I am sceptical the S&P has gone parabolic unless of course you look at it from 666 the maybe it has.
More...
Thanks, I looked at this book long ago. While the theory was interesting, nothing in it ever clicked with me. Now, that may change!
 
We want new lows into the 1 CT hour. Between 1CT and 2CT markets tend to drift higher. Then come 2 CT, new lows again, closing on lows. One scenario in an almost infinite number of them. But this pattern repeats itself with uncanny recurrence.

I think we see 1155 SPX today.
 
NFV 1089.45. ANFV 1131.94. SPX 1182.49.

I am short SPX from 1188.10, ANFV. Maybe I should not even post it, since it appears after the fact.
 
I have added one more "field" to the equations of ANFV. I will be posting that along with NFV and ANFV. From now on, ANFV will be called NFV(1). That means NFV with one more field added. So this new one will be called NFV(2).

I know this seems absurd. Hang with me a little longer. I think I have maybe one last field, NFV(3) (I know what the field should be, but I don't have the equation yet) before all these get called the holy grail, simply FV.

As of right now:

NFV 1091.77. NFV(1) 1134.7. NFV(2) 1170.09. SPX 1183.71.
 
Quote from nitro:

S ESZ0 1178.50, NFV(2).
More...
NFV 1084.53. NFV(1) 1123.69. NFV(2) 1158.86. SPX 1182.79.

Out @1178.50, B/E

Transfer to S SPX @1182.79, NFV(2).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top