New study says: Technical Analysis is garbage

Here's my two cents on technical analysis. It works. I started with some money, came up with a T.A. system, and watched the money slowly erode away. So I refined the system and started again. Still unsatisfactory. After 100 trades or so and lots of refining, I started to move ahead. Now my account is higher than it ever was, but not altogether that high.

But here's the thing. I was working with ETFs that traded multiples of broad markets. Hardly any bias in them in either the up or down direction and after adding in my transaction costs, the real winner was my computer broker.

So now, I'm combining T.A. and Fundamental Analysis and it looks like its working. I've picked out "several" stocks that meet certain T.A. criteria, but also meet certain Fundamental Analysis criteria too. By gosh, it seems to be working. I'm now convinced that to do very well, I need both. Yeah, some of you guys are the exception and I tip my hat to you. BTW, if anyone wants to collaborate on this method over the long-term, PM me.

So I say, just do whatever makes you money. Don't worry about what its called. And if you're losing money, change your program.

SM
 
Quote from StLouisTrader:

mark brown origional qoute: losing money one trade at a time.....
More...

i might be a loser but at least i dont hide behind a fake name and post shit in hindsight.
 
Quote from MarkBrown:

i might be a loser but at least i dont hide behind a fake name and post shit in hindsight.
More...

thx for admitting to being a loser pls admit this to all the folks getting your "live es calls". Wooho. I really really hope u r not asking folks to pay for your worthless calls.
 
Philosophy 101 classes teach us that you cannot prove a negative, you cannot prove that something cannot be done... so when somebody says "TA doesn't work" well, they can't have proven it.. so it's a baseless assertion.

Pshychology 101 will introduce the Big Five Personality Traits. They are Openness, Conscientiousness, Extraversion, Agreeableness, and Neuroticism. If somebody provides a baseless assertion that "TA does not work", they are not conscientious regarding philosophical argumens and probably not open to new things, at least not open to things that require work to master... so they score low in two of the five categories. Further, if they are on an internet forum posting baseless assertions there is a likelihood that they are pretty neurotic, so they are low in a third category... they are basically just being disagreeable so that's a fourth low score and they aren't very extraverted or they would be out doing something.... LOSERS IN ALL FIVE CATEGORIES WITH A PHILOSOPHY 101 BONUS LOSER POINT !!!!!!!!!

Since they have proven that they score low on openness then my message to them follows:

You are absolutely correct, everybody that has any sense at all knows that TA does not work and cannot work. If somebody posts trades in realtime, it's not enough proof for any sane person... any real trader would laugh anybody posting real trades in realtime out of their big, expensive office...

Later, losers

:p
 
Quote from StLouisTrader:

mark brown = bernie madoff wannabe. W/o the skill or motivation. Still he tries. Try hard mark try hard.
More...

lame - also the more you post the more i know who you really are, stupid.
 
Quote from R. Raskolnikov:

"The biggest part of fundamental analysis involves delving into the financial statements. Also known as quantitative analysis, this involves looking at revenue, expenses, assets, liabilities and all the other financial aspects of a company. Fundamental analysts look at this information to gain insight on a company's future performance. A good part of this tutorial will be spent learning about the balance sheet, income statement, cash flow statement and how they all fit together. "


http://www.investopedia.com/university/fundamentalanalysis/



Did you even know what quantitative analysis was with regards to mkt or security analysis when you typed your smart ass response to me? :p
More...

Your insistence that the Black-Scholes Model for Options pricing is technical analysis warrants no further response from me. I've told you Black-Schole is quantitative analysis, not technical analysis. If you want to know what a company is worth, just calculate it's book value. That doesn't work in practice because everyone has different expectations about any company's future, thus fundamental analysis doesn't ever get you your answer. If you're looking at why we bottomed in March it goes no further than the median S&P 500 price to book ratio was around .65.

Now that I've said that, go study the Black-Scholes model until you can calculate the value of an option on just a financial calculator like the BA-II Plus from Texas Instruments. Then, once you've realized that the model nearly perfectly prices options and their and other derivate instruments without any balance sheet, income statements, or any financial statements, come back and tell me you've seen the light.

Till then...

<i>Investopedia has nothing on real market professionals. It's a tool for the investing public to understand things that they aren't trained to know, like you. </i>
 
My insistence is that if we are discussing the 2 types of analysis be it for the general market/index or an individual security or an option or a currency etc etc then it MUST fall into either TECHNICAL analysis, FUNDAMENTAL analysis or BOTH of them. "Neither" is NOT A CHOICE. This is my whole point, that seemed to fly right over you head.







Quote from bwolinsky:

Your insistence that the Black-Scholes Model for Options pricing is technical analysis warrants no further response from me. I've told you Black-Schole is quantitative analysis, not technical analysis. If you want to know what a company is worth, just calculate it's book value. That doesn't work in practice because everyone has different expectations about the company's future, thus fundamental analysis doesn't ever get you your answer.

Now that I've said that, go study the Black-Scholes model until you can calculate the value of an option on just a financial calculator like the BA-II Plus from Texas Instruments. Then, once you've realized that the model nearly perfectly prices options and their and other derivate instruments without any balance sheet, income statements, or any financial statements, come back and tell me you've seen the light.



More...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top