New study says: Technical Analysis is garbage

R. Raskolnikov · Oct 21, 2009

"New study says: Technical Analysis is garbage"

This just in.....

New Study says those who conducted this study are garbage

MarkBrown · Oct 21, 2009

this is true you better have money to make money. it is not easy to take a small account and make it big. i have failed many times at it. only when i trade "believing" in advance that i have lost all the money i am about to trade, am i then usually a winner.

so in other words dont trade with money you cant afford to lose and yet maintain your lifestyle. scared money = loser.

ps only 25% of my income is from "other than ie real estate" trading ventures.

SethArb · Oct 21, 2009

IF T.A. is "bunk"

how come the BOTS do this all the time ?

www.youtube.com/watch?v=QDhJbVaRqeY

ambienCR · Oct 21, 2009

Quote from MarkBrown:

this is true you better have money to make money. it is not easy to take a small account and make it big. i have failed many times at it. only when i trade "believing" in advance that i have lost all the money i am about to trade, am i then usually a winner.

so in other words dont trade with money you cant afford to lose and yet maintain your lifestyle. scared money = loser.

ps only 25% of my income is from "other than ie real estate" trading ventures.

well, thanks for telling the truth.

a rare commodity in this biz

bravo

tomdavis · Oct 21, 2009

In many financial/economic academic studies the conclusions are driven largely by the assumptions. In other words, if you change the assumptions you change the conclusions. This is a classic case. If you change TA methodology assumptions, you change the outcome.

bwolinsky · Oct 21, 2009

Quote from TrueRange:

C2 Realism Factor 80%

Your system is not realistic at 80%.

bwolinsky · Oct 21, 2009

Quote from R. Raskolnikov:

Dumbass, you just TOLD me that options pricing is NOT based on fundamentals....hence you are using some form of TA to make your trading decisions!!

Idiot. Pricing options does not use fundamental analysis. TA is not any part of it. Go look up the Black-Scholes model. It values options nearly perfectly, and does not use fundamental analysis. Since you're ignorant of modern options pricing theory, I'm probably wasting my breath on someone that only thinks he knows how to trade.

bwolinsky · Oct 21, 2009

Quote from MarkBrown:

err - not really www.oddballsystems.com

Those were really horrible systems if you ask me. Always being in the market never works. It drawsdown too much and too frequently. I'd suggest for your systems finding more specific filters for your systems. I'm not saying they aren't profitable, but they do appear a bit hard to stomach. Too much work in trading everyday.

R. Raskolnikov · Oct 21, 2009

"Black and Scholes are the mathematicians who developed a model (formula) that determines theoretical value of an option based on volatility and time to expiration."

Excuse me fat boy, but measuring volatility is a subset of a greater category called TECHNICAL ANALYSIS

Quote from bwolinsky:

Idiot. Pricing options does not use fundamental analysis. TA is not any part of it. Go look up the Black-Scholes model. It values options nearly perfectly, and does not use fundamental analysis. Since you're ignorant of modern options pricing theory, I'm probably wasting my breath on someone that only thinks he knows how to trade.

TraderZones · Oct 22, 2009

Quote from makloda:

There is a boatload of papers on SSRN defying the non-sense that is the Efficient Market Hypothesis. Classic TA is only one piece of the picture.

boatload of non-sense for EMH? IF you ignore a boatload of evidence for EMH. emh has huge amounts of evidence, ignored by trader wanna-bes.

The general reality is, many try to trade, but their money goes to others, everyone is assuming you will be successful. Classic opinion base on fluffy opinions rather than evidence based.