There is a difference between sharing strategy code vs sharing generic tool like back testing or charting indicator, right?
Removing the golden handcuffs
- Thread starter fan27
- Start date
this tool spits out 'profitable' strategies
why would you want to sell that? t
oh wait, because they aren't profitable
got it
While I don't believe in the future of automated trading, I still feel that there is nothing wrong with selling tools to those who believe.
Here is the reason: there are numerous software development tools around. Prospective quants can either use them to develop something from scratch or find something more specific, polished for this exact task. It's like selling libraries/tools to software developers, or marketing tools to marketing experts.
If there is a demand for something, there must be a supply of some kind. It's a free market.
On the other side, I would not personally go into this niche because I don't believe. But, if I ever become a believer again, I will join the TS
Last edited:
Incorrect. As outlined here, the tool adds automation to the strategy discovery process. It is not going to magically "spit out" profitable strategies. The user has to have an idea of what features might make up a profitable strategy.
new approach for testing algorithmic trading strategies
I stopped reading right there. You don't believe in the future of automated trading.
Do you have any idea how much volume algo trading makes up today?
so it's just a backtesting tool where there is parameter optimisation?
what is new about that? every tool i use does that
Do you have any idea how much search traffic and advertising income does Google get today?
Why don't we launch yet another Google?
Newbie retail trader going into the quantitative niche has almost the same chance to succeed.
As for "big guys" - yes, let's daydream about becoming the next Google. It's fun when you are in your 20th, but it doesn't seem like a great idea after you were inside all these bubbles, starting from the very first .com one.
I'm not arguing about the fact that there are some small quants who are making money here and there. But, if you ask them if their life becomes easier over time, you will get the honest answer. For me betting on this niche is like trying to buy Bitcoin right now, following 2017 news and analytics.
As I told previously, I'm not against quantitative trading per se, I'm against blindly following this approach. I believe that a human PLUS AI will always win against a pure AI, no matter how "smart" it may be. From my previous niche I know that everything automatable eventually loses its profitablility, becoming commoditized, up to the cost of the hardware it uses.
Last edited:
Software development is also commoditized nowadays. All companies are investing in AI so they don't need programmers to write code for them anymore.
The same here: software developer + AI will always beat any software development AI
The main problem for software market isn't in AI, it's in the growing number of ready-to-use solutions. 10-15 years ago you had a chance to come into any niche, develop something from scratch in few weeks and get enough money to make a living out of it. Today software developers rarely develop anything brand new, they mostly support, integrate and extend existing systems.
As for companies investing into AI, if you had some deeper knowledge in the niche you will know that it's not about software development at all. It's about expert knowledge and data, about inputs for algorithms that are relatively simple and can easily be standartised. That's why we see progress only in those areas that have big and reliable data sets. No number of software developers can replace that.
The same here: software developer + AI will always beat any software development AI
The main problem for software market isn't in AI, it's in the growing number of ready-to-use solutions. 10-15 years ago you had a chance to come into any niche, develop something from scratch in few weeks and get enough money to make a living out of it. Today software developers rarely develop anything brand new, they mostly support, integrate and extend existing systems.
As for companies investing into AI, if you had some deeper knowledge in the niche you will know that it's not about software development at all. It's about expert knowledge and data, about inputs for algorithms that are relatively simple and can easily be standartised. That's why we see progress only in those areas that have big and reliable data sets. No number of software developers can replace that.
AI doesn't need many software developers. Core team will be a few researchers and maybe 1 or 2 software engineers to code it. I would argue most software developers don't have what it takes to implement a proper AI system.