Technical Analysis, from a Quant's Perspective
- Thread starter fatrat
- Start date
I read something by a quant on TA where he had a 90% win rate. Using Shapiro-Wilkes W statistics rendered normal by log transformation, subsequent analyses using log-transformed data using a suitably large eugonadal reference population across multiple commercial immunoassay platforms, with statistically significant, but only quantitatively minor, variations between assays.
I'm sure you meant babble. However, if you look closely, you'll notice the person to whom you responded doesn't have the same username as Jack Hershey.
- Spydertrader
an IMPOSTER is among us! hear hear!!
surfer
surfer
Jack - More people will read your stuff if you don't include my name in the title of it. A very clear explanation of what you are currently doing. I see that you suffer in your old age from the same syndrome I do, the inability to resist overcomplicating things. Exclusively an engineer's disease, I think. Glad you are looking at fast charts. It really is academic which leads which, P or V. As Steve46 wrote recently, what counts is the alternation from price stationarity to price randomness and back. As to predicting that for an index future's, there's an easier method than imagining a relationship to another index that gives a full minute's warning. I use it every day in NQ. But only until I get those two bottles of Gloria. Don't want to overuse it, or it might quit working, like your stuff, haha!. Best regards. - Mike
See Attached.
the argument over whether TA is subjective is kind of silly.
similar to whether Fundamentals are subjective.
both can (and usually do) employ INTEPRETATION, which is of course subjetive, as people use them
however, some trading systems and rules, whether based on Fundies, TA, or both can be entirely objective.
for example.
If a trade setup is : buy YM @ close if TRIN > 1.9 and price < R2 and volume >= 1.2 times average volume over last 20 days
that is entirely objective.
and purely a TA setup.
similarly, one could have a setup, like the "dogs of the dow", which is also entirely objective (several variations, but each are objective)
similarly, a moving average cross is entierly objective.
a dogs of the dow where you buy the 5 dow stocks with the lowest P/E is an objective fundies approach.
a fundamentals approach that is more peter lynchian, is of course more subjective
similar to whether Fundamentals are subjective.
both can (and usually do) employ INTEPRETATION, which is of course subjetive, as people use them
however, some trading systems and rules, whether based on Fundies, TA, or both can be entirely objective.
for example.
If a trade setup is : buy YM @ close if TRIN > 1.9 and price < R2 and volume >= 1.2 times average volume over last 20 days
that is entirely objective.
and purely a TA setup.
similarly, one could have a setup, like the "dogs of the dow", which is also entirely objective (several variations, but each are objective)
similarly, a moving average cross is entierly objective.
a dogs of the dow where you buy the 5 dow stocks with the lowest P/E is an objective fundies approach.
a fundamentals approach that is more peter lynchian, is of course more subjective
(gasp!) Successful automated TA systems with verified real-time track records are not available at these sources!? Systems at Wealth Lab are very weak. Your TA books serve up lots of general gobble-de-gook and verbage and fluff...
Please post specific details(Easy Language code ,or other code) on only one of the many mechanical TA systems for us to understand systematic non-subjective automated trading which uses TA chart interpretation (so even a quant can appreciate real-time performance).
define a "bull flag" so that it can be tested.
thank you,
surf
ps. many thanks to <b>MAGNA</b> for sending me a PM regarding this thread. otherwise it would have been lost forever