The best traders in ET

Quote from R. Raskolnikov:

I AM, but you are not providing a convincing argument. I use PAST price, past price is included as part of TA, therefore I use TA. You are trying to tell me I do not use TA and I'm telling you you are wrong.

Why are you having such trouble with this?
More...

He trades volatility. Volatility is a derivative of price. If he accepts that price is part of TA, he has to accept that he uses TA.

His sense of self-worth is tied to the label quant.

Ergo, the problem here.
 
It's just so odd how some people have such a negative connotation when it comes to TA that they will do whatever they can to try and justify that their methods do not incorporate TA, even though they are using past price. It's baffling, yet provides some insight into the human psyche.



Quote from justrading:

He trades volatility. Volatility is a derivative of price. If he accepts that price is part of TA, he has to accept that he uses TA.

His sense of self-worth is tied to the label quant.

Ergo, the problem here.
More...
 
Quote from justrading:

He trades volatility. Volatility is a derivative of price. If he accepts that price is part of TA, he has to accept that he uses TA.

His sense of self-worth is tied to the label quant.

Ergo, the problem here.
More...

I can't resist, this is just so naive.

Might as well say--

He studies the planets, the planets are part of astrology, therefore he must call himself an astrologer.

Game-set- match.
 
It's simple logic, if TA involves using past price to make trading decisions and if ones method involves using past price to make trading decisions, then ones method involves TA.

Quote from marketsurfer:

I can't resist, this is just so naive.

More...
 
Quote from nitro:

Well I have traded or trade all of those. A kalman filter is TA if you simply turn around the definition of an indicator. Particle Filters have no correspondence in the chart world. The others are standard techniques used by all traders, analysing the order book.

Most traders prefer to trust things they can see, so they can tell simply if something works or not by inspecting it visually. Perhaps that is the ultimate definition of TA. That is no small thing, especially if you are not trained in computer science, statistics, and mathematics.

The difference between an Exponential MA and a Kalman filter are subtle, and won't make a hill of beans of a difference when an instrument is tracking and indicator.

I cannot comment much on PFs since I have never used them.

All [non market-making] trading is buying low and selling high. The means to decide if something is high or low is predicting on some tme frame the likelyhood of persistence or anti-persistance. After many years of doing this, I, like George Elliot, am beginning to "understand the place for the first time."
More...


"All [non market-making] trading is buying low and selling high."

I agree with that sentence, there is too much polarity in these debates making them fruitless discussions, an open mind is an amazing thing. :)
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

I can't resist, this is just so naive.

Might as well say--

He studies the planets, the planets are part of astrology, therefore he must call himself an astrologer.

Game-set- match.
More...

You must be pretty thick if you do not appreciate the difference between reasoning and ignorance.

Better pray your daughter has her mother's intelligence.
 
Quote from dbphoenix:

…

The value of a company is what it is,

….
More...

Actually, there is no objective value of a company other than the market price. Fundamental analysts want to make others believe differently.

The value of a company is determined by assumptions about its future and these assumptions are VERY subjective! You can see that also in the wide range of price targets of analysts for the same company.

In the end, the only reliable "value" of a company is the one the market determines. It's also the only relevant one.

Even value investors - in order to make a profit - rely on other investors acknowledging the "higher value" of the resp. asset AND be willing to pay more for it compared to the earlier investors in order for the price to increase. Hence, they are also dependent on the effects of supply and demand which ultimately moves price.

I've worked professionally as a fundamental analyst, but realized this soon. That's why I'm a TA believer now (wide definition of TA here).

EDIT: corrected first sentence to avoid misunderstanding.
 
Quote from karoshiman:

Actually, there is no objective value of a company. That's what fundamental analysts want to make others believe.

The value of a company is determined by assumptions about its future and these assumptions are VERY subjective! You can see that also in the wide range of price targets of analysts for the same company.

In the end, the only reliable "value" of a company is the one the market determines. It's also the only relevant one.

Even value investors - in order to make a profit - rely on other investors acknowledging the "higher value" of the resp. asset AND be willing to pay more for it compared to the earlier investors in order for the price to increase. Hence, they are also dependent on the effects of supply and demand which ultimately moves price.

I've worked professionally as a fundamental analyst, but realized this soon. That's why I'm a TA believer now (wide definition of TA here).
More...

For me, only insiders know how to really use the right data to do the correct fundamental analyst, no matter government insider or big corp insider.

TA, only believe the possible objectively tested kind, and after you really backtest it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top