# Comparing all TA methods statistically



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

Please see my post in the ASF feedback thread.

I wanted to know if traders who are very familiar with one or more techniques would be interested/willing to take part in a "trade off", one method against others.

Joe is ok with it.  If there are people who want to take part, please indicate here to get an idea of numbers.  We might need an excel person to keep track of trades and tabulate data.  Gains and losses would be compared with 'method' chosen.  The best method would be one where most % gains have been made across all traders and all trades.  It's not a competition where a person wins, but a method.

Hopefully this is of interest to everyone.  It's the best way I could think to compare TA methods against each other.

How it would work:

from the list of 10 stocks, analyze each, find one you like using a method you like.  If nothing appeals, make no trades.  Submit your trade to the ASF thread.  Buy and sell as you wish within the set time frame.

Obviously there are times when a certain stock may appeal on a number of different criteria.  eg. a 'breakout' stock may also be a 'momentum' stock may also be a 'candle pattern' set up.  In this case you can nominate more than one method for each entry and exit you make.  

Anyone?


----------



## tech/a (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Please see my post in the ASF feedback thread.
> 
> I wanted to know if traders who are very familiar with one or more techniques would be interested/willing to take part in a "trade off", one method against others.
> 
> ...




Well
Youd never follow my discretionary trading.
Id be for ever explaining why I did this or that.
Its a combination of 18 yrs experience not just VSA or Chart Patterns.

I think youll find with most of the experienced guys here theyd be the same.

Systems trading has a set rule base so when Im trading that again thats easy.

We dont care whats "Best" and my best wont be yours if you attempt to emulate it.
You wont be able to.

What you need to do is learn *HOW* to trade.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

This is not about comparing systems.  Systems are easily compared.  What's not easy to compare is TA methods that can't be sytematized, eg. trendline breaks, pattern set ups, elliot wave analysis, vsa etc etc.

I really need to know:

1. Can any of these non-systematizable methods stand on its own?
2. What can be thrown out all together?
3. What methods involve a high degree of subjectivity/user experience?

Don't you think that's useful info?

The 'how' is a different ball game, and I agree that's where the money is made.


----------



## Trembling Hand (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> I really need to know:
> 
> 1. Can any of these non-systematizable methods stand on its own?
> 2. What can be thrown out all together?
> ...



I got a better idea. Why don't we pick 10 different athletic events and do the same. 

I really need to know which one I can make a living out of.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

You're saying a good depth trader (for example) will not necessarily be a good elliot wave trader, which is a fair comment.

But allowing for that, don't you want to know if a good depth trader makes more or less than an elliot wave trader?  Maybe a "good" elliot wave trader makes 10% pa, whereas a "good" depth trader makes 100%.

See what I'm saying?  I'm wanting to isolate the method on its own.


----------



## Trembling Hand (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> See what I'm saying?  I'm wanting to isolate the method on its own.




How are you first going to isolate "good" which is by far the more important trait rather than the method.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

That's probably not possible. 

But if we had 100 participants, the skill factor across various methods would even out to some degree and become less influential in the measurements.


----------



## tech/a (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> This is not about comparing systems.  Systems are easily compared.  What's not easy to compare is TA methods that can't be sytematized, eg. trendline breaks, pattern set ups, elliot wave analysis, vsa etc etc.
> 
> I really need to know:
> 
> 1. Can any of these non-systematizable methods stand on its own?




Of course.



> 2. What can be thrown out all together?




Lots of stuff.All that you end up not using in *YOUR* discretionary method.



> 3. What methods involve a high degree of subjectivity/user experience?




All methods which involve discretionary trading---its *discretionary*.



> Don't you think that's useful info?




No



> The 'how' is a different ball game, and *I agree that's where the money is made*.




So what are you doing with ideas like the one above?


----------



## tech/a (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> That's probably not possible.
> 
> But if we had 100 participants, the skill factor across various methods would even out to some degree and become less influential in the measurements.




I doubt youll get 1 let alone 100


----------



## McLovin (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> That's probably not possible.
> 
> But if we had 100 participants, the skill factor across various methods would even out to some degree and become less influential in the measurements.




Are there even 100 regular participants on this forum? I would have thought it was around 50.


----------



## skc (21 March 2012)

Don't you think you should at least quote what you suggested on the other thread?



Gringotts Bank said:


> I had an idea for a one-off competition.
> 
> Let's choose say 10 speccy stocks (chosen randomly - so that no one is advantaged).
> Then a group of practitioners of each of the following methods* can analyze and submit trades (long only) on these ten stocks.... and see which comes out ahead over a set period of time.
> ...




There are many problems with the above competition and really won't yield anything meaningful (even if you can get 100 people to participate - which you won't).

First of all, the profitability of any method over a period of time is directly related to the number of opportunities available and the effectiveness in identifying such opportunities. Limiting the competition to 10 randomly selected stocks will not test the above, so any results are by and large useless. 

Secondly, unless you have a very large sample size in both number of participants and number of trades taken, random variations in statistical distribution of outcomes will make the results from your small sample competition statistical insignficant. 

You better off having a simple survey of practitioners and ask them what is the average return of their method from their experience and average that over all the respondents for that method. You'd probably get an answer no worse than this competition while saving yourself a fair bit of time.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

skc said:


> You better off having a simple survey of practitioners and ask them what is the average return of their method from their experience and average that over all the respondents for that method. You'd probably get an answer no worse than this competition while saving yourself a fair bit of time.




I like that idea apart from the fact that people tend to lie.  Perhaps I'll do it anyway, since it's easy to ask.


----------



## skyQuake (21 March 2012)

Here's a better idea:

1. Work for the ATO. 
2. Find the most successful/profitable traders
3. Audit them and claim they're doing inside trading.
4. Learn their methodology as they attempt to explain their legitimate strategy
5. ???
6. Profit!

BONUS:
3b. Turns out they were doing inside trading! Cut a deal. $$$


----------



## sinner (21 March 2012)

Why don't you do this yourself?

State of Trend Following report does something similar.

You would need to replicate their model IMHO across

* Trend following strategies
* MR or S/R strategies
* Volatility breakout strategies

http://www.automated-trading-system.com/state-of-trend-following-in-february/ for an idea of what I mean.

Needs to be diversified across a large basket of futures. SOTF uses 50 instruments from many exchanges.

My guess is the results would not be very useful, and only confirm what most already know (those who have done the research already) about market regimes and discretionary trading.


----------



## peter2 (21 March 2012)

1. Yes absolutely.
2. Anything that is not useful for each individual trader.
3. All of them.

eg MA crossover systems back test badly, but a competent trader can use the MA crossover and be very profitable. 

The "how" you mention is the simple process of skewing the numbers (trade stats) to ensure a profitable outcome over time. Every profitable trader does the same things even though they may use completely different methods. 
The methods don't matter. 
I repeat. The methods don't matter and again, the methods don't matter.

The methods aren't responsible for their profitable edge. Their methods provide them with trading opportunities. Proper trade management skews their results so that they are profitable over time.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

skyQuake said:


> Here's a better idea:
> 
> 1. Work for the ATO.
> 2. Find the most successful/profitable traders
> ...




LOL.  I have done something similar in that I have asked a few accountants about client traders (no names of course).


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

sinner said:


> Why don't you do this yourself?
> 
> State of Trend Following report does something similar.
> 
> ...



  Thanks for the link, but I'm more wanting to know about hard-to-test or impossible-to-test TA methods. Anyone with a profitable and purely mechanical system won't share it (nor should they).

My initial hypothesis on the other thread was that method would *not *matter... then maybe try to disprove that.  I tend to agree with you peter, but not totally convinced without numbers.  I have a feeling that certain methods are slightly easier to use and more robust than others, even if the difference is small.


----------



## tech/a (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Thanks for the link, but I'm more wanting to know about hard-to-test or impossible-to-test TA methods. Anyone with a profitable and purely mechanical system won't share it (nor should they).




Have done --- its now in a book.(Techtrader)
As for the impossible to test discretionary methods---how on earth are you going to follow something that cant be tested---worse how on earth am I or anyone going to put it down on paper and answer the myriad of questions generated by those who dont see what I see?



> My initial hypothesis on the other thread was that method would not matter... then maybe try to disprove that.  I tend to agree with you peter, but not totally convinced without numbers.




*RE READ*


> The "how" you mention is the simple process of skewing the numbers (trade stats) to ensure a profitable outcome over time. Every profitable trader does the same things even though they may use completely different methods.
> The methods don't matter.
> I repeat. The methods don't matter and again, the methods don't matter.
> 
> The methods aren't responsible for their profitable edge. *Their methods provide them with trading opportunities*. Proper trade management skews their results so that they are profitable over time



Now 
*RE READ.*

Now thats ALL you need know its in a nut shell.
Everything else is* UP TO YOU!*


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

tech/a said:


> Have done --- its now in a book.(Techtrader)
> As for the impossible to test discretionary methods---how on earth are you going to follow something that cant be tested---worse how on earth am I or anyone going to put it down on paper and answer the myriad of questions generated by those who dont see what I see?
> 
> 
> ...




A head-and-shoulders pattern can easily be identified and traded.  Backtesting is near impossible.  That's the sort of thing I'm talking about.

So why do you spend so much time and effort on VSA as opposed to just using a simple MA to find opportunities?


----------



## sinner (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> A head-and-shoulders pattern can easily be identified and traded.  Backtesting is near impossible.  That's the sort of thing I'm talking about.
> 
> So why do you spend so much time and effort on VSA as opposed to just using a simple MA to find opportunities?




I have no idea how you could consistently 'easily' identify a H&S but not be able to back test it? They are the same thing!

Anyway, Bulkowski has (as usual) done the hard work.

http://www.thepatternsite.com/hst.html

Google 'bulkowski head and shoulders' to get a better listing of bottoms/tops/complex stuff.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

sinner said:


> I have no idea how you could consistently 'easily' identify a H&S but not be able to back test it? They are the same thing!
> 
> Anyway, Bulkowski has (as usual) done the hard work.
> 
> ...




Yep, it's a great site.  One of my favs.  You can backtest H&S for Aus markets if you're willing to spend a huge amount of time on it.  But then I don't get my comparison with other non-pattern TA methods.

*tech, still waiting on your response!!  Is VSA a better method than a simple MA for identifying opportunities, or isn't it?*  I know this looks like some sort of Socratic entrapment, but you led yourself into it!  I wasn't aiming to do this.


----------



## tech/a (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> A head-and-shoulders pattern can easily be identified and traded.  Backtesting is near impossible.  That's the sort of thing I'm talking about.
> 
> So why do you spend so much time and effort on VSA as opposed to just using a simple MA to find opportunities?




The time and effort as in all analysis I consider.
Chart reading
Support resistance
VSA
Elliot.
Pattern recognition.
Has taught me to instantly "see" a setup which requires further time spent on it and or an exit setup which needs to be monitored.

The *APPLICATION* of what I see to execute a buy or a Sell is what your after.
What makes me pull the trigger.

Frankly I just dont have the time or inclination to walk you through the process.
It would take around an hr to mark up a chart and make notes on it.
Then Id have to answer questions and sometimes it would be 3 times in a day or 3 times in a week!!

Perhaps when I retire Ill disclose my trading accounts to those who want me to teach them and who have the $10000 + its worth to educate someone.


----------



## motorway (21 March 2012)

What is a TA method ? Do you mean various ways of arranging data ?

(into EWs , Into Bars and Volume , Into aggregations of same eg Averages  , patterns)

Maybe there is only ONE TA method

Has two phases

So we could see ONE method maybe with two approaches.

Identifying Turning points &
Following Trends

What else is there with position trading ?

My focus is on primarily on Identifying Turning Points
That of course means  measuring trends

But this is just the ONE thing

The only question becomes how best to arrange data ( maybe it does not need arranging , or minimal arranging ?.

( This is connected to more than the  one aspect of a buy or sell  leading beyond a particular trade )





Motorway


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

tech/a said:


> The time and effort as in all analysis I consider.
> Chart reading
> Support resistance
> VSA
> ...




LOL, I'm not an idiot!!

You're saying you analyze a chart using 5 different and quite complex methods, however you instantly see the trade set up and pull the trigger?  That statement contradicts itself.

And then *you *can do it in an instant, but it takes $10000 and many years to teach *someone else???
*
Thirdly, why use 5 relatively complex methods when all you need is a simple MA? 

Pffff!!!  Try again my friend.


----------



## peter2 (21 March 2012)

> So why do you spend so much time and effort on VSA as opposed to just using a simple MA to find opportunities?




Each of us develops beliefs about how the market moves, who's behind the moves or what each move represents (refer to the loony RED thread). We interpret the price movements, chart patterns and fundamentals based on what we know, what we think we know, what we understand (or don't), how we feel, etc. We seek information that confirms our understanding of the markets. Tech/a probably had an "aha" moment when he was introduced to VSA. Something clicked and he was able to see the trading opportunitites clearer. He was able to see repeating VSA patterns that he can use to earn profits. 

Each of us is different and will require different tools to "see" trading opportunities. I think some people even use FA to find trading opps.


----------



## Trembling Hand (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> You're saying you analyze a chart using 5 different and quite complex methods, however you instantly see the trade set up and pull the trigger?  That statement contradicts itself.



It certainly does not. Its called expertise.


----------



## tech/a (21 March 2012)

> LOL, I'm not an idiot!!




Debatable. Why the question?
When this is your conclusion.



> when *all you need *is a simple MA?






> You're saying you analyze a chart using 5 different and quite complex methods, however you instantly see the trade set up and pull the trigger? That statement contradicts itself.




Racing drivers/Surgeons/Engineers all take years to be able to learn their specialty.
They can in their field instantly see something positive or negative through experience.
I can show you and so can they but with all learners youll be sure to wreck the race car/kill the patient/have your structure fail.



> And then you can do it in an instant, but it takes $10000 and many years to teach someone else???




Yep I can teach you for $200 and leave you to it.---Failure.
$10,000 would be cheap.



> Thirdly, why use 5 relatively complex methods when all you need is a simple MA?




Because those 5 and others thrown in the mix work for me. A simple M/A works for me in a few systems---but not Discretionary.

*The exercise hasnt got off the ground and already your making assumptions.
Your not interested in what is being offered up to you from those who do trade.
This---is why I and many others cant be bothered.--Takes to long and you cop 
more flack than a bomber over Germany!*



> Pffff!!! Try again my friend.




im not trying anything simply responding to your question.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

No.

Anyone with a reasonably decent intellect can become a surgeon or engineer, and make good money guaranteed.  The same is *not *true for trading.  In fact the opposite is true.

Race driving is physical skill + memory.  

I read your threads on vsa and I see pavillion and a few others flapping around trying to follow what you're on about.  While I believe you make money, I don't for one minute believe that you could teach it successfully, even if given years and thousands of dollars.


----------



## sinner (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> No.
> 
> Anyone with a reasonably decent intellect can become a surgeon or engineer, and make good money guaranteed.  The same is *not *true for trading.  In fact the opposite is true.
> 
> ...




So wrong, so rude, so naive.

You treat us like a science experiment whenever you have one of these "ideas" and never respond well when the consensus is opposite to what you wanted to hear. This is not the first thread started by you simply because you were unwilling to carry out the hard work yourself.

What's your beef, GB?


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

Well if what you say is stupid... of course I'm going to pick you up on it!

On this thread I am very happy with the way sky, peter and skc responded.  skc was critical, but I couldn't care less.  What he said was sensible.

90% of surgeons would make $250,000 minimum, the good ones in the millions, and it's pretty much guaranteed.  If you think that's true of traders, well.... I dunno...what's your beef?


----------



## Trembling Hand (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> No.
> 
> Anyone with a reasonably decent intellect can become a surgeon or engineer, and make good money guaranteed.  The same is *not *true for trading.  In fact the opposite is true.
> 
> ...



Oh dear. Whats the diff between a trained surgeon or engineer and a wannabe trader?

One has structured training over 5-10 years racking up huge hours in fundamentals and then progressively getting more specialised. While the other has no structure and does no real work while flopping around looking for an easy way.

What you are proposing in the thread is you want to test mostly unproven participants to legitimise an approach.

Desperate?

Why can you not just do it yourself? I'm sure you will learn more.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

Yes there's a lot of preparation study - nuts and bolts stuff at university.

But as we've already found, trading "method" is not all that important.  So what is your nuts and bolts preparation, what is your ground work as a trader?

Once you've passed your physician's exams, the credo in surgery is "learn one, teach one", meaning that you observe *one *appendectomy, then you know how to do it, so you teach the next guy.

Totally different.


----------



## Trembling Hand (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Totally different.




LOL

Some seem to think so.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

Answer the question please!

If you were TH-University Incorporated, what units of study do you teach in years 1 to 6?  Let's make it comparable to our surgeon or engineer.  What methods do you teach and more importantly...why?  If you teach method x over method y, you must think or have some proof that x is more valuable/profitable or at least easier to use.

If it's just a matter of "watch the depth for 6 years", then that's not the same as learning a huge number of facts as you would with a bachelor degree.


----------



## tech/a (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Answer the question please!
> 
> If you were TH-University Incorporated, what units of study do you teach in years 1 to 6?  Let's make it comparable to our surgeon or engineer.  What methods do you teach and more importantly...why?  If you teach method x over method y, you must think or have some proof that x is more valuable/profitable or at least easier to use.
> 
> If it's just a matter of "watch the depth for 6 years", then that's not the same as learning a huge number of facts as you would with a bachelor degree.




To become proficient in the Technical disciplines I myself have studied takes many many hrs.
Elliott alone took around 500 hrs for proficiency
VSA 1000 ish
Chart Patterns 500 ish
Support and Resistance and the associated reading of 
Price action leading up to and at each S and R zone 750 ish.
Chart reading another 1000
Systems design and testing 2000 ish and counting.
Stadelmayer/Market profile 200
Point and figure 100 ish.
Oscillators 200 ish.
Application of analysis well over 5000 hrs
Risk and Position sizing 500 hrs.

*Your not going to know what you dont need to know until you know as much as you can about everything technical which makes up you the trader.*

There is a lot i know which just sits in the back of the brain and pops out when you least expect it.
Market profile for 1

Anyway---thats what I can think of off the top of my head.
Come back when you have a proficiency in all the above and perhaps then we can have a meaningful discussion.
Until then 
as Radge would say
"Enjoy the Journey"


----------



## Trembling Hand (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Answer the question please!




Maybe you could try looking at the answers as well? Like your last few threads on scalping, taking 2 tick profit , where it was pointed out the ten thousand problems with your approach yet you ignored them all. 

Now we have another thread, because I assume your scalping methods have gone t1ts up, where it seems all you want in it is an easy one, two, three steps to success in 5 days. 

At my Tremblers University the curriculum would be very similar to a medical degree structure actually.

Basic fundamentals of the market,
How each parts interact with each other,
Broad observations and play with as ALL approaches,
Picking of specialisation
Setting out paths to learn that specialisation.
etc etc

This is the basic prop shop model. Hell its all been said before. Here is a post from a Doctor explain how he trains traders,
http://traderfeed.blogspot.com.au/2008/09/introduction-to-trading-learning-how-to.html


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

so tech, how can you make a decision when:

Fib retracement says BUY
S/R says HOLD
Trendline says SELL
... along with ten other contradicting signals?  I have studied a lot of different methods myself and find they they will often strongly contradict each other.

So my decision was to pick one, which I believe is marginally better than the others.  Otherwise you will be obeying S/R on one trade, then denying it on the next.  How could you develop a confidence with that way of working?


----------



## sinner (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> so tech, how can you make a decision when:
> 
> Fib retracement says BUY
> S/R says HOLD
> ...




Geeeeeee 

Never heard of confluence before?

http://www.trading-naked.com/Confluence.htm







IF S/R says hold, fib says buy and trendline says sell and you put equal weight in all signals then 

S/R: +1
Fib: 0
Trendline: -1

Total = 0. Decision? Hold.

What about if (like in the above picture)

S/R: +1
Fib: +1
(Untested) Trendline: +1 (* 0.5 since untested) = +0.5

Total = +2.5. Decision? Buy.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

Trembling Hand said:


> Maybe you could try looking at the answers as well? Like your last few threads on scalping, taking 2 tick profit , where it was pointed out the ten thousand problems with your approach yet you ignored them all.
> 
> Now we have another thread, because I assume your scalping methods have gone t1ts up, where it seems all you want in it is an easy one, two, three steps to success in 5 days.
> 
> ...




Hang on, I read every single bit of feedback I get, thanks, no matter whom it's from.  I just so happens that more than half of it doesn't end up helping.  On the flipside, there are a couple of people in here who have been great, offering accurate and useful information.  I take it all in (apart from the dumb comments) and unlike a lot of dudes in here I always thank people who have given me something valuable.

If that's what prop shops do, shouldn't the graduates all be making good money?


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

sinner said:


> Geeeeeee
> 
> Never heard of confluence before?
> 
> ...




That's all well and good, but how are you going to weight the importance of the signals?  Based on what???  

See this is _the whole reason for this thread._ Are there methods that are better/more accurate/more profitable than others?  Even if slightly, it's worth knowing.


----------



## motorway (21 March 2012)

Start with the dynamics at the  Bid  ask Spread.

What is it ?

What is the market price ?

What moves these

Why do these move

Then link this to aspects of changes in Information and changes in Supply and Demand

Then Auction Dynamics

Get a grounding in what the reality of the market is

Then move on to defining trends
in terms of that reality

Etc

Very far from your list of "Signals" 

Motorway


----------



## tech/a (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> so tech, how can you make a decision when:
> 
> Fib retracement says BUY
> S/R says HOLD
> ...




7250 hrs should do it.
At the end of which your brain will automatically tell you what to accept and what to disgard.
It will also tell you how to manage the trade
How to handle or anticipate loss/profit and 
How to position size.
All in a few minutes.



> Support and Resistance and the associated reading of
> Price action leading up to and at each S and R zone 750 ish.
> Chart reading another 1000,Application of analysis well over 5000 hrs
> Risk and Position sizing 500 hrs.




But some elliott wouldnt go astray either.
Another 500 hrs.
Surely you have the picture by now.
Take a look at the RED chart analysis. Spot for a few months.
Ive many many examples on this board.
winners and losers.
Its how they are traded.


----------



## sinner (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> That's all well and good, but how are you going to weight the importance of the signals?  Based on what???




Are you kidding me? You can't tell which should have more weight, a 50% retrace of a monthly move or a 50% retrace of an intraday move? You can't tell how to weight a 50 day breakout versus a 50 hour breakout? Can't you weight a trendline that has been tested twice versus one that's been tested thrice?

Based on what? *Your understanding of the market structure.*



> See this is _the whole reason for this thread._ Are there methods that are better/more accurate/more profitable than others?  Even if slightly, it's worth knowing.




Oh right, now because you put it in italics I get it whereas before it made no sense to me.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (21 March 2012)

It's 5.20 in Melbourne, sun is out and a cool breeze blowing.

I'm going for a walk.

If you live in Melbourne anywhere near the Eastern Freeway bike track, give us a wave!

Over and out.

oh... and thanks for those last few replies.  Something to look at when I get back.


----------



## Trembling Hand (21 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> If that's what prop shops do, shouldn't the graduates all be making good money?



No guarantees for success but its the same for learning everything. Not everyone wins for many reasons. But its pretty much a time tested way to archive the _most _ success. 


Gringotts Bank said:


> so tech, how can you make a decision when:
> .
> .
> .
> How could you develop a confidence with that way of working?






Gringotts Bank said:


> See this is _the whole reason for this thread._ Are there methods that are better/more accurate/more profitable than others?




YES!!
Experience.


----------



## Sir Osisofliver (22 March 2012)

Hi GB,

I am currently building a course that is designed to upskill our employees in the area of Analysis, both technical and fundamental.  At this stage of the economic cycle buy and hold is still a viable strategy due to underlying dividend yields.  In the not too distant future however this will change and our current crop of grads are woefully underskilled to deliver results using technical and fundamental analysis over shorter-term timeframes. Even though these youngsters are RG146 compliant - they simply lack the skills necessary for the roles we want to move them into.

To let you know the scale of the course...the *course outline* is an inch thick document. I anticipate that the course duration will take *9 months*...full time in classroom not including assignments and examinations to make them merely "competent". They will still need oversight from more senior staff. 

Many here are pointing out the requirement of experience to become successful, and a course is simply designed to speed the process of experience.  Methodology is largely irrelevant IMHO. Depending upon how you like to learn, how you like to process information and data, depends on what tools in the arsenal are going to work best *for the individual*. That is the reason for the length of the course...to expose these youngsters to a wide variety of methods and have them apply these different methodologies to determine which work for *them *and which do not. One is not better than another, its the individual that determines the success. Tech's comment about being able to visually assess a chart at a glance is correct...there are three people in the company who have that level of skill...and it's taken an average of 15 years of experience to get there amongst the three of us.

Cheers

Sir O


----------



## tech/a (22 March 2012)

Thought I may add that the actual cost to myself in the process of learning T/A has been considerable.Ive attended 4 seminars that was about $1500.
Software thats around $10k for all of it.
Data feeds $250/mth for 10 yrs (Say) Books around 5K in 18 yrs.
Let alone my time invested of around 15000 hrs.

Just ask anyone who has done some form of degree the costs.
So if your going to do this you better be serious and be able (Start up capital) to do it justice in the end.


----------



## Gringotts Bank (22 March 2012)

Sir Osisofliver said:


> Hi GB,
> 
> Depending upon how you like to learn, how you like to process information and data, depends on what tools in the arsenal are going to work best *for the individual*. That is the reason for the length of the course...to expose these youngsters to a wide variety of methods and have them apply these different methodologies to determine which work for *them *and which do not.
> Cheers
> ...




Makes perfect sense. 

Wouldn't it save a lot of time if you could asses each student at the start (or get them to perform a self-assessment) to find out which method is going to suit them?

eg. a student who is more visually oriented will learn charting much more readily than FA.  This student then skips the FA units and hones his visual skills.  No time wasted.  Only downside would be the course length (and income from same) would be greatly reduced.


----------



## Sir Osisofliver (22 March 2012)

Gringotts Bank said:


> Makes perfect sense.
> 
> Wouldn't it save a lot of time if you could asses each student at the start (or get them to perform a self-assessment) to find out which method is going to suit them?
> 
> eg. a student who is more visually oriented will learn charting much more readily than FA.  This student then skips the FA units and hones his visual skills.  No time wasted.  Only downside would be the course length (and income from same) would be greatly reduced.




That's a very intelligent comment GB - it's actually the first work item in the first module. It covers investor psychology in depth. It covers a self assessment using a VARK model, Gardiners Multiple intelligence model and a risk modelling exercise (internally developed) involving both a psychometric and sensitivity analysis. 

This will help tune the student into the methodologies that suit them the best and there is an elective component to the course structure, (specifically designed that way so those whose preference is FA or TA can focus on applying those methods). 

For internal purposes however the grads will complete all modules. Our investment strategy (governed by our investment committee) involves the production of an approved product list within direct equity (IE what shares are approved for purchase for clients in the next 30 days and a buying range) - including research justification from both a TA and FA perspective. The grads need to to have a working knowledge of both. Anyone who wants to do the course who we don't employ could probably cut the course length down to about five months full time or about a year part-time.

For anyone reading this...don't ask me about it...don't PM me about it...aside from the fact it's still in development and likely won't be complete until the end of this calendar year, I *will not* be using ASF as a marketing channel for this product....I don't think Joe would like that.

Cheers

Sir O


----------

