I can prove "Random walk theory" wrong

[DMC31]

The days we trade are not random, I can tell you buying long every day will lose money, with a stop loss or not.

 

[DMC31]

Our trades are not random, If you went long every day, placed a stoploss, it would lose money.

 

[James Austin]

I chose to write a proposal to Google, because I believe they would be interested in more than just a trading system, it does prove some stock markets can be predicted,
I am not here to sell or endorse any company or any product, just my research.

this forum has encountered many many "plots and schemes", so the reception here is likely to be suspicious

better to approach the appropriate research institution.

it is there that the minds absorbed in this stuff on a daily basis can disect your theory and system, prove or disprove it. as well as have it published if it shows merit.

that is, if all you are interested in is research . . .

 

[Agentm]

I chose to write a proposal to Google, because I believe they would be interested in more than just a trading system, it does prove some stock markets can be predicted,
I am not here to sell or endorse any company or any product, just my research.

its like saying you have found the holy grail with your research but cant present it to anyone or you would lose it..

you want help in marketing you say

ok.. what are you offering?

 

[Sean K]

I am not here to sell or endorse any company or any product, just my research.

Ah, so you're here to sell your research.

If it smells like spiced ham, and tastes like spiced ham, it's probably .....

 

[beamstas]

Ah, so you're here to sell your research.

If it smells like spiced ham, and tastes like spiced ham, it's probably .....

spam (SPiced hAM)!!!




Just as a side note: Anyone can make a system and backtest it for 1000's of % profit. It's called DATA MINING. IE: You fit your system around backtested data. Just because it worked in back testing doesn't mean it will work again! Remember the market will never exactly repeat itself.

 

[Agentm]

dmc

use the density functional theory instead

or this

Repeat until ER becomes constant. Then wait for the asymmetric and
distribution of artificial resurgents to particulate

this will give you up to date and ground-state function.


ahhh hang it all..

i am going out for a random walk..

 

[DMC31]

Skepticism is expected; I can and will prove it in time,

There is no curve fitting involved, all trades are the same, bought at market open, 4% stop loss set, and sold on market close. Back tested, probabilities are constant through any market condition, trending, or sideways.

When you have a few shares that produce 60-70% probabilities of winning, and combine them into a single system, the probabilities increase to 68-72%.

There is no scalping; all trades are let run to market close, winning or losing.

 

[Cartman]

spam back testing doesn't mean it will work again!

gidday Brad --- i hope we are on speaking terms now ---

agree ---- backtesting can be manipulated to produce whatever results u want if u r trying to sell something ----

forward testing results with real money over an extended period ---- those kinda results will get people interested

dmc

use the density functional theory instead

or this

Repeat until ER becomes constant. Then wait for the asymmetric and
distribution of artificial resurgents to particulate

this will give you up to date and ground-state function.


ahhh hang it all..

i am going out for a random walk..

lol ---- good to see u still have a SOH Agent considering the grief ADI must be giving u


PS DMC ----- are u talking buying the Index or specific shares ??

 

[tech/a]

I can prove "Random walk theory" wrong

There are quite a few here who can prove it correct as well with trading statements to prove it!

 

[beamstas]

gidday Brad --- i hope we are on speaking terms now ---

agree ---- backtesting can be manipulated to produce whatever results u want if u r trying to sell something ----

forward testing results with real money over an extended period ---- those kinda results will get people interested

Ha Ha Cart, like i said, no problem between us, two people are allowed to disagree right? It's not against the law.... yet

Im with you on this one, i won't believe this until i see some real trades with real money.

There are quite a few here who can prove it correct as well with trading statements to prove it!

I'll kindly upload my winning trades, that oughta prove random walk theory correct!!


Thanks..
Brad

 

[doctorj]

Didn't Benoit Mandelbrot already find rather persausive evidence against random walk using cotton data in the 1960s?

 

[skc]

Is "Random walk is wrong" the same as "I have a trading system that makes money"? Must you have the second to prove the first?

 

[Sean K]

The crowds are starting to make their way into DMC's head office to pick up a nice new little black box .....

No free samples for us unfortunately.

 

[Trembling Hand]

The crowds are starting to make their way into DMC's head office to pick up a nice new little black box .....

Classic

 

[schnootle]

The results also prove “Random walk theory” is wrong.

If you can as you suggest prove random walk theory wrong, you would get on the cover of "Nature" easy, and become quite famous.

If you do attempt to get anything published from this, i would suggest you avoid the term "prove".

Us engineers and mathematicians and the like have a bit of thing for terminology, and this is a fast way to get put in the crackpot basket.

 

[MichaelD]

2009: 45.75% return (33 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 72.72%)

2008: 233.63% return (232 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 67.24%)

2007: 96.29% return (208 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 62.98%)

2006: 116.87% return (199 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 68.84%)

2005: 121.14% return (205 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 74.14%)

2004: 87.92% return (202 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 65.32%)

2003: 159.21% return (209 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 69.37%)

2002: 65.28% return (155 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 52.25%)

Total return: 926.1% over 7 years and 2 months.

Let's see:

Start with $10,000 and compound profits

2002: $16,528
2003: $42,842
2004: $80,509
2005: $178,037
2006: $386,110
2007: $757,896
2008: $2,528,570
2009: $3,685,391


And you want to publish research disproving random walk theory and need suggestions for how to market this?

It's simple.

Step 1: Trade the system with YOUR money for 10 years.
Step 2: BUY Google Finance.
Step 3: Publish your results.

Problem solved. You can pay my consulting fees directly into my account at Bear Stearns.

 

[nizar]

My research began back in 2005 which stemmed from an idea I saw when looking over stocks on the NYSE and NASDAQ markets. My brother (a database computer programmer) custom built a program to test out this idea.
The results certified to us, that stock market direction (from the opening price to the closing price of the day) could be predicted with high probabilities, incorporating this method.

The results also prove “Random walk theory” is wrong.

All trades back tested were, buying at the market open, setting a 4% stop loss, and selling on market close. No trades were ever held overnight.

Here are the results tested from January 1st 2002 – 27th February 2009.
Results:

2009: 45.75% return (33 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 72.72%)

2008: 233.63% return (232 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 67.24%)

2007: 96.29% return (208 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 62.98%)

2006: 116.87% return (199 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 68.84%)

2005: 121.14% return (205 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 74.14%)

2004: 87.92% return (202 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 65.32%)

2003: 159.21% return (209 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 69.37%)

2002: 65.28% return (155 days traded), (Probability of profitable days: 52.25%)

Total return: 926.1% over 7 years and 2 months.

The results above are all long trades, when testing the system live, we were getting slippage on the short trades at market open, but when buying (long), we were guaranteed the opening days price. (When shorting stocks on market open, U.S markets requires a long trade before a short), that is why we were not getting filled at the market open price on short trades.

All stocks within the system trade 1-7 million in average volume per day and all trade on U.S exchanges.

Our method goes beyond being a high probability trading system with great returns, it proves random walk theory wrong, and certifies predicting stock market direction.

We contacted Google finance last week with a proposal, to prove our research, and are waiting for a reply.

Any feedback would be much appreciated on how to go about marketing our research and analysis,

What was your universe of stocks exactly?
Anything that trades between 1-7million per day?

 

[vincent191]

Whereas I find it hard to accept the Random Walk Theory, I also find it hard to accept that you can predict the sharemarket with a high degree of accuracy on a daily basis.

 

[DMC31]

I am not endorsing any product, website, black box or other commercial fluff, just the research, I can prove the results are 100% accurate.
I am flattered by skepticism.
I am happy if the thread ends here.
Thank you.