Yes and No. I know where you are coming from.
Obviously if you don't care about fundamentals you are not trying to predict where its going. however you are trying to predict a percentage of winning trades.
You are trying to predict where the share price is going and relying on it to change substantially.
You are using semi -proven human behaviour patterns to predict in which direction the share/market changes.
Sure, you are using capital management so you don't have to be right all that often.
You need positive expectancy to make money. You need an edge.
That's why you test the theories before implementing them. You can't tell me that all people who try to use technical analysis do well. There are many who lose, just as occurs (probably even more so) in fundamental investing.
Sorry if it's come up somewhere before but whats wrong in taking both sides here. Rather than Analysis vs Fundamentals why cant the two work together as a tool to buy shares? Does it have to be black and white?
I tend to look at both when buying a share. Even as an example with RED the Tech analysis won out over the fundamentals here but even so i dont think i would be in the black with that particular share if it weren't for the technical charts of the the share. Unless fundamental means long term i dont see any reason for the two work as one.
Refreshing to find some sensible and balanced comments on this thread instead of the usual vehement criticism of FA by TAs and vice versa.Sorry if it's come up somewhere before but whats wrong in taking both sides here. Rather than Analysis vs Fundamentals why cant the two work together as a tool to buy shares? Does it have to be black and white?
I tend to look at both when buying a share. Even as an example with RED the Tech analysis won out over the fundamentals here but even so i dont think i would be in the black with that particular share if it weren't for the technical charts of the the share. Unless fundamental means long term i dont see any reason for the two work as one.
Back in October 2010 robusta issued the challenge.
Anyway here we are 18 months from the original post and i though it would be interesting to see how the comparison of robusta's "value" portfolio was travelling against both my portfolio of discretionary "cheap high dividend" stocks and the ASX200
Looks like im way out in front of both robusta and the ASX200
~
Use both I figure... why not hey?
Technical analysis = squiggly line voodoo. Yeah I really just said what most of us fundamental guys actually think.
I have yet to hear of a single person that has made a few hundred million from technical analysis alone and managed to actually keep it until death. As for fundamental analysis there are plenty of billionaires who fit that category.
Tell me what does a technical analyst do when buying an unlisted asset with no price history such as a small business for sale? They have to look at the fundamentals don't they?
Technical analysis is absolute non-sense and has no basis in fact. In fact calling it analysis is akin to labeling a tarot card using fortune teller an analyst.
By responding, you actually did enter into an argument.You clearly have no idea! Tell that to the prop firms that are taking large sums of money out of the market on a consistent basis, and all the firms running HFT systems, etc. You think that's just luck?
....
Anyway, that's all I have to say on the matter. I'm not going to get in to an argument with you about it. It makes no difference to me what you believe.
I am no expert on high frequency trading but from what I have read in articles and seen in documentaries the majority of high frequency trading systems seem to make money by front running large buy or sell stock orders (usually from institutional investors). Many of them have very high computing power, the highest speed internet, have their computers close to the exchange where orders are processed in order to get an advantage in terms of trade execution by a few milliseconds.
In addition to that there have been many claims of market rigging (accompanied by investigations) in regards to high frequency traders who somehow get leaked or insider access to classified information so they know the what orders will be placed before they are actually visible to the market.
I doubt many high frequency traders legitimately make money from technical indicators. However that being said I admit I do not know too much about the topic and I could be wrong about all of the above. Simply put high frequency trading is something I care little about because it doesn't affect my investing strategy at all (buy assets at or below intrinsic value).
"Let your winners run"
The next string to the bow. You need to have either an anticipated target OR a mechanism to determine the end of your trading trend in your time frame which maximises your time in a trade in your chosen direction.
You see there are ONLY 3 ways (Other than Arbitrage) That you can profit from your Trading/Investing.
More aggregate winning profitable trades than aggregate losing trades.
OR
Bigger aggregate Winning trades to Aggregate losing trades.
OR
A combination of both.
If you know the above and you've put those understandings in place you'll be trading time frames and set-ups that in the long run will deliver you positive expectancy through your trade management and the understanding that there are NO SECRETS.
The traders trap is to constantly buy that new book or try that new trading technique
in the hope that it will find and give an EDGE.
That edge is staring you in the face
REGARDLESS OF METHOD USED.
I firmly agree with you on letting winners run (but from a fundamental perspective). If you have bought shares in such a company that keeps increasing their earnings (companies like Cochlear, CSL, Resmed, REA Group, TPG Telecom, Dominoes Pizzas, etc) do not sell the shares just to take a profit, even if the shares get somewhat overvalued. However if a company keeps putting out consistently poor results you should consider selling even of the shares may appear to be undervalued (a.k.a. a falling knife or value trap).
As Peter Lynch pointed out always cut the weeds and water the flowers, not the other way around!
Cynic absolutely insider trading goes on. I have noticed in the days or week leading up to a profit upgrade many stocks quietly trend higher. At the end of the day if a company is doing better than expected many employees (I am not just talking about the top management) will know about it. Even if they don't directly buy shares for fear of being accused of insider trading they may tell family and friends who will buy shares leading up to the anouncement pushing the shares up.
But overall I still don't think its a reliable indicator. Besides by the time you realize the shares are trending up before the announcement it is too late and most of the gain has already been made as it typically happens within a short window (from my observation anywhere between one or two days and a week or slightly longer sometimes)
Technical analysis = squiggly line voodoo. Yeah I really just said what most of us fundamental guys actually think.
I have yet to hear of a single person that has made a few hundred million from technical analysis alone and managed to actually keep it until death. As for fundamental analysis there are plenty of billionaires who fit that category.
Tell me what does a technical analyst do when buying an unlisted asset with no price history such as a small business for sale? They have to look at the fundamentals don't they?
Technical analysis is absolute non-sense and has no basis in fact. In fact calling it analysis is akin to labeling a tarot card using fortune teller an analyst.
Technical analysis = squiggly line voodoo. Yeah I really just said what most of us fundamental guys actually think.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?