Tools being used by your trading competition

[Wysiwyg]

I'm quite confident you wouldn't share anything that can be used profitably by someone posting on a public forum, and nor would I.

Duck made the good point there are short term and long term trading guides on ASF. Peter2 s the only poster I have seen with reguarly 'detailed and reasoned' trade activity posted. When he is buying and selling posted in advance. The time he has given to help others practically is remarkable and rare.

 

[Wysiwyg]

Are we really competing against other traders, or just our own minds?

You would have run thousands of strategies in Amibrioker so I assume you came to the conclusion that indicator based strategies are generally 50/50 over time and everything works sometimes? Then there are the biases and assumptions of getting price and quantity and other gotcha's. It's a treadmill with the "profitable trading system" carrot dangling up front. What people need to know is the market has countless nuances which leaves all participants at risk at all times. People don't "know", they play higher probabilities based on knowledge/expereince and set risk as desired.
When I trade there is price movement and how I plan to react. Nothing else.

 

[Newt]

Yes, but after 5 years of so running Amibroker backtests, people would learn most trend following strategies deliver just under 50% win/loss but can still pull a profit over the medium term with proper position sizing, possibly a market filter. e.g. Simple 100 day BO strategy still worked over last 5 years last time I checked - about 17% compound on ASX.

I wouldn't for one minute pretend that the edge is a anything other than a pretty fine line, but it is there. Most people seem to get caught up in "being right" for a high % of the time, when its more like having a casino-like edge where you have to be playing very consistently over a long time to make money (the casino that is, not the players )

 

[Gringotts Bank]

You would have run thousands of strategies in Amibrioker so I assume you came to the conclusion that indicator based strategies are generally 50/50 over time and everything works sometimes?

I have some systems that definitely work. Making enough to live off is another matter.

I like your Epictetus quote, but I'd change it slightly.

 

[tech/a]

I have some systems that definitely work. Making enough to live off is another matter.

I like your Epictetus quote, but I'd change it slightly.

I would suggest it's more a case of having enough capital to
To make a living from.

 

[Value Hunter]

I am not saying that quant strategies do not work or that Howards ideas do not work. But as a fundamental investor it bothers me when quants attack fundamental investing when decades of evidence and proven results (and practitioners on this forum) show that it works. In particular Howard's baseless assertion earlier in the thread where he claimed that fundamental investing does not work.

To Quote Howard "It is my opinion that market efficiency limits the use of fundamental information and that it is of near-zero value to individuals other than those with a seat in the boardroom and their best friends." Can Howard provide any proof or evidence whatsoever for his baseless and false assertion?

He provided no evidence of this claim and when I called him out on it I got silence in response.

 

[Indoril]

I am not saying that quant strategies do not work or that Howards ideas do not work. But as a fundamental investor it bothers me when quants attack fundamental investing when decades of evidence and proven results (and practitioners on this forum) show that it works. In particular Howard's baseless assertion earlier in the thread where he claimed that fundamental investing does not work.

To Quote Howard "It is my opinion that market efficiency limits the use of fundamental information and that it is of near-zero value to individuals other than those with a seat in the boardroom and their best friends." Can Howard provide any proof or evidence whatsoever for his baseless and false assertion?

He provided no evidence of this claim and when I called him out on it I got silence in response.

Hate to nitpick here but he did say it was his opinion. He didn't claim it as a fact.

 

[Sir Burr]

Simple 100 day BO strategy still worked over last 5 years last time I checked - about 17% compound on ASX.

Quoting Howard, the days of long term holding, and simple trading algorithms are over.

I'm simple and can't understand why, maybe 17% is unacceptable with these new tools? What happens when everyone is using these new tools?

 

[Trembling Hand]

Quoting Howard, the days of long term holding, and simple trading algorithms are over.

Come on guys. You are all just being trolled. This thread was never about information or explanation of any method. If there was any intent to show the possibility within these pages of the usefulness of ML the OP would have shown it. But all that was ever given as input were inflammatory claims about other peoples approach and reference numbers to pages in his books that you have to purchase. You don't need a complex Machine Learning algo to draw the correct conclusion of expected outcome from those two inputs..

 

[Sir Burr]

his books that you have to purchase. You don't need

Haha thanks, that's a relief!

 

[Gringotts Bank]

When people have their beliefs challenged, it's always aggressive.

Give me all your intellectual property for free or I'll say it's bullsh1t.

 

[Trembling Hand]

When people have their beliefs challenged, it's always aggressive.

Give me all your intellectual property for free or I'll say it's bullsh1t.

Nah its not that at all. I'm actually using Python to find trades. Its not ML but I have spent a bit of time going down that rabbit hole too. But you cannot expect to make extraordinary claims without having extraordinary proof. Howard failed to offer anything close to that to further the discussion. He cannot rely on an appeal to authority as proof of an extraordinary claim. And along the way managed to kick sand in the face of everyone else who didn't follow his process.

Hardly a helpful thread.

 

[tech/a]

Perhaps You could ask Stephen Simmon?

 

[DaveDaGr8]

Nah its not that at all. I'm actually using Python to find trades. Its not ML but I have spent a bit of time going down that rabbit hole too. But you cannot expect to make extraordinary claims without having extraordinary proof. Howard failed to offer anything close to that to further the discussion. He cannot rely on an appeal to authority as proof of an extraordinary claim. And along the way managed to kick sand in the face of everyone else who didn't follow his process.

Hardly a helpful thread.

So make it helpful. You stated you went down that rabbit hole, what did you find ???

 

[brajeevn]

To Quote Howard "It is my opinion that market efficiency limits the use of fundamental information and that it is of near-zero value to individuals other than those with a seat in the boardroom and their best friends." Can Howard provide any proof or evidence whatsoever for his baseless and false assertion?
...In long term holding period (may be useful due to stock split/dividend etc..) is profitable. But Howard advocate for short term holding period due to RISK involved. In that sense, I think his opinion is right especially if huge money is invested. Holding a stock for short term period do not need to consider fundamental value (Price action have no logic to define or predict). My trading success solely based on Howard's methods..... and always admire him for his contributions..

 

[tech/a]

What constitutes " Help "
What constitutes " Proof "

What exactly do you want to see?

 

[Trembling Hand]

So make it helpful. You stated you went down that rabbit hole, what did you find ???

Actually, I was going to but was expecting Howard to follow through with something better than wild claims about us all being on the scrap heap and assumed his stuff would be far better than what I have been able to achieve. And had tried to move the thread on a few time asking for examples from Howard not because I wanted to steal his IP but it would have been a catalyst to move away from the Quant v TA V Fundie Bore feast.

Maybe I'll have a go in another thread at another time.

 

[Indoril]

https://arxiv.org/abs/1208.4429
A paper on the common mistakes of machine learning in the markets. I haven't read it yet, I'm on mobile right now, but thought others might be interested. Its not a long read.

 

[captain black]

https://arxiv.org/abs/1208.4429
A paper on the common mistakes of machine learning in the markets. I haven't read it yet, I'm on mobile right now, but thought others might be interested. Its not a long read.

Thanks for posting this @Indoril, always something new to learn

 

[Gringotts Bank]

https://www.wired.com/2016/01/the-rise-of-the-artificially-intelligent-hedge-fund/

"In the simplest terms, this means it creates a large and random collection of digital stock traders and tests their performance on historical stock data. After picking the best performers, it then uses their "genes" to create a new set of superior traders".