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.
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.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?
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 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.
Simple 100 day BO strategy still worked over last 5 years last time I checked - about 17% compound on ASX.
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..Quoting Howard, the days of long term holding, and simple trading algorithms are over.
his books that you have to purchase. You don't need
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.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.
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.So make it helpful. You stated you went down that rabbit hole, what did you find ???
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.
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?