Thoughts on some of the absurdity of multi-currency analysis. - page 3
You are missing trading opportunities:
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
Registration
Log in
You agree to website policy and terms of use
If you do not have an account, please register
The top-starter's hints can be interpreted as follows:
A unit (lot) of money is expressed as a quantity of a given currency, i.e. it is "owned" by the local market for that currency. For a variety of reasons, this unit is "transferred" to the markets of other currencies. There is a cost in any such transfer. One of the goals of a rational holder of such a unit is cost minimization, in other words, the money supply tends to go through the path of least resistance. It is well known that costs are inversely proportional to market liquidity, which is in turn positively correlated with the volume of commerce and mutual investment between the two countries. Therefore the mass of money often flows through the dollar, i.e. along the path of least resistance.
P.S..
A problem for reflection:
The notion of overbought/oversold degree, which cluster indicators in particular show, are subjective concepts, i.e. they show the degree of deviation from the level of the instrument's subjective balance in the eyes of the actor (e.g. trader). The basic strategy of this person is to buy an oversold instrument and to sell an overbought one, for example via the cross.
Now the question.
Let D be the currency of your deposit. Your trading leverage is 1:1.
Why is there practically no profit if you buy a rising X/Y pair, if the D/Y pair is rising at the same time ?
Поэтому часто денежня масса перетекает через доллар, т.е. по пути наименьшего сопротивления.
Only not often, but almost always.
EUR/GBP is ALWAYS a consequence of EUR/USD and GBP/USD. There is no such thing as the other way around for a cross to "rule" a major.
The good thing about world currencies is that absolutely everything can be measured in absolutely certain parrots. And rates between each other follow from these rates with parrots.
Majors are 100% market information.
Только не часто, а почти всегда.
EUR/GBP является ВСЕГДА следствием курсов EUR/USD и GBP/USD. Не бывает наоборот, чтобы кросс "рулил" мажором.
Плюс мировой валюты в том, что совершенно все можно измерить в абсолютно определенных попугаях. А уже из этих курсов с попугаями следуют курсы между собой.
1) Мажоры - 100% информации о рынке.
1) Both yes and no. If we convert to euros, we get exactly the same basis for claiming that EVERYTHING is converted to euros.
How do you prove that it is not? Technically it is not possible. And you don't need to.
1) Таки и да и нет. Если делать пересчёт через евро, мы получим точно такие же основания для утверждения что ВСЁ пересчитывается через евро.
Чем докажешь что не так? Технически сие невозможно. Да и не нужно.
I should add that the amount of information in this case is not a criterion. There's as much as there is in any other baseline. That is the same 100%.
1) Таки и да и нет. Если делать пересчёт через евро, мы получим точно такие же основания для утверждения что ВСЁ пересчитывается через евро.
Чем докажешь что не так? Технически сие невозможно. Да и не нужно.
BLACK_BOX писал(а) >>
The notion of overbought/oversold levels, which cluster indicators in particular show, are subjective notions, i.e. they show the degree of deviation from the instrument's subjective balance level in the eyes of the actor (e.g. the trader). The basic strategy of this person is to buy an oversold instrument and to sell an overbought one, for example via the cross.
Now the question.
Let D be the currency of your deposit. Your trading leverage is 1:1.
Why is there practically no profit if you buy a rising X/Y pair, if the Y/D pair is growing?
It seems that you have made some mistakes. If X/Y grows and Y/D also grows, you will get double profit from the trade.
But even if you correct the condition, it won't have much effect on practical trading in brokerage houses with 1:100 or more leverage.
So it is an academic question, or rather a school question.
It only shows that there is a single currency to be converted. But it does not imply its causal "influence".
// The Americans can be proud if they want to. But they don't benefit from it.
Похоже что вы несколько напутали. Если растёт X/Y да ещё и Y/D, то от сделки будет получена двойная прибыль.
Но даже если вы поправите условие, это не шибко скажется на практической игре в ДЦ, где кредитное плечо 1:100 или больше.
Так что вопрос академический, точнее школьный.
Yes you are right, corrected.
The point of this school question is to interpret :) the shoulder as the degree of sensitivity to the teasing.
портфель из валютных пар не диверсифицирует риски, точнее, не уменьшает.
I think I've seen it somewhere else. Either Peters or Vince. But the reasons stated there are different.