Discussion of article "What is a trend and is the market structure based on trend or flat?" - page 4
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
to determine the price direction at a moment != to predict the next moment. Therefore, it is impossible to make money on it, because this Price(t) is unknown, or it is random :)
I agree. You can't make money on one instrument, but on 3 interdependent instruments you can, but for a short time.
Do you think it is a randomness or regularity?
to determine the price direction at a moment != to predict the next moment. Therefore, it is impossible to make money on it, because this Price(t) is unknown, or it is random :)
I completely agree with the second one, but for BA against futures you can use other classical tools like cointegration.
Алексей Тарабанов:
Всё совсем плохо. Тренд это не распределение плотности вероятности приращений (цитата), а просто прямая линия. Её нужно строить умеючи.
You just didn't realise at all that the author is describing a completely new approach to defining a trend. And his definition has every right to exist, just like your "just a straight line" ))
The meaning of my definition of a trend is that if the distribution of the process is wider than the benchmark, then the probability of the next step in the direction of the previous step is higher than 50%. And if this is the case, you can make money by opening positions in the direction of the previous step. If the process has a tendency to continue the trend, then it is a trending process. This is the problem of the majority, that with knowledge of mathematics and a large number of specific terms, a person does not understand what to do to make money, if the market is trending, because the definition of the trend itself does not tell how to make money.
Maybe the variance is greater than the benchmark, but the probability is the same both ways.
If everything is already made up and it makes more sense, please mark up this graph and draw conclusions about its characteristics.
Maybe the variance is just greater than the benchmark? And the probability is the same both ways.
The variance may be larger, and it is definitely larger. And the probability is the same both ways if the distribution is symmetric about zero. But I'm talking about the probability of reversal. If the distribution is wider and lower than the reference distribution, then the probability that after the price has travelled 10 pips up, it will travel another 10 pips up is greater than 50%. This means that if you always trade on the continuation of the trend (no matter up or down), the expectation of profit will be positive. This is the concept of trends as applied to trading.
why? ) There are no fat tails and it's symmetrical.
All right, well, you do it.
I agree. On one instrument you can't, but on 3 interdependent instruments you can, but briefly.
Do you think this is an accident or a pattern?
Why do you want me to think about it? I don't know what to think about it.
What do cointegrated instruments have to do with it, that's a different story.
Why would you slip me a fake? I don't need to think about it.
What this has to do with cointegrated instruments is a different story.
I see.