The future of automated trading: round two - page 21
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
Well, it all kind of adds up:
1) We make mistakes in simple mathematics (because we have never counted in reality, banal erudition and confidence were enough), we call a mistake in 10 times "forgot a zero" (such non-recognition is symptomatic).
2) stubbornly unwilling to count real volumes (years of history, tens and hundreds of instruments, tens of thousands of users), stopping at "well, look, not so much!", forgetting to clearly spell out"don't believe me, I did the calculation in 24 hours".
And yet they naively try to mislead the rest of us. And this is the main mode of defending their position: to underestimate and compare with incomparable (amazing examples of comparisons with wild distortions are present on this forum - one "make decisions once an hour, rule once an hour" stand out). They leave economic realities out in general, it's easier to live in an invented world.
My mistake.
60*60*24=86400 ticks per day
Correspondingly -
86400*36=3110400
That's terrible. Now compare that data stream with, for example, a Skype stream. And they say there's internet television. They must be lying.
gip: Ужас. А теперь сравни этот поток данных, например, с потоком какого-нибудь скайпа. А ещё говорят есть интернет-телевидение. Врут наверное.
I am more interested in the history of news directly in MT and the mql-interface to that news, which I think (imho) is the more important thing.
I would like to mention this idea in particular. If there was a mechanism, some kind of icon on the chart that would mark the time of news arrival and click on it to open the news - that would be great. If we had a couple of scripts for fours that placed news on the chart, such a mechanism could be built into MT5 - that would be great. That would be the future of auto-trading! :)
I don't really care. I'm even in favour. I just understand the developers in a way - every step costs money in this life. Has anyone calculated how much it costs to make it possible to work with ticks? Not only on the user side, but also on the platform creator and broker side? And the following pragmatic questions. Is it possible to earn not on ticks, but on usual bars? The answer is yes, you can. Then why do we need ticks? Who will pay for the possibility to use them, when in 99% of cases they will be used only for experiments on a free demo account, and not for real trading? Who will pay for it? )))
"Whose banquet is it on?"(s))).
Moreover, even if we go along with the trader, has anyone calculated the effectiveness of using tick history opportunities for the trader? That is, by how much more will the trader earn, using the tick history opportunity? Correspondingly, how much more efficient are the investments in this opportunity? )))
Who said that? I just downloaded Eurodollar tics from eSignal as an experiment. Three days - 150 meg.
I see that arbitrage profits are the profits of large companies, and it is easy to "guard and hide" them from individuals. But the fact that a large company that gets hold of your non-arbitrage algorithm will immediately rush to destroy its profitability is very doubtful. Most likely, it will try to make a profit out of it, which is not a problem for an individual.
No one is going to destroy anyone. It's just that trying to profit from a strategy by many participants reduces the profitability of the strategy.
A simple example, the same arbitrage: sell a share and buy a futures on it if the prices diverge by 2 sigmas - they will converge and there will be a good profit. But if many people want to buy at 2 sigma, obviously not enough for all, and the most cunning decides to buy at a divergence of only 1.5 sigmas, the profit is smaller but guaranteed because it is the first. Now everyone who waited for 2 sigmas has nothing, and someone decides that profit from the divergence of 1 sigma will be enough for him. And so it goes all the way down to the minimum barely covering transaction costs, when only the fastest and the "unhungriest" can use the strategy, and that is a robot in a large company. And all individuals go to the garden... And so with any strategy.
Maybe I don't understand the analogy about the farmer, because I wouldn't dare to suggest that individual traders (manual or autobot) have become or are becoming fewer as a result of mechanisation. It seems to me to be the opposite. And products like MT lower the barrier to entry and make individuals closer to the market.
It's the same with farming - more and more people are growing something on a balcony or in a pot on a windowsill. But what they grow has a casual nature, it is not a job - it is a hobby that brings more expense than profit. Only large farms are guaranteed to make money.
Imagine that the market is a stream of information, a river, a very abstract example, this river has a useful signal (opportunity to make a profit with mo > 0) and noise (mo is negative - due to commission). Robots will fish out all the useful stuff, and individuals will be left with a sea of noise.
Crowds of people go to casinos, many even win, some win a lot, but only casinos have mo > 0. The casino's income is systemic and the players' income is random.