Non-dynamic trading. - page 8
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
So how is it "indicatorless" ? And where does the name of the stock come from, if not from an indicator ?
And how can you make a buying decision just by the name of the stock without knowing anything else about it? You don't. That's why the name itself is not an indicator. ))
The name of a financial instrument is only a clue to its properties which may be indicators.
And how can you make a buying decision just by the name of the stock without knowing anything else about it? You don't. That's why the name itself is not an indicator. ))
The name of a financial instrument is only a clue to its properties which may be indicators.
What do you mean the name itself is not an indicator? It is. It indicates that this instrument belongs to certain market events.
It' s clear that this discussion is purely terminological, and it is based on the desire to get "ideal inputs", because indicators either "lag" or "give false signals"... So there is a desire to eliminate this weakness... Calling it all "indicatorless trading". And they forget that the indicator is just a convenient representation of some of the market situation properties. How exactly and which properties are represented makes no difference, you still get an indicator.
For example, you have only been given the name of a stock that you know nothing about at all. Without asking anything about it, you decide to buy and hold it. In such a case, trading is unsyndicatorial. ))
What do you mean, "the title is not"? It is. Indicates that the instrument in question belongs to certain market events.
It is clear that this conversation is purely terminological, and it is based on the desire to get "ideal inputs", because indicators either "lag" or "give false signals"... So there is a desire to eliminate this weakness... Calling it all "indicatorless trading". And they forget that the indicator is just a convenient representation of some of the market situation properties. How exactly and which properties are represented makes no difference, you still get an indicator.
To what market events? To none. But it is an indicator to the properties that indicate the market events. It means that it is a pointer to properties which are volatile.
If a stock name on the screen changes its colour depending on some event, then it is not the name that is an indicator, but the property to which it is attached.
I would say that, in that case, the trade is towerless))
Perhaps there are traders who when they hear a stock name think: "Mmm, what a nice name. How nice it sounds. What stiff consonants... ...and how transparent the vowels are. I think it's worth buying for the sake of it. A promotion with a name like that just can't help but make me a profit."
If so, then yes, the title could also be called an indicator. ))))
If there is no basis under the decision, then it is non-syndicated. But, if at least one property of a financial instrument has been requested, then no.
For example, you have only been given the name of a stock that you know nothing about at all. You decide to buy and hold it without asking anything about it. In such a case, the trade is unsyndicatorial. ))
But to open a position you need to ask your broker for a quote.
So there are no unsyndicator strategies at all.
it is suggested that we move from the concept of indicatorless trading to the topic of EAs without parameters
it is suggested that we move from the concept of no-dynamics trading to the topic of EAs without parameters
No. This topic is about indicatorless trading.
so it turns out that it sort of does not exist ))))
or maybe it is - EAs that do not use external indicators?
so it turns out that it sort of does not exist ))))
Or maybe it's like this - EAs that do not use external indicator calls?
Neither external nor internal. No technical indicators. The concept of indicatorless trading in general is still being built (or refuted). Therefore, I don't think we need to specify what kind of trading it will be yet.
No external or internal indicators. No technical indicators. The concept of no indicator trading at all is still being built (or refuted). Therefore, I don't think it is necessary to specify what kind of trading it will be yet.