Market prediction based on macroeconomic indicators - page 48
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
In a neighbouring thread I have posted a condensed list of the mathematical methods that Citi and JPMorgan actually use for trading and forecasting.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/72329/page46#comment_2349683
They've paid good money and decades to create this stuff. And they have it more or less, crooked or straight, but it works. I assure you, if it were possible to predict cheaper or simpler - they would use this simple thing and not get into the thick of things. But you can't. It won't work.
Look strong vupley - where they are in their mathematical research and where you are.
In a neighbouring thread I have posted a condensed list of the mathematical methods that Citi and JPMorgan actually use for trading and forecasting.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/72329/page46#comment_2349683
They've paid good money and decades to create this stuff. And they have it more or less, crooked or straight, but it works. I assure you, if it were possible to predict cheaper or simpler - they would use this simple thing and not get into the thick of things. But you can't. It won't work.
Look strong vupley - where they are in their mathematical research and where you are.
In a nearby thread I have posted a condensed list of the mathematical methods that Citi and JPMorgan actually use for trading and forecasting.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/72329/page46#comment_2349683
They've paid good money and decades to create this stuff. And they have it more or less, crooked or straight, but it works. I assure you, if it were possible to predict cheaper or simpler - they would use this simple thing and not get into the thick of things. But you can't. It won't work.
Look strong vupley - where they are in their mathematical research and where you are.
Yes, all large financial institutions have units that use mathematics in trading.
But.
What proportion of the profits of these organisations is determined by the use of mathematics and what proportion is outright fraud?
A final example.
There is an organization which publishes data on the volume of oil supply. A couple of days ago it turned out that the information about the over-supply of oil is a complete fiction by 30%. What's with the math? You make a hump on the downside and short from the heart!
Let's not confuse God's gift with the egg. The entire financial market in the West is a cancer of the modern economy. This is where the basic principle of market economics is implemented on a gigantic scale: you can't cheat, you can't sell.
Yes, all large financial institutions have units that use mathematics in trading.
But.
What proportion of the profits of these organisations is determined by the use of mathematics and what proportion is outright fraud?
A final example.
There is an organization which publishes data on the volume of oil supply. A couple of days ago it turned out that the information about the over-supply of oil is a complete fiction by 30%. What's with the math? You make a hump on the downside and short from the heart!
Let's not confuse God's gift with the egg. The entire financial market in the West is a cancer of the modern economy. This is where the basic principle of market economics is implemented on a gigantic scale: you can't cheat - you can't sell.
Forex is definitely evil, I thought so.
In a neighbouring thread I have posted a condensed list of the mathematical methods that Citi and JPMorgan actually use for trading and forecasting.
https://www.mql5.com/ru/forum/72329/page46#comment_2349683
They've paid good money and decades to create this stuff. And they have it more or less, crooked or straight, but it works. I assure you, if it were possible to predict cheaper or simpler - they would use this simple thing and not get into the thick of things. But you can't. It won't work.
Look strong vupley - where they are in their mathematical research and where you are.
I read this sign about the job. Not impressed, even laughed. Many of these methods are familiar to me, I tried them at one time or another. For some reason you think I'm some kind of homegrown mathematician trying to tackle something that big banks have entire departments of statisticians trying to solve. You don't know anything about me. If I told you that I run a department of statists, you'd have respect and adoration. You bow to authority and that's your place. When you yourself understand the essence of mathematical and statistical methods, not only reading textbooks, but also trying to apply them in practice, then you can speak about the level of what I do.
For interest, look at these early 2008 GDP growth predictions made by your favourite JP Morgan, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Barclays, Deutche Bank, Credit Suisse, and respected economics universities like UCLA Andersen. None of the above have been able to predict a recession even in the current quarter. Which is probably why Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterns are gone and the rest of the banks should have been given a capital infusion.
Expand your horizons, read, get into the essence, apply, then we'll talk.
http://www.bloombergview.com/articles/2015-03-05/economics-can-t-predict-the-big-things-like-recessions
"Economists didn't just fail to see that monster recession; they routinely fail to see economic events coming. The best models we have -- the ones central banks use, which take graduate-level training in order to handle -- have about as muchforecasting power as simple, naïve mathematical techniques that any undergraduate statistics major could whip up in a few minutes."
http://www.economist.com/blogs/buttonwood/2012/07/economic-history
"BACK in October 2008, just after the investment bank Lehman Brothers collapsed, the International Monetary Fund unveiled its forecasts for growth in 2009. The IMF is the global lender to national governments; its economic pronouncements are highly respected. So what did it predict? The US would grow 0.1% in 2009, countries in the euro zone 0.2% and the world as a whole 2.6%. The actual outturns were declines of 3.5%, 4.2% and 2.6% respectively."
If you want to educate yourself about 2008, read economist Steve Keen's blog:
http://www.debtdeflation.com/blogs/2009/12/01/debtwatch-no-41-december-2009-4-years-of-calling-the-gfc/
Steve Keen is widely considered the only economist to have predicted the 2008 crash, which has earned him much credit and respect and an advisory role in big hedge funds. After criticizing the SDGE model used by the Fed, of which Bernanke was a big follower, Steve Kean proposed his own model before 2008, based on the financial balance sheet. This model predicted that rising private debt would lead to a crash. Unfortunately, his model was based on unstable coupled differential equations, showing volatility around 2008 and going off the charts after that year. That's it, the end of the world in 2008. It's unclear why we're still here :)
I read this sign about the job. Not impressed, even laughed. Many of these methods are familiar to me, I tried them at one time or another. For some reason you think I'm some kind of homegrown mathematician trying to tackle something that big banks have entire departments of statisticians trying to solve. You don't know anything about me. If I told you that I run a department of statists, you'd have respect and adoration. You bow to authority and that's your place. When you yourself understand the essence of mathematical and statistical methods, not only reading textbooks, but also trying to apply them in practice, then you will be able to speak about the level of what I do.
For interest, look at these early 2008 GDP growth predictions made by your favourite JP Morgan, Lehman Brothers, Bear Stearns, Barclays, Deutche Bank, Credit Suisse, and respected economics universities like UCLA Andersen. None of the above have been able to predict a recession even in the current quarter. Which is probably why Lehman Brothers and Bear Sterns are gone and the rest of the banks should have been given a capital infusion.
Expand your horizons, read, get into the essence, apply, then we will talk.
On what basis do you think anyone was going to predict anything?
Look up "The Downgame".
Everyone knows and understands everything, but the profit today, at this moment and in the jet is the one who went into the cache in time!
GDP has nothing to do with stock indices. Where is the proof? The movement of stock indices is usually multiple, but GDP? The most recent example is oil. That oil consumption has fallen by a factor of three, or supply has risen by a factor of three? Just a PR campaign since stock prices are the opinion of a crowd, which has very little, if anything, to do with the economy, GDP.
One last thing.
Finance, strictly speaking, has nothing to do with the economy. Whereas in Muslim countries one can still talk about the relationship of finance to the economy, the continental model of the stock market can be talked about with a stretch, in the Anglo-Saxon model one cannot at all. Finance in the Anglo-Saxon model is a separate kind of activity, a kind of "monopoly" game for adults and the brightest and most importantly outspoken representative of this tribe is Mavrodi.
GDP has nothing to do with stock indexes. Where is the proof? Stock market indexes usually move in multiples, but GDP?
Are you saying that stock indices can rise during recessions (negative GDP growth)? I am not talking about daily or even monthly index values. I am talking about quarterly data. That's not enough of a chart to convince:
It is impossible to forecast stock market indices without monetary indicators.
And U.S. money supply indicators are not published
It is impossible to forecast stock market indices without monetary indicators.
And U.S. money supply indicators are not published