First sacred cow: "If the trend started, it will continue"
As in, a night out? Interesting. But no clever thoughts on the subject.
By the way, I don't think the recent drop was a trend. And it didn't continue as you can see. It was short-lived and rapid. It was exactly the correction phase that passed. And the upward trend will continue. Probably, because it hasn't come to the end yet. And they are ending I won't say where. Too simple. It's just that the price hasn't got there yet. We'll see a lot of flat, but the trend is up.
By the way, I don't agree that a trend is as simple as a nail. The trend may be weak, but stubbornly creeping, gathering many stops of those who are waiting for the reversal, and it may be strong and fast, you may even be afraid that it is about to end and you may not enter, but it goes further.
Trying to find a flat on soy in Alpari - all I see is a sequence of elementary particles
1. If the trend has started, it will continue...
2. P.S. By the way, why don't we say: "if the flat started, it will continue"?
Immediately an analogy:
If a thread has just been created, then all the posts of that thread will not go beyond the predetermined topic of communication...
Is this the case? Most likely there will necessarily be a digression in the topic - an off-topic. And then the communication will continue back on topic... maybe.
Will there be flubbing, flamming in the thread? How can you tell in advance if communication will continue on topic...
And if the off-topic has started, will it continue? It often happens even in this forum, when at the N-th page of the topic, already forget the very name of the topic and start discussing everything in the world, but not the essence of the topic. But after a while, as a rule, again appears a message corresponding to the content of the topic ...
Immediately an analogy:
If a topic is just created, then all the posts in that topic won't...
>> message corresponding to the content of the topic.
you can tell right away that the doctor!
If a trend started, it will continue
One thing is almost certain: If a trend has begun, it will end at some point.
The only question is when? How do you learn how to determine the lifespan of a newborn trend?
Don't scare the beginning, show the end! (c) Proverb
A flat is also a trend, only its slope is close to zero. Therefore, it would be logical to say that the flat will continue too.
Here's a chart like this. Can you find the beginning and the end of the trend here? Notice how clearly the levels worked.
And it's a random wander of pure water, I just generated it.
So will the trend continue or not?
Do you have reason to believe that the trend you are observing has a non-random component? If yes, then the trend is more likely to continue. If not, a random walk is still a random walk.
But nobody doubts that it is true.
And how they doubt... In fact - the other side of my topic: https://forum.mql4.com/ru/23962
Hopefully, at least there won't be any flubbing on completely left-handed topics here.
My imho: the market is almost always random.
In general, think about the fact that if there were a trend, it would be possible to evaluate, at least on history, the level of "noise" at a specific moment and separate it from the trend component. But authors of various books (sorry, I do not remember exactly where I read it - someone carried out some experiments) have an opinion that the trend is a VERY small component of the price movement. That is, even if we see a sharp jump in price, it is not the influence of a trend.
In general, trend/flat had sense in the beginning of 20th century - since then a lot of clever guys have got smart and simple wizards don't work any more. :)
- Free trading apps
- Over 8,000 signals for copying
- Economic news for exploring financial markets
You agree to website policy and terms of use
Hello all. The topic of this thread is a well-known, tired and even trite classic statement. At first glance, it sounds about the same as "if you put sugar in your tea, it will become sweet". On the other hand, no one doubts that it is true. So it turns out that we all know that it is truth, but only few of us can use this truth, because we do not understand it properly.
Have any of you, dear forum users, tried to analyze this phrase, and not just ignore it and put it somewhere at the edge of your consciousness? And if you have tried, what exactly does it mean to you?
The main feature of a true and practical statement is that there are necessarily conditions under which it is violated. (This phrase seems to have been said by a famous mathematician and philosopher.) The conditions for breaking the truth assertion seem almost obvious: if suddenly our trends become too abrupt and too short-lived, then we will not be able to profit from them because we simply will not catch up. Let's assume that the market is not going to become like that in the near future.
Let's try to decipher this trite phrase though. "If some complex condition X is satisfied, we can tentatively call it the beginning of the trend. Condition Х really must be strong enough for the quotes to get a serious kick and break out of the flat swamp - sustainably and during a certain period of time". This is the trend that has continued.
Not every new move is turning into a trend, we know that very well. This kick should not be a simple single condition, but a complex one: it is not so easy to defuse a quasi-stationary, though not very stable flat state into a full-fledged catastrophe called a trend. Why is this the case? I don't know, but my guess is that the flat state of the pair is more structurally complex than the trend state. I wrote earlier that I distinguish at least three qualitatively different flat states. But the trend is of only one kind, simple as a nail. In physics, a jump in system complexity is called a phase transition.
One more thing that distinguishes a trend from a flat is a distinct local dependence between neighboring bars.
In short, one can talk about all this for a very long time, but it would be better to just take a child's set of plasticine and mold the topic of branches in plasticine. Scientologists will understand me: it is believed that molding in clay allows for a proper, reliable and serendipitous understanding of the concept being demonstrated. When I worked for a Scientology organisation, I had to mould in clay concepts such as 'responsibility', 'truth', etc. I suspect that I moulded them with a poor quality :) But I still wonder how much more effective the trader could have been if he had not been too lazy and had sculpted the subject in clay?
Of course, I'm not suggesting anyone here to do it, but here's my question: how do you yourself understand this almost platitude?
The answer in the style of "a trend is when the fast swing crosses the slow one in this or that way, RSI does this, MACD does that, etc" is no good, because there is no understanding of what exactly a trend is. In your answers I expect to see logic, not trivial empiricism, based on a combination of standard indicators.
So, the three concepts are: "trend", "started", "continued". How do you understand them in the context of the branch topic?
Note, by the way, that this maxim does not work when applied to an ordinary Wiener process. Yes, in a Wiener process there are areas that can be called local trends, but, alas, in the long term they can not make money on them. And the statement itself actually states the possibility to earn on a trend!
P.S. By the way, why don't we say "if the flat started, it will continue"?