First sacred cow: "If the trend started, it will continue" - page 49
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
Mathemat
Let me speak on this subject.
I believe there are no trends in forex, it's just a money game.
And there is only one way to make a profit, a good money management.
All inputs/outputs are pure random.And in roulette also a good money management will allow to make a profit?
To what?
have you forgotten what you were asking? :)))))))))))))
А в рулетку тоже хороший менеджмент ДС позволит получать прибыль?
Ну нет, не глюки, конечно: на истории-то они есть. Просто этими феноменами невозможно воспользоваться долговременно и прибыльно в реальной торговле (даже если нет спредов, проскальзываний и т.п.).
No, exactly glitches. And there aren't any on the history. After all, it's a random wander, I generated it myself, I know for a guarantee that the trends aren't there. But you see them anyway. So it's glitches.
A real trend is a guarantee of predictability. Trends can't start and end, they either are or they aren't. If you cannot say with absolute certainty that there is a trend, here are its parameters, and it is guaranteed to be tomorrow, then it is not a trend, but a random fluctuation, a piece of random walk, even if prices are lined up in a perfectly straight line.
No, exactly glitches. And there aren't any on the history. After all, it's a random rambling, I generated it myself, I know for a guarantee that the trends aren't there. But you see them anyway. So it's glitches.
A real trend is a guarantee of predictability. Trends can't start and end, they either are or they aren't. If you can't say absolutely affirmatively that there is a trend, here are its parameters, and it's guaranteed to be tomorrow, then it's not a trend, but a random fluctuation, a piece of random walk, even if prices are lined up in a perfectly straight line.
It is useful to think of a time series in general terms as a mixture of four components:
1. a trend or long-term movement;
2. a more or less regular fluctuation relative to the trend, the deterministic component;
3. a seasonal component;
4. the residual or unsystematic random effect.
A deterministic component, such as a sine wave and whose influence is close to 100%, is a guarantee.
And anyway... don't you think our arguments are like
the Indian parable of the elephant? :))))))))))
No, exactly glitches. And there aren't any on the history. After all, it's a random wander, I generated it myself, I know for a guarantee that the trends aren't there. But you see them anyway. So it's glitches.
A real trend is a guarantee of predictability. Trends can't start and end, they either are or they aren't. If you cannot say with absolute certainty that there is a trend, here are its parameters, and it is guaranteed to be tomorrow, then it is not a trend, but a random fluctuation, a piece of random walk, even if prices are lined up in a perfectly straight line.
Case in point: the temperature over the course of a year clearly has trends associated with the seasons. But even that is no guarantee when making a forecast, because the forecast would be sufficiently accurate and the noise component (the one you did not account for) might be large enough to make your forecast practically useless. Well, you can say that tomorrow the weather will be like today +0.3 degrees due to the fact that summer is closer))) +5 degrees. Trend component is insignificant in this case compared to noise component, but it is objectively present. It gives no guarantees and is useless for the forecast for the next days. However it is the same as for a longer period of time.
A trend is precisely a forecasting opportunity. A trend as a "fait accompli" is a figment of the fevered imagination, a reading of coffee grounds, there are many things you can see with a fertile imagination, too. There are and will be trends, but not in the financial markets.
This is not the first time I see your opinion and I do not understand it. Trend: rise - fall. How it is not there? It was yesterday and will be tomorrow. It's just that tomorrow is a trend forecast. Whether there will be a trend forecast for the future is the big question. If that's what you mean, then yes. But TS can be made on different predictions. Nobel demanded a figure and a RMS and got Nobel on that. You don't need a trend for a TS - you need a direction forecast.
ZZ is a tool and it all depends on how you apply it
ZZ is a swear word on this forum, as only indicators that do not redraw are recognized. I personally am very skeptical of such indicators, as they show such antiquity that the market has already had time to change several times.
ZZ is a swear word on this forum, as only indicators that do not redraw are recognised. Personally, I am very sceptical about such indicators, as they show such antiquity that the market has already had time to change several times.
The specific realizations of ZZ are redrawn. It is just unclear how any indicators or calculations in general can be bad or good. The only thing that may be bad is trading strategies that use them, i.e. calculations were used inappropriately or at the wrong time.
Привет всем. Тема ветки - известное, замусоленное и даже, можно сказать, банальное классическое утверждение. Звучит оно на первый взгляд примерно так же, как "если положить в чай сахар, то он станет сладким". Зато в его истинности вроде бы никто особо не сомневается. Вот и получается так, что мы все знаем, что это истина, но вот пользовать эту истину могут только немногие из нас, т.к. толком ее не понимают.
P.S. Кстати, почему мы не говорим: "если флэт начался, то он продолжится"?
My three cents, these concepts can only be formalised and dealt with constructively within a specific strategy otherwise you get a branch like this one. Experimental results
The Expert Advisor idea - a kick in the arse is a sign of a trend start . Price should pass the range ATR * k for not more than time t . if the condition is not met pending orders are reset . when opening a position opposite pending order is removed, position is trawled on the distance ATR * k . Well probably everything is optimized like any other strategy, the results on the forward test are not very good to say the least. I think the statement that the trend is more likely to continue is not true - the lifetime of the trend is random for this strategy.
Possible improvements - introduction of additional filters on position opening, provided (I do not know how yet) that this is a true trend opening additional positions.
As always I appreciate the substantive nudges .