FOREX and ECONOMETRY. Theory, practice, forecasts and implications - page 13
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
No problem. I will describe everything. I will make it readable.
In general, I have come to the conclusion that the actual quote history is about nothing. Only quote history statistics are of interest, i.e. only history parameters, which speak about market reaction to events. If you have such statistics, every new day and every deal closing - everything starts from zero. Everything is zeroed out. Only history statistics remains. There is no history as such - only statistics. IMHO, I am not claiming anything, but in practice this approach is very effective.
Then again, if you look at autocorrelation functions and Fourier spectra, it's probably true - history has no effect on the future. Only statistics influences the market reaction to stories. It, the statistics, can't seem to change much quickly.
The first (my post) will be answered later, because I'm not ready yet.
I will answer the second one.
The buy/sell volume in forex is conventionally made up of 2 parts: the underlying asset and the operational volume. The basic one contains those who are waiting to come out of a drawdown or are waiting for a certain amount of profit, and the operative one contains those positions that are in active trading. Look at the buy/sell volume distribution on the OANDA website.
Not about that, well, never mind.
I didn't know about OANDA, I'll have a look. But it's not a buy-sell, it's kind of an open interest. So you say. But it's different.
As my mate used to say - terminology is not important, it's the most important thing.))
There the answer is hidden in the logic of my post. That is, "every new day resets to zero" - I disagree. And that ruins the logic of your question.
That is, you didn't get it.) Again - history has no meaning. It is the statistics of history that make sense. That's why you have to work not with history, but with its statistics. I.e. every new day, and after each transaction the history is reset to zero. Only the history statistics is left. What is the contradiction here? I do not understand.
IMHO, this is what econometrics is all about. All these fluctuations in the past are about nothing. But the statistics of those fluctuations are important. Assuming that the future is largely unpredictable... And statistics don't change quickly.
The first (my post) will be answered later, because I'm not ready yet.
I will answer the second one.
The buy/sell volume on forex market consists of 2 parts: base asset and current volume. The basic one contains those who are waiting for a drawdown or waiting for a certain amount of profit, and the operative one contains those positions that are in active trading near the current price. Look at the buy/sell volume distribution on the OANDA website.
//ster inadvertently, recovered
I have to say, I don't really understand charts as I trade stocks, futures and options. It just can't happen there. Because it could never be.
How could it not be?
Isn't an option part of a futures?
Well, the torture sample is ready:
How can it not be?
Isn't the option a component of the futures?
It is not composite. It is a separate instrument whose price depends on the value of the futures.
I don't understand the ratios on the charts - how can that be? It must be the peculiarities of forex. I'm trying to interpret, but I can't.)
Options may fall apart every day, but the futures continue to run until expiry, right?
Let's take a look at the CME website
it has both futures and options.
So both the futures are in two parts and it's the same in forex.
I know all about futures and options. What I need. (Even more.))
In futures the number of open long-short positions is always the same. How is the difference in forex? How much was bought - so much was sold. Why is there a mismatch on the charts? Either I am interpreting something wrong.
On the currency exchange, does 50% make money and 50% do not?
Or does everyone make money?
If everyone benefits, then who pays them?
You do realise that such statements are utopian, don't you?
So there is no way that buying and selling volumes can be equal, whichever financial market is being traded.