Looking for a programmer, there is an MTS enriching its creator. - page 2
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
Then don't you think it's strange that the postulate you describe is only true in one direction?
Absolutely not. The second is practically equivalent to the first. The price of the market always shifts in the opposite direction to the maximum bids.
So push any idea to the masses, and work against ...
Only the workers against are also all blown away ;)
By implementing this MTS in the code, we will either become golden, or we will possess invaluable knowledge that this system does not work. But in both cases we will get one step closer to understanding the market.
Freelancing will save the Giant of Thought and the Father of Russian Democracy.
Paying a bit of money can either get us stunned or "one step closer to understanding the market".
Go for it, buddy.
So we push any idea to the masses, and work against ...
Only the workers against are also all blown away ;)
You're too late). The idea has long been pushed to the masses, and is still being pushed. The idea is called technical analysis.) - It is simple, clear, and accessible to a housewife. The masses are very enthusiastic.)
About it being a pain in the ass. This is not true. You can work in the market only if the market cannot see you. As they say, money loves silence.
And work against it? - What does that mean? Working against what... against the wind.)
Instead of all this water, it was enough to post a description of the strategy :-)
better then the state or monitoring of a real account
and what is the point of them?
If a strategy is described, it is usually clear whether it has something worthy of implementation and refinement in code or not.
The manual trading stats don't say anything - you can just see that the author trades with his hands, that's all. Of course, he will swear that he respects the strategy, but it's not true, manual trading is 100% that the timing and distance is not respected, the MM is broken, news is considered, etc. etc.
Again, if there is a good profit from manual trading, the trader really needs panels, alarms, reminders (secretary in the end) and ordering an inexpensive robot that "fully automates the strategy" he is deluding himself. A bot that trades a strategy after the trader is very expensive :-)
A bot that trades a strategy after a trader is very expensive :-)
I see there's a lot of trouble with the devotees, all the crocodiles are passing by. Well, let's not despair, but for now let's comment on the main thoughts of the thread participants:
Instead of all this water it was enough to post a description of the strategy :-)
If it were, I would have been engaged in such an uncharacteristic of me appealing to the brightest that can be in man. If I open my cards, there is no guarantee that anyone will be interested in it, and the entire trading community won't be left with a nosedive.
Yuriy Asaulenko 2017.07.28 03:39 #3 EN
1. An open-source TS is already unworkable from the start).
2.It is not necessary to understand the market in order to trade.))
I was testing the neuronet yesterday. The probability of profitable trades on different tests from 0.53 to 0.75. I was testing yesterday. Probability of profitable trades in different tests. However, she is doing a great job). And brains, not even comparable to a cockroach.
And what are we going to compare the "trader's mind" with? Where to "move it"? It's just a mess.
The subject is as though for a separate thread, but in short: 1. Apparently, we mean that any profitable TS ceases to be such when it is widespread. But if we continue the chain of logical reasoning, it turns out that any profitable TS ceases to be such over time. Suppose it is a top secret and uses some market regularity. But due to the fierce competition of trading systems in the market, there is a constant search for similar regularities, and now a lot of TSs based on different principles use the same pattern. The regularity is naturally leveled and all the TS that use this regularity stop being profitable. So now what, to fall into despondency? Or maybe try to rack our brains?
2. of course, all that is needed is the intention to trade and the opportunity. But we are talking about profitable trading, and here you have built a certain model in which you do not need to understand the market for profitable trading.
Using a neural network in trading is in itself an original innovation
Enriched who? You? Pupkin? Who?
Enriching someone who has a name, and at least one person (me) knows that name.
Freelancing will save the Giant of Thought and Father of Russian Democracy.
Paying a bit of money - you can either become stunned or "one step closer to understanding the market".
Go for it, buddy.A thousand thanks, mate, and I'm the moron who created the thread.
There is at least one real example of successful trading by the creator of MTS himself.
This is kind of a topic for a separate thread, but briefly:
1. Apparently this means that any profitable TS ceases to be profitable with widespread distribution. But if we continue the chain of logical reasoning, it turns out that any profitable TS ceases to be such over time. Suppose it is a top secret and uses some market regularity. But due to the fierce competition of trading systems in the market, there is a constant search for similar regularities, and now a lot of TSs based on different principles use the same pattern. The regularity is naturally leveled and all the TS that use this regularity stop being profitable. So now what, to fall into despondency? Or maybe try to rack our brains?
2. of course, all that is needed is the intention to trade and the opportunity. But we are talking about profitable trading, and you have built a certain model in which you do not need to understand the market to make a profitable trade.
3.The use of neural networks in trading is in itself an original innovation
1. You are right in general. I do not understand only what has dejection in it, and what calls to stretch brains).
2) Why don't you need to? Oh yes, you should. I only showed that a cockroach's brains are more than enough for that).
3. There is neither original, nor innovative long time ago.( Another thing is that it is shrouded in mystery, however, as well as all really working systems. See p.1.