What is a trend? - page 18
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
Not to mislead people, stipulate that the noise should be much greater than the medium + slippage + other stuff. As it is, it's fine.
On the RTS Index it's clearly less. But on the Forex it's also realistic to look at the level of noise - it's always there, just choose a larger timeframe. The movements on the Forex are small, and the spread is still a bit large. (But if you take at the bottom (sell at the top), the risks are also small.
The mistake of many people is that - there was an up movement, and they grab it (which is high noise) - and it immediately goes down. It is good, if it goes to Breakeven. And there is no need to hurry, wait, look at the noises and take it to the bottom. Well, you will miss it. So it is not the first and not the last).
Regarding wave theory. Post mathemat (Sceptic Philozoff).
Is this a trade secret? Or can you describe what is on the graph?
I used to want to share it with everyone, but as time went on I realised it would not be the right move in terms of competition in the market. I see you as a promising trader. I also have a good partner and would like to discuss some issues.
The RTS index is clearly less. But in Forex it is also realistic to see the level of noise - it is always there, just choose a larger timeframe. The movements on the Forex are small, and the spread is still a bit large. (But if you take at the bottom (sell at the top), the risks are also small.
The mistake of many people is that - there was an up movement, and they grab it (that is high noises) - and it immediately goes down. It is good, if it goes to Breakeven. And there is no need to hurry, wait, look at the noises and take it to the bottom. Well, you will miss it. It's not the first and not the last.)
For dabbling it is suitable, but for serious work - sorry.
Regarding wave theory. Posted by mathemat (Sceptic Philozoff).
Elliot's theory contradicts the logic of price construction. There is only one correction between the beginning and the end of the movement - the maximum one. The others are corrections of a smaller order (level) or a smaller TF. Even the most doubtful indicators will show it when increasing the averaging period in their parameters or switching between the TFs.
Therefore, I do not take this theory seriously. The idea of five waves is a highly artistic, pseudo-intellectual theory that has a hundred patterns, as many contradictions. They may also trade successfully on the same waves, it depends on the person, so I do not accept the success of the eliot traders either. But good for them, in any case))
It's good for pampering, but for serious work - sorry.
That's what you think. I'm guessing it's a misunderstanding. And if you think about it?
Hint. The market is a random process. Its prediction is analogous to guessing the next song on a music station. The DJ knows it (deterministic process), but you do not (random process).
That's what it looks like to you. I suppose it's a misunderstanding of the question. And if you think about it?
Hint. The market is a random process. Its prediction is analogous to guessing the next song on a music station. The DJ knows it (deterministic process) and you do not (random process).
It is a random process, but not for everyone. For the vast majority it is a random process, maybe for you too.
And some claim it is a regulated process. Who should I believe more?
Elliot's theory contradicts the logic of price construction. There is only one correction between the beginning and the end of the move - the maximum correction. The others are corrections of a lower order (level) or a smaller TF. Even the most doubtful indicators will show it when increasing the averaging period in their parameters or switching between the TFs.
That is why I do not take this theory seriously. The idea of five waves is a highly artistic, pseudo-intellectual theory that has a hundred patterns, as many contradictions. They may also trade successfully on the same waves, it depends on the person, so I do not accept the success of the eliot traders either. But, good for them anyway)).
All right. And I was in doubts because of some of your posts.
It is a random process, just not for everyone. For most people it is a random process, maybe for you too.
And some claim it's a regulated process. Who should I believe more?
I already answered in a previous post - believe everyone. Both of them and others. The same process turns out to be deterministic for some and completely random for others.
By the way, on topic. The trend is a regression line and is defined only and exclusively statistically (on history).
Hence it automatically follows that deviations from the regression line are noise.
Hence, also: MAs are no substitute for regression.
It is a random process, just not for everyone. For most people it is a random process, maybe for you too.
And some claim it's a regulated process. Who am I supposed to believe more?
And some say it's self-regulating.