From theory to practice - page 1504
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
That's right. Bravo, as always.
However, the most essential detail, market memory, you have paid a little less attention than at all.
Also. I don't know what you have messed up there in Bablacocos with the beam and cocoon, relative to MA probably, but it is very easy to make money on a random process - using DPT and dispersion calculated according to the law of "the root of time". In this case there is no drift, MA or other nonsense and everything is much simpler than in the market.
This is the paradox and magic that you love so much.
It is a great misconception that you cannot make money from a random process with no memory. On the contrary, in this case, it is much easier than in the market.
It is a great misconception that you cannot make money from a random process with no memory. On the contrary, in this case, everything is much easier than in the market.
Alexander, what prevents you from opening trades at random with different TP and SL, for example, and getting the random series you need and trading it?
Alexander, what prevents you, for example, from opening trades at random with different TP and SL, and you get the series you want and trade it?
What for? I've already said the algorithm for earning on a random process - through TPT and the law of the root of T. The problem is that the market is a non-random process, with giant trends, with memory. The only question is how to define it, by which formula, since it cannot be eradicated. And at that point, either do not enter the trade in a return strategy, or, on the contrary, enter the trend until the memory runs out.
Somehow I think Rena is right: the true, uncluttered memory formula is the ratio of sellers to buyers, OI in other words.
But it should not be used in its pure form, but when trading in a channel, for example.
radikal.ru/video/c91W51Rue08
Wizard, that's cool of course, but matey is such a weighty thing....
1*1=1
10*10=100
i agree that (1+10)/2 != (1+100)/2, or (1+10)/2 << (1+100)/2 at any y scale
hmm, not interesting...
but 1/0 = ?
I may not be as cool with video, but still dividing by zero is a pulse .........
where is it ?
by the way, the opposite is also a pulse, i.e. 0/1
That's right. Bravo, as always.
However, the most essential detail, market memory, you have paid a little less attention than at all.
One more thing. I don't know what you've messed up there in Bablacocos with the beam and cocoon, relative to MA probably, but it's very easy to make money on a random process - with DPT and variance calculated according to the law of the "root of time". In this case there is no drift, MA or other nonsense and everything is much simpler than in the market.
That's the paradox and magic you love so much.
The main idea was to try to formulate a model of a dynamic cocoon (e.g. at least in the form of y=kx+ax^p) which trend component will depend on the current slope of distribution of a given area, then average all cocoons and try to find their common border, as a result this cocoon will not get wider infinitely but will be something like an amorphous snake / pussy which sometimes blows up, unfortunately the problem is quite big as many questions arise, in the simplest case as you have noted it is to take a muv On a plot sometimes one looks better sometimes another, we can also use the law of repeated logarithm, but there is a problem with ashift of the plot by two points and undefined values at zero, and it seems that in the world nobody cares, but visually it is not nice somehow, not neat, I suppose that the concrete form of the law is not even important, because in practice there will anyway be some errors/slippage, there is also a point: you can simply increase the range by a scaling factor before the root, yes so you might not make it to the factory in time...
Market memory is the darkest moment, I'm not so much satisfied with Peters' description, while noise colour and spectra are floating too, in fact only daily rhythm is stable, other harmonics are visibly floating and, worse than that, they're splitting and spreading out... I don't know what to do about it... There is only one thing for sure: looking at the news calendar one can suppose the "Joker effect by Peters" - a memory shift and a sharp fall in autocorrelation... Interesting options were suggested here on the forum too, lots of options, there's not enough time to try everything... From a purely visual point of view the movement should be no less than 200 bars of the working timeframe with a glance at the point of the last extremum and the scale of movements on the left in the history, but it is quite subjective, I understand how it sounds... So far I got used to orienting on the chart form itself and on the calendar...
As for earning purely by CPT from a random process (no memory, no Markovism, no all that) - it seems very questionable to me, I don't even understand how it can happen, maybe there is some special process that is not quite random? After all, the very concept of randomness, if you ask Shiryaev and Kolmogorov for historical reference, is a process that cannot be said to be in any order = no pattern of dependence of specific outcomes = no algorithm by which it can be reproduced at least partially... I can suppose that it has something to do with a consequence of Hinchin and Shiryaev and then we can define a neighborhood S(n)*sqrt(ln(ln(n))))+e which will be a boundary which the process touches only a finite number of times? - But there are assumptions about stable variance and average, and unfortunately the market is not like that... And even logically it is not clear how it can work. We made such an experiment in one secret secret sect: we took generator data and built gradients after trend, for random IID data (and for resampled market data too) there was no shift in any direction on any scale only flatline, But for the market data we observed a soft continuation (arc slightly upwards) and then a rollback to the initial level or slightly below (arc goes down and gradually turns into an asymptote), that is, there was a visible effect of difference between the generated data and the market data by over 9000 averages, in a word, if it is possible to earn on the bare DTT, I am perplexed, magic indeed...
It is a great misconception that you cannot make money from a random process with no memory. On the contrary, in this case, it is much easier than in the market.
Of course I'm not a mathematician, but just a user of mathematics, but it seems very strange! Maybe the problem may lie in the definition of "earn"? For example, it may mean "earn on a certain interval"? Then you may stop the process when it is above zero... However, if the processes are added up in series, this will still have no effect because two processes stitched together is like one inseparable... another assumption is that it has something to do with incremental discreteness and rounding...
I am not a mathematician, but only a user of mathematics, but it seems very strange to me! Maybe the problem lies in the definition of "earn"? For example, does it mean "earn on a certain interval"? Then you can stop the process when it is above zero... However, if the processes are added together sequentially, this will still have no effect because two processes stitched together is like one continuous process... another suggestion is that it has something to do with incremental discreteness and rounding...
Mate, I'll just reiterate my post:
Forum on Trading, Automated Trading Systems and Trading Strategy Testing
From theory to practice
Alexander_K, 2019.03.02 19:36
In the distribution of instantaneous velocities of a simple stream of market quotes, I am desperate to find the key that separates random and non-random price movements in the market.
I wish to deal exclusively and only with random processes like Laplace Motion, while non-random, trend movements piss me off and drive me to my grave.
To be clear.
Here's a classic stationary Laplace Motion:
This is the kind of process you can and should make money from, no matter what anyone says.
And here is the actual market picture I have already given:
On the lower chart you can clearly see a non-random movement (marked with a rectangle) when the price is in a trend, i.e. the sum of increments is in the tail of the distribution for a long time. The classical Laplace Motion does not have such area and these trends are tearing my TS like investors in Alyoshenka the son, who tried to hide from them in vain...
I'm not going to use my own practice until I find the key I coveted, stop embarrassing myself. And I do not recommend anyone who wants to go to the market without it.