What charting programm would you recommend ?
Tul
i'm looking for a good charting programe.
(no metastock, no TC2000 please).
What are the alternatives ? Cheap if possible.
Thanks,
Tul
Bob Grumbine
Write one yourself. Does precisely what you want it to do. All of the
time. Anything you don't like, you get to patch it immediately so that
next day it works perfectly. That's the only real alternative.
Bob Grumbine :-)##
+++++++++++++++ # email bgru...@dimensional.com
Robert E. "Bob" # postal PO Box 260203, Lakewood CO 80226-0203
Grumbine, MBA # voice 303-232-4520
visit Bob's web site at http://www.dimensional.com/~bgrumbin
Proton
if you have high-speed Internet access. Their basic, free service can be
reached at:
http://www.stockcharts.com/index.html
If, perchance, you are so impressed by it that you want to subscribe to the
"Extra" service (includes technical scanning), please let me know. I will
get an extra month free.
"Tul" <f...@ff.ff> wrote in message
news:3bbc6cd4$0$1573$4362...@news-test.free.fr...
Bob Grumbine
> Stockcharts.com is a decent replacement for a charting program,
> especially if you have high-speed Internet access. Their basic, free
> service can be reached at:
> http://www.stockcharts.com/index.html
Hear ye! They're good enough to have gotten a top line position on my
web site. I use them myself when I want to create quality charts for
inclusion in postings various places. Even nonsubscribers are allowed to
create charts and StockCharts goes so far as to *explain how* Windoze
dummies can capture the created charts (even if they rationally won't store
them for you unless you subscribe to their pay service). I was so
favorably impressed with StockCharts that I'm even considering sending
them some money (subscribing) just because I like the way they do business.
Good outfit, and don't forget that Proton...@go.com recommended
them to you first and would like you to help him get an extra month free
by writing him if you decide to go for the non-free version of StockCharts
service. Shameless plug. But when it's for something as useful as
StockCharts, even I am willing to go along with it.
Proton
decide to go for the non-free version of StockCharts service. Shameless
plug. But when it's for something as useful as StockCharts, even I am
willing to go along with it.>>
<LOL!> Actually, I was pretty ashamed to make my plug. Spam is -- along
with testosterone-laced cortisol generated by minor flame wars -- the great
crippler of newsgroups [personal opinion, of course]. Even the truly
shameless spammers among us should have the good grace to disclose what
their compensation is. Of course, there is nothing the genital-growers and
pedophiles can do to redeem themselves (if you really want to reduce your
risk of prostate and bladder cancer, don't buy some pump -- just drink
cranberry juice).
C.U.
P.
server not recognized
email I won't say else others will say I'm vendoring, but you can email me
and I will advise.
P
--
"Tul" <f...@ff.ff> wrote in message
news:3bbc6cd4$0$1573$4362...@news-test.free.fr...
Eric Magaoay
A-T Financial Information, Inc.
http://www.atfi.com
Great for mulitple monitors since you can organized unlimited charts
and other data anyway you wanted. Most trading software I ecnountered
only limit charts/data within the main program's window screen.
Not cheap though!
eric
Omicron Research Institute
Why don't you check out my StockEval program on the Omicron Research
Institute web site at www.omicronrsch.com. It is a scientific approach to
short-term stock trading and technical analysis. I am just completing a
major upgrade (v. 3.0) which should be ready by Oct. 15. This might just be
the software you are looking for. It is reasonably priced at $795, and best
of all the trading rules can be demonstrated to work via a diagnostic test.
Bob
"Tul" <f...@ff.ff> wrote in message
news:3bbc6cd4$0$1573$4362...@news-test.free.fr...
server not recognized
--
"Omicron Research Institute" <ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote in message
news:9pj2el$8sq$1...@news3.kcnet.com...
Wireless Trader
Also, consider using one of the general math or stats programs that are
free. They have much more capability than your typical stock charting
program -- they will not come with a library of predefined indicators, but
you are free to write any indicators you like. Somepossibilities :
Octave (http://www.gnu.org/software/octave/octave.html)
R (http://www.r-project.org/)
Yorick (ftp://ftp-icf.llnl.gov/pub/Yorick/doc/index.html)
Matrix apps lend themselves well to the purpose since each indicator can be
treated as a vector for the time series.
QuoteMonster can be used for data retrieval
http://xmlworks.com/quotemonster/
"Tul" <f...@ff.ff> wrote in message
news:3bbc6cd4$0$1573$4362...@news-test.free.fr...
Perrush
"Tul" <f...@ff.ff> schreef in bericht
news:3bbc6cd4$0$1573$4362...@news-test.free.fr...
> Hi,
> i'm looking for a good charting programe.
> (no metastock, no TC2000 please).
>
Jack Hershey
There's a chance Tul is able to work through what is required to handle the
real market/ capital appreciation issues.
The dichotomy that programmers aren't financially educated and the
financially educated aren't programmers is looming here.
The two generations of the Wordens is very interesting here too. When the
Wordens gave up on handling Y2K reasonably, their short cut to increasing
income was to pursue systems to support data sales. It just like the steps
IBM kept taking to screw up over and over.
Tul has recognized something most don't see. He wants to be able to
skillfully anticipate using a very fast feed that gives him real time
analysis depth.
The combination of ability to display indicator signals and being able to
display on a fractal level faster than your trading decision fractal level
is an exquisite thing. Pairs turn everything into slow motion for any of
the several market paces which appear.
The three computer I run on a cable feed each have twin screens accessible
with one mouse. The arc they are arranged in in 68cm and my glasses have
the same focal length.
"Perrush" <stefan....@PERRUSHpandora.be> wrote in message
news:Fvzv7.87901$6x5.19...@afrodite.telenet-ops.be...
Jack Hershey
who contributes here. as an amateur I am still working out how to give away
the knowledge I have. I know the persons who have reduced it to software
have terrific performance results.
Where you are definitely headed is to software that is not limited the way
omicron etc is.
"Omicron Research Institute" <ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote in message
news:9pj2el$8sq$1...@news3.kcnet.com...
Jim Cochrane
Wireless Trader <wireles...@xmlworks.com> wrote:
>Have you looked at MAS (http://sourceforge.net/projects/eiffel-mas/) ?
>
By the way, over the summer I ported the current version of MAS to Windows
(from Linux). I hope to release it soon on sourceforge, but if anyone
would like to try out a beta release, you can grab it at:
ftp://ftp.dimensional.com/users/jtc/mw
Read the README file for instructions on how to install it.
>
>"Tul" <f...@ff.ff> wrote in message
>news:3bbc6cd4$0$1573$4362...@news-test.free.fr...
>> Hi,
>> i'm looking for a good charting programe.
>> (no metastock, no TC2000 please).
>>
>> What are the alternatives ? Cheap if possible.
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Tul
>>
>>
>
>
--
Jim Cochrane
j...@dimensional.com
[When responding by email, include the term non-spam in the subject line to
get through my spam filter.]
dufferdon
wrote:
>I agree with P, you should check in with him. P. is experienced as a pro
>who contributes here. as an amateur I am still working out how to give away
>the knowledge I have. I know the persons who have reduced it to software
>have terrific performance results.
>
>Where you are definitely headed is to software that is not limited the way
>omicron etc is.
>
>
Jack, many times in your posts you have mentioned the C++ software
based on your trading ideas and you have offered to make it available
on disk to some. My bulletin board (link below), which provides a
place for discussing your ideas, also has the capability for file
storage and easy distribution.
I would be happy if you would upload any relevant programs there or
send them to me and I will do it. You are also more than welcome to
give away any knowledge you have in any other form by posting it
there. Then it becomes part of an easily accessed permanent record of
your thoughts and observations, rather than you having to recycle the
same information again and again to a newsgroup audience that seems to
have a rather short half-life.
Last time I looked though Deja I believe you had some 900+ posts in
the investment newsgroups and it really is becoming an arduous chore
for those newly interested in your ideas to cull the really
substantive posts from those that are casual comments and anecdotes.
I am also sure that the audience at my board would appreciate hearing
from the horses mouth, rather than relying on me to translate (perhaps
inaccurately) a few of your concepts.
Don Cameron
"The crowd never thirsted for the truth" - G. LeBon
Check out my free, non-commercial stock trading bulletin board at
http://communities.msn.com/ShortTermStockTrading/messageboard.msnw
Omicron Research Institute
I wish you could explain what you mean that my StockEval software is
"limited". It only analyzes up to 256 stocks instead of thousands, but that
is because it does such extensive calculations and uses 1000 days of data.
At the moment it only handles stocks, but I am going to add mutual funds and
indexes within a couple of months. What do you mean limited? Aren't there
enough technical indicators? I am open to any suggestions you have to give,
and I thank you for them. (But personally, it is just the kind of software
I want to use for stock trading; that is why I wrote it.)
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"Jack Hershey" <jhers...@home.com> wrote in message
news:UPJv7.108590$aZ6.24...@news1.rdc1.az.home.com...
Omicron Research Institute
I hope you don't think I am bragging, but I have a Ph.D. in theoretical
particle physics and I am a pretty good programmer. I also have the Series
7 license, and although it is not as good as an MBA in finance, at least it
is something. I have been studying the book on MPT by Sharpe, et. al., on
my own, and have learned a lot from it.
I am always looking for new ideas. I thought sometime in the future I would
adapt my StockEval program to real-time quotes, using DTN. The program
could re-compute the price projection from Linear Prediction every minute,
since the routine only takes half a second. Is this really what everybody
wants? The two-point correlations in the price ticks become strong for time
periods less than 20 minutes, and trading on these short time scales could
be very profitable. But would the individual trader be able to trade on
such short notice?
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"Jack Hershey" <jhers...@home.com> wrote in message
news:cJJv7.108569$aZ6.24...@news1.rdc1.az.home.com...
Simon Haynes
> Write one yourself. Does precisely what you want it to do. All of the
> time. Anything you don't like, you get to patch it immediately so that
> next day it works perfectly. That's the only real alternative.
> Bob Grumbine :-)##
Or you can download Freecharts from my site (www.spacejock.com). I'm the
programmer, and my users email me suggestions which I often code into the
program after some discussion and/or thought. It's the second best thing to
writing it yourself. (Better, if you don't know a class module from a
mushroom)
Cheers
Simon
---
o Author of yBook (eText reader) and Freecharts SE (Stock Charting)
Download FREE from http://www.spacejock.com
o Author of 'Hal Spacejock' - ISBN 1-877034-00-2 (AUD$15.95)
Order now from http://www.spacejock.com
server not recognized
have spent some time here as has Bonehead, riskarb, Mike Higgs plus a few
others, sufficient corporate memory to keep some of the bastard posters
honest.
As regards trading skill, I think we live in different neighbourhoods.
While I too am an amateur -it is stucco and tar paper for me and Biltmore
for you. You are far too modest a fellow by far. If I have any original
insights its only because of during the time it took for 700 references to
"compound interest" to seep in, I must have absorbed some of your other
stuff as well.
P
--
"Jack Hershey" <jhers...@home.com> wrote in message
news:UPJv7.108590$aZ6.24...@news1.rdc1.az.home.com...
server not recognized
Defence Scientist finished a long explanation of the force multiplier effect
of technology etc to the head military forces general, only to be advised "
thats very good. But you know we kill people here".
Until you confront the demons and faced your fears its hard to be really
grounded, and when you have confronted them you learn something and you can
see it missing in an instant in those that haven't.
So exposure to the real world of trading as opposed to the real world of
particle physics would help you understand what you are attempting to
develop. Until you get peer acceptance of what you are doing and some real
independent review and preferentially a successful track record of your
system using REAL not hypothetical paper trades, then you fall into the
category of wannabe vendor spammer.
Why is it so hard that you can't use your system for six months and come
back and tell everyone to get stuffed, you just made a million bucks and on
the way to ten million bucks and you wouldn't sell now anyway. Cause we all
know you can't do it. There's the challenge. Prove me wrong and I'll buy
it myself.
P
--
"Omicron Research Institute" <ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote in message
news:9pohbu$h4f$1...@news3.kcnet.com...
Alex
Mr. Rickert but he stopped
developing it any more. It's very easy to use. Alex
Omicron Research Institute
So what is the difference between the trading software costing many
thousands of dollars and the charting shareware? I had a recent customer
who suggested that I raise the price on my software, so I did. My software
does a lot of complex calculations; does the shareware (or even the
expensive trading software)?
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"Jack Hershey" <jhers...@home.com> wrote in message
news:UPJv7.108590$aZ6.24...@news1.rdc1.az.home.com...
dufferdon
<ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote:
>I am happy to be acquainted with P.
>
>So what is the difference between the trading software costing many
>thousands of dollars and the charting shareware? I had a recent customer
>who suggested that I raise the price on my software, so I did. My software
>does a lot of complex calculations; does the shareware (or even the
>expensive trading software)?
I and many others primarily rely on charting software to sort the
wheat from the chaff by screening using fairly simple criteria. Does
your software do this?
When I have what I believe to be the likeliest prospects to trade I
would sooner rely on an educated and experienced eye and brain to make
my trading decisions rather than a lot of complex calculations. Your
approach belies your background. I too have a Ph.D, but I was an
experimentalist rather than a theoretician. Hence my bias.
Your software is far too expensive for my requirements. I get mine
free from TC2000.
Omicron Research Institute
Thanks very much for your comments. I need to find out what people are
thinking. It seems that there is a whole range of opinions.
Personally, I use stock charts with 15 years of data to make my initial
purchase selections. These charts also have fundamental data to go on.
Then I use StockEval to track the stocks on a daily basis and look for
buy/sell points. I, too use my own brain and eyeball the Main Graph to make
buy/sell decisions. However, the technical indicators in StockEval are also
a big help in deciding when to buy/sell. They supplement, rather than
replace, my own intuitive judgement.
I started out writing StockEval because I didn't like the way the free
software displayed the data. A proper display of the data helps a lot when
"eyeballing" the chart.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"dufferdon" <duff...@whoknowswhere.com> wrote in message
news:o801stk93ccqkm68v...@4ax.com...
Omicron Research Institute
Thanks very much for your input.
I have been trading since 1988 in the stock market. I decided to write
StockEval because I didn't like any of the existing software. If there had
been a software package that I really liked, I would have used it instead of
writing my own.
I have to do paper trading in the program because I need to test the system
over a long period of time. I am not trying to claim that anybody will get
rich in six months. I am just claiming that my trading system leads to the
greatest possible returns with the least risk. I thought it was a great
achievement to be able to consistently do better than the market, in
contradiction to established wisdom. Isn't that pretty good?
Why is everybody so cynical? I wanted to develop a system using the best
advice of the experts, that would be a completely realistic trading and
investing method. The experts all say to "buy and hold", but I thought I
could do better, and I have. What's wrong with that? But I am definitely
not claiming that people can get rich overnight (as other products are
claiming). Please don't confuse me with the others.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"server not recognized" <win...@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:vmVv7.20852$Tv6.1...@news1.rdc1.nsw.optushome.com.au...
server not recognized
usually traders who forgot or chickened out when it came time to pull the
trigger, then hoped, and hoped some more, and then ..oh well....became
investors.
It is great to do better than the market. Most of the people here are TA
driven with usually a watchful eye on FA.
Why are you surprised people are not cynical. Where have you been since
1988 - inside a cyclotron? Even a quick perusal of the google records of
posts would have identified software sellers bobbinbg up here along with the
usually cast of snake oil salesmen/women of one sort or another. There was
an exceptional group here about two years ago but an anonymous flame war
drove many away, though they lurk from time to time.
I suppose with a PhD you haven't done much marketing study, I'd suggest you
think about a business plan with a SWOT etc. Why is anyone going to give Dr
Joe Blow from Woop-Woop, $800 bucks cash for anything?
P
--
"Omicron Research Institute" <ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote in message
news:9ps90g$mqv$1...@news3.kcnet.com...
Omicron Research Institute
It's true I haven't spent much time on the newsgroups--too busy programming
and reading books. Its also true I don't know much about marketing. What
is SWOT?
On the other hand, I understand a lot of math and physics and have read a
lot about the stock market and finance in general. It really is very
difficult to beat the market and the "buy and hold" strategy. Most mutual
funds do not perform as well as the indexes, for example. If the Random
Walk theory is true, then active trading cannot work, and it just greatly
increases the risk (variance of returns) with no average increase in
returns.
If you hope to come out ahead, you had better use a set of trading rules
that finds a real inefficiency in the market. Otherwise, it is just
gambling. That is where my StockEval program comes in. I worked hard to
find a set of rules that can really be verified to work. Considering all
the advanced features, personally I think $795 is cheap. As the saying
goes, an active trader can easily make that up in a single trade. I am sure
many traders would welcome some new, original technical tools, rather than
relying solely on "eyeballing" the charts using shareware or freeware.
Have you ever studied any Modern Portfolio Theory, like the book
"Investments" by Sharpe, et. al.? Those are the experts I am talking about.
They are finance professors, and Sharpe won the Nobel Prize. As far as I
have seen so far, my software is the only one that takes these experts
seriously.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"server not recognized" <win...@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:rNtw7.10459$98.5...@news1.rivrw1.nsw.optushome.com.au...
dufferdon
<ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote:
> Considering all
>the advanced features, personally I think $795 is cheap. As the saying
>goes, an active trader can easily make that up in a single trade. I am sure
>many traders would welcome some new, original technical tools, rather than
>relying solely on "eyeballing" the charts using shareware or freeware.
>
>Bob
OK, it's time for the acid test questions.
Are you actually a trader? How many times have you made $795 with a
single trade? Has your actual trading using your software been
profitable overall? Are you prepared to publish audited trading
results on your web-site? If your software is the greatest thing since
sliced-bread and it really allows one to make lots of money trading,
why not just trade rather than try to sell the software?
Brian
I don't understand why you (and others) try to discredit someone for putting
software out on the market, with questions that have nothing to do with the
usefullness of the software... and then you end it by inviting people to
something that you're involved in.. go figure!
There's many reasons why people offer software for sale... loving a challenge and
enjoying programming have alot to do with it... the thrill of starting your own
company and offering products to the marketplace is a big one too. It may be
hard to believe, but there are people out there who value those things more than
they value keeping to themselves and trading a "secret" trading system. It's
satisfying to get acknowledgment from peers about a job and philosophy well
done. Some developers, like myself, don't have a large enough trading account to
really make a nice profit to live off of, so we put our software out there, and
enjoy the benefits I described above. As a developer, wouldn't it be IDEAL to
make decent money through the software, AND make a profit from trading and
experimenting with your own ideas.. of course!!!!!!!! That's OUR holy grail :)
Brian
> OK, it's time for the acid test questions.
>
> Are you actually a trader? How many times have you made $795 with a
> single trade? Has your actual trading using your software been
> profitable overall? Are you prepared to publish audited trading
> results on your web-site? If your software is the greatest thing since
> sliced-bread and it really allows one to make lots of money trading,
> why not just trade rather than try to sell the software?
>
> "The crowd never thirsted for the truth" - G. LeBon
>
> Check out my free, non-commercial stock trading bulletin board at
>
> ://communities.msn.com/ShortTermStockTrading/messageboard.msnw
dufferdon
tell whether he is buying a pig in a poke? There is no Consumer
Reports issue for investment software. Sometimes in life it pays to
be cynical. BTW, I run a discussion board. I am not trying to part
people form their money. Not quite the same thing I think.
The excuse that you don't have enough money to trade is a cop out. It
shouldn't take long for a skilled computer programmer to pull together
$5-10,000 and use it to develop an audited track record. There's no
better marketing tool.
http://communities.msn.com/ShortTermStockTrading/messageboard.msnw
bassetti
& Magee's Technical Analysis of Stock Trends. For free charting see
prophetfinance.com. AIQ, Metastock and Tradestation have terrific programs.
Bassetti
www.johnmageeta.com
Omicron Research Institute
I wanted to amend my own comment. I hope that is OK.
Evidently the idea that the "buy and hold" strategy is hard to beat might
have come from some past era when commission rates were high. Now that
commissions are practically zero, this statement might not apply anymore.
Nevertheless, short-term trading does greatly increase the risk (variance of
returns). Unless there is a corresponding increase in expected returns, it
is gambling, not investing.
Actually, my StockEval program uses indicators that are not all that
different from some of the traditional ones. I have just found a better way
of computing them. This shows that at least part of Technical Analysis
works, contrary to some academic studies. But some of it seems a little
far-fetched. The question is still, "What really works and what doesn't?"
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"server not recognized" <win...@optushome.com.au> wrote in message
news:rNtw7.10459$98.5...@news1.rivrw1.nsw.optushome.com.au...
David Wilkinson
<ORI...@kcnet.com> writes
>P,
>
>It's true I haven't spent much time on the newsgroups--too busy programming
>and reading books. Its also true I don't know much about marketing. What
>is SWOT?
>
>On the other hand, I understand a lot of math and physics and have read a
>lot about the stock market and finance in general. It really is very
>difficult to beat the market and the "buy and hold" strategy. Most mutual
>funds do not perform as well as the indexes, for example. If the Random
>Walk theory is true, then active trading cannot work, and it just greatly
>increases the risk (variance of returns) with no average increase in
>returns.
>
>If you hope to come out ahead, you had better use a set of trading rules
>that finds a real inefficiency in the market. Otherwise, it is just
>gambling. That is where my StockEval program comes in. I worked hard to
>find a set of rules that can really be verified to work. Considering all
>the advanced features, personally I think $795 is cheap. As the saying
>goes, an active trader can easily make that up in a single trade. I am sure
>many traders would welcome some new, original technical tools, rather than
>relying solely on "eyeballing" the charts using shareware or freeware.
$795 sounds very expensive to me when I can get O'Higgins' "Beating the
Dow" for $15.
>
>Have you ever studied any Modern Portfolio Theory, like the book
>"Investments" by Sharpe, et. al.? Those are the experts I am talking about.
>They are finance professors, and Sharpe won the Nobel Prize. As far as I
>have seen so far, my software is the only one that takes these experts
>seriously.
>
MPT is a good theory if you have sound data on future returns and
standard deviations to feed into it but, as the data is unknown and
unknowable, MPT is about as much use as a piece of wet string. As for
Nobel Prize winners in economics, weren't a couple of them running that
long term hedge fund that went spectacularly bust a year or so ago?
>
>
--
David Wilkinson
Mike Higgs
news:2sHvmsAN...@quarksoft.demon.co.uk...
> As for
> Nobel Prize winners in economics, weren't a couple of them running that
> long term hedge fund that went spectacularly bust a year or so ago?
Close. They weren't running the LTCM but the fund was based on the
Black-Scholes option pricing model which won its 3 authors the Nobel prize.
See http://optionetics.com/articles/archive/article_archive_full.asp The
site is passworded but membership is free.
Regards,
Mike
millstox
>For total destruction of the buy and hold method see the 8th edition of Edwards
>& Magee's Technical Analysis of Stock Trends. For free charting see
>prophetfinance.com. AIQ, Metastock and Tradestation have terrific programs.
>Bassetti
>www.johnmageeta.com
For total destruction of the buy and hold method, look at a 2-year
chart of the NASDAQ.
millstox
>Jack,
>
>I hope you don't think I am bragging, but I have a Ph.D. in theoretical
>particle physics and I am a pretty good programmer. I also have the Series
>7 license, and although it is not as good as an MBA in finance, at least it
>is something. I have been studying the book on MPT by Sharpe, et. al., on
>my own, and have learned a lot from it.
>
>I am always looking for new ideas. I thought sometime in the future I would
>adapt my StockEval program to real-time quotes, using DTN. The program
>could re-compute the price projection from Linear Prediction every minute,
>since the routine only takes half a second. Is this really what everybody
>wants? The two-point correlations in the price ticks become strong for time
>periods less than 20 minutes, and trading on these short time scales could
>be very profitable. But would the individual trader be able to trade on
>such short notice?
>
>Bob
You're asking if traders can make a trade in a 20 minute timespan?
Tell me I've misunderstood you, please!
millstox
>On Sun, 7 Oct 2001 08:53:19 -0500, "Omicron Research Institute"
><ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote:
>
>>I am happy to be acquainted with P.
>>
>>So what is the difference between the trading software costing many
>>thousands of dollars and the charting shareware? I had a recent customer
>>who suggested that I raise the price on my software, so I did. My software
>>does a lot of complex calculations; does the shareware (or even the
>>expensive trading software)?
>
>I and many others primarily rely on charting software to sort the
>wheat from the chaff by screening using fairly simple criteria. Does
>your software do this?
>
>When I have what I believe to be the likeliest prospects to trade I
>would sooner rely on an educated and experienced eye and brain to make
>my trading decisions rather than a lot of complex calculations. Your
>approach belies your background. I too have a Ph.D, but I was an
>experimentalist rather than a theoretician. Hence my bias.
>
>Your software is far too expensive for my requirements. I get mine
>free from TC2000.
You get the datafeed free too? Kewel, howdya do that?
millstox
>You won't find many "experts" here advocating buy and hold. Investors are
>usually traders who forgot or chickened out when it came time to pull the
>trigger, then hoped, and hoped some more, and then ..oh well....became
>investors.
Buy and hold is the only way to go! Buy when it's time for a move,
and sell once it's made it (or when it shows you were wrong)!
millstox
>On the other hand, I understand a lot of math and physics and have read a
>lot about the stock market and finance in general. It really is very
>difficult to beat the market and the "buy and hold" strategy.
No kidding, huh? You should learn more. Really.
>Most mutual
>funds do not perform as well as the indexes, for example. If the Random
>Walk theory is true,
It isn't.
> then active trading cannot work, and it just greatly
>increases the risk (variance of returns) with no average increase in
>returns.
See above.
>If you hope to come out ahead, you had better use a set of trading rules
>that finds a real inefficiency in the market. Otherwise, it is just
>gambling. That is where my StockEval program comes in. I worked hard to
>find a set of rules that can really be verified to work. Considering all
>the advanced features, personally I think $795 is cheap. As the saying
>goes, an active trader can easily make that up in a single trade. I am sure
>many traders would welcome some new, original technical tools, rather than
>relying solely on "eyeballing" the charts using shareware or freeware.
>
>Have you ever studied any Modern Portfolio Theory, like the book
>"Investments" by Sharpe, et. al.? Those are the experts I am talking about.
>They are finance professors, and Sharpe won the Nobel Prize. As far as I
>have seen so far, my software is the only one that takes these experts
>seriously.
>
>Bob
All the theory in the world won't make you a nickel if the theory
doesn't hold in the real world.
millstox
>P,
>
>I wanted to amend my own comment. I hope that is OK.
>
>Evidently the idea that the "buy and hold" strategy is hard to beat might
>have come from some past era when commission rates were high. Now that
>commissions are practically zero, this statement might not apply anymore.
>Nevertheless, short-term trading does greatly increase the risk (variance of
>returns). Unless there is a corresponding increase in expected returns, it
>is gambling, not investing.
There is no difference between gambling and investing except in the
mind of the rube. No matter what your timeframe, if you put money
into the financial markets you are gambling, period. The trick is to
keep the odds heavily in your favor by using a combination of
understanding and leverage.
>Actually, my StockEval program uses indicators that are not all that
>different from some of the traditional ones. I have just found a better way
>of computing them. This shows that at least part of Technical Analysis
>works, contrary to some academic studies. But some of it seems a little
>far-fetched. The question is still, "What really works and what doesn't?"
That is indeed the question.
Personally there are only two indicators that I really *need* to
trade, a price history chart with associated volume.
Anything beyond that is a nicety. The more derived your indicators
are, the more likely you are to slip into the fallacy of taking the
indicator's word for it. Stochastic is handy if you want to point
something out to a friend, and also handy because quite a few people
base trades on it; but it's derived from relationships within the
data, and the human mind is a better analytical tool than any program.
When it comes down to placing money on the line, I don't care what the
stochastic says, because it's a trailing indicator and I've spent
plenty of time training my mind to read leading indications.
Good luck with your product, really. In my opinion, both as an active
trader and as a programmer with 30 years of professional software
experience who has developed and sold software products, it is
overpriced. Profit equals price times units less expenses; make it
shareware for $30 and if it's as good as you believe it is, you'll
make more profit.
If it's as good as you believe, you should be able to make at least
20% a month on a consistent basis, so put some money on the line and
soon you won't need to worry whether it sells or not.
Mike Higgs
news:l6j8st4n44c868h89...@4ax.com...
> There is no difference between gambling and investing except in the
> mind of the rube. No matter what your timeframe, if you put money
> into the financial markets you are gambling, period. The trick is to
> keep the odds heavily in your favor by using a combination of
> understanding and leverage.
Ahh, but that's a huge difference. When you gamble, the house always has
the odds in its favour. When you invest/trade, it's possible for the
individual to have the odds in his favour. It does really matter whether
it's gambling or investing. It's all about who has the edge.
Regards,
Mike
Omicron Research Institute
Scholes running the hedge fund. The dynamics of financial systems is very
complicated--it sounded like they got a little overconfident in their
system.
I am not an expert on options, but from what I have seen the Black-Scholes
model seems very simplistic. It assumes a Normal distribution with zero
expected return, which is clearly not very realistic. Its main virtue is
its simplicity, both conceptual and computational. Evidently it is exactly
solvable, if I am not mistaken, and academics love those kind of models.
Personally, I would opt for a more realistic, if more complicated model. It
is known that financial returns actually obey some kind of Pareto-Levy
distribution. Most systems in the real world have fatter "tails" than the
Normal distribution.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"Mike Higgs" <moong...@home.com> wrote in message
news:OUWw7.55055$0%.8486923@news1.busy1.on.home.com...
Omicron Research Institute
From studying a lot of science, it eventually becomes clear what the
limitations of science are. No scientific theory is perfect, although some
theories like classical electrodynamics in physics are close to it.
Financial systems, on the other hand, are far more complex and difficult
than simple physical systems that can be studied in the lab. Up until
recently, there were no scientific theories of financial systems at all.
Even a theory that is only partially correct is better than none at all.
The MPT that I have studied seems pretty simple and obvious now. But I can
see that before I studied it, my ideas about the market were way off. You
need to take the Random Walk model and EMH seriously, even though they are
not exactly correct--they are only idealizations. The departures from these
ideals make it possible to gain by short term trading. But you need to
understand the basic model before you can study the departures from it (the
correlations and inefficiencies that make Technical Analysis work).
I think MPT is useful as a conceptual framework, even though it is only a
crude approximation to reality.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"David Wilkinson" <da...@quarksoft.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:2sHvmsAN...@quarksoft.demon.co.uk...
millstox
>David,
>
>From studying a lot of science, it eventually becomes clear what the
>limitations of science are. No scientific theory is perfect, although some
>theories like classical electrodynamics in physics are close to it.
>Financial systems, on the other hand, are far more complex and difficult
>than simple physical systems that can be studied in the lab. Up until
>recently, there were no scientific theories of financial systems at all.
>Even a theory that is only partially correct is better than none at all.
>
>The MPT that I have studied seems pretty simple and obvious now. But I can
>see that before I studied it, my ideas about the market were way off. You
>need to take the Random Walk model and EMH seriously, even though they are
>not exactly correct--they are only idealizations. The departures from these
>ideals make it possible to gain by short term trading. But you need to
>understand the basic model before you can study the departures from it (the
>correlations and inefficiencies that make Technical Analysis work).
>
>I think MPT is useful as a conceptual framework, even though it is only a
>crude approximation to reality.
>
>Bob
I used to be almost as smart as you are. Those were the days, Bob.
Since then I've emptied my trading account twice, and finally learned
how to tell my ass from my elbow.
Mike Higgs
> I am not an expert on options, but from what I have seen the Black-Scholes
> model seems very simplistic. It assumes a Normal distribution with zero
> expected return, which is clearly not very realistic. Its main virtue is
> its simplicity, both conceptual and computational. Evidently it is
exactly
> solvable, if I am not mistaken, and academics love those kind of models.
OK, you're not an expert in options. Let's assume that the Nobel prize
committee is. You might want to check your ego at the door before you make
these kinds of statements.
Regards,
Mike
David Wilkinson
<moong...@home.com> writes
so per annum with a fair standard deviation but over the long term the
odds are you win. That's investing.
If you play roulette then the punters lose 1/37 or 2/37 of the amount
bet on average every spin of the wheel. depending on how many zeros
there are. So the house averages 2.7 or 5.4% gain on the money on the
table, which the punters lose. That's gambling.
--
David Wilkinson
David Wilkinson
As my main research area is computational fluid dynamics I am well aware
of the limitations of mathematical models in trying to represent complex
real phenomena. I agree that MPT is better than nothing and I have tried
several times to use the asset allocation algorithm for it given by
Elton & Gruber.
However, the problem is, as Bernstein has pointed out, that the
recommended portfolio is highly sensitive to the data on returns and
standard deviations fed into it. Quite small changes to what are only
estimated numbers about the future give big changes to the answer. After
playing about with it for a while you tend to conclude that almost any
answer is possible depending on the assumed numbers and that what it is
really giving you is the best portfolio that would have worked in the
past because usually numbers are historical ones.
The E&G method ranks the investments by the Sharpe Ratios so at the peak
of the tech stock bubble it would probably have said something like put
95% of your money into tech stocks as they have a very high return over
standard deviation which, historically they did then. Ditto for Japanese
stocks in 1989 and US stocks in 1987 and 1972. As such it is more like a
momentum follower if you use historical returns and SDs. And what else
can you use as this is the only data you have? If you guess future
numbers then you guess the outcome. Bernstein gets round this by
guessing the allocation directly without bothering with the MPT
mathematics. The trouble is that his guessed portfolios have pretty
feeble returns even historically. He says something like keep the faith,
baby, it's bound to pay off in the end but I am not convinced.
Are you seriously saying that you feed numbers into an MPT model and
then allocate your assets by what it recommends?
In article <9q2qov$4ho$1...@news3.kcnet.com>, Omicron Research Institute
<ORI...@kcnet.com> writes
--
David Wilkinson
Mike Higgs
> That's right. If you hold a portfolio of stocks you stand to make 12% or
> so per annum with a fair standard deviation but over the long term the
> odds are you win. That's investing.
>
> If you play roulette then the punters lose 1/37 or 2/37 of the amount
> bet on average every spin of the wheel. depending on how many zeros
> there are. So the house averages 2.7 or 5.4% gain on the money on the
> table, which the punters lose. That's gambling.
I think that it can apply to trading rather as well as investing. It
depends whether or not you have an exploitable edge. I also think that the
"Is it investing/trading or gambling argument?" usually misses the point
entirely because it ignores the concept of risk definition and risk
minimilization.
Regards,
Mike
Omicron Research Institute
With some of the trading techniques that are being advocated, it is not
surprising that people would empty their trading accounts. To me the idea
of searching through thousands of stocks, looking for short-term trading
signals, does not make any sense. People who do a lot of radical in-and-out
trading like that stand a very good chance of losing their money. That is
why I am trying to advocate a sensible approach to short-term trading that
is as safe as possible. That is what MPT is all about--increasing returns
while reducing risk. Hardly anybody talks about risk with regard to
short-term trading, but they should.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"millstox" <kissm...@hell.com> wrote in message
news:n9u9stgb5cg5c129a...@4ax.com...
Rosinke
Take it from someone that knows how to evaluate, your program that
you've deployed on the web under "TickeRank" truly ranks among the few
BEST I've ever seen as far as 'Job and Philosophy' goes. Haven't
gotten rich off it yet (due to my personal shortcomings), but if I had
to chose one program that would be helpful to filter for tradable your
software is the 'none plus ultra' in my opinion. I fully agree with
what you posted, because I often mention to my wife about these selfless
folks that contribute substantial value to the web with little concern
for their immediate remuneration. Your software works without a hassle,
is almost self-explanatory, and with just a little common sense one
could go a long way making proper trading selections, and perhaps
decisions. If I ever get the right clue for trading w/o losses you may
rest assured that I'll reciprocate for the work you have done.
Regards, Bruno
P.S. Never mind audited track record ;-) (some folks really don't know
where to stop!)
PPS. Don't anybody answer, because I ain't got time to read much posts,
too busy using "TickeRank" :-)
millstox
>Millstox,
>
>With some of the trading techniques that are being advocated, it is not
>surprising that people would empty their trading accounts. To me the idea
>of searching through thousands of stocks, looking for short-term trading
>signals, does not make any sense. People who do a lot of radical in-and-out
>trading like that stand a very good chance of losing their money. That is
>why I am trying to advocate a sensible approach to short-term trading that
>is as safe as possible. That is what MPT is all about--increasing returns
>while reducing risk. Hardly anybody talks about risk with regard to
>short-term trading, but they should.
>
>Bob
Indeed they should. Risk is a money-management issue. And by the
way, it was not with radical in-and-out trading that I had trouble, it
was with holding. In my experience daytrading is the safest possible
kind of trading. Of course most people see it very differently.
Anyway since you have chosen to ignore what I was trying to tell you,
resorting to the old you-lost-you-know-nothing strategem, I'll just
wish you luck and sit back to laugh later. Though there could be
additional outcomes, I see three as most likely; you'll lower your
price to a reasonable level and make a profit, you'll keep your price
high and go broke, or you'll try some actual trading and learn what
you're doing before you get any deeper into automating something you
don't understand. Good luck.
dufferdon
<ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote:
>Millstox,
>
>With some of the trading techniques that are being advocated, it is not
>surprising that people would empty their trading accounts. To me the idea
>of searching through thousands of stocks, looking for short-term trading
>signals, does not make any sense. People who do a lot of radical in-and-out
>trading like that stand a very good chance of losing their money. That is
>why I am trying to advocate a sensible approach to short-term trading that
>is as safe as possible. That is what MPT is all about--increasing returns
>while reducing risk. Hardly anybody talks about risk with regard to
>short-term trading, but they should.
>
>Bob
Let me repeat my previous question. Do you actually trade and if so do
you actually make money trading? If not, you know very little about
trading and should not pontificate.
"The crowd never thirsted for the truth" - G. LeBon
Check out my free, non-commercial stock trading bulletin board at
http://communities.msn.com/ShortTermStockTrading/messageboard.msnw
dufferdon
respond to them. However, he used to be a trader before he became so
enamored by "challenge", "programming" and the "thrill of starting his
own company". He actually ran a bulletin board with his
recommendations as I recall.
I guess actual trading was not sufficiently challenging for him. Hence
the new business man route. Let us know when you have developed enough
"common sense" to make "the proper trading selections" using the
software and have "the right clue for trading without losses"
http://communities.msn.com/ShortTermStockTrading/messageboard.msnw
Omicron Research Institute
Actually, in Blackjack, the odds of winning are usually very close to 50%,
if you know what you are doing.
The essential aspect of gambling is that you are doing it because you
actually enjoy risk. Most people don't think in terms of expected return
when they gamble, they only think in terms of "getting lucky". Investors,
however, are risk averse and they do think in terms of expected return.
When traders do short-term trading, it is inevitable that they are greatly
increasing their risk (variance of returns). The question is, will the
trading rules they are using lead to a worthwhile expected return to offset
the risk, or not? That is why I wanted to develop a set of trading rules
that I could verify actually leads to a good expected return. This has been
a lot harder than you might think. (Remember, conventional wisdom in
academia says that it is impossible altogether.) I am sure that many of the
trading systems in use don't work at all, and they merely lead to greatly
increased risk with no increase in average returns. So it is just gambling,
not investing.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"David Wilkinson" <da...@quarksoft.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:0okvXgAA...@quarksoft.demon.co.uk...
> In article <Ao1x7.55119$0%.8563805@news1.busy1.on.home.com>, Mike Higgs
> <moong...@home.com> writes
> >"millstox" <kissm...@hell.com> wrote in message
Omicron Research Institute
You must have some idea of what return you expect from each stock, otherwise
why would you buy it? You can get a rough idea of the expected return and
risk from looking at the graph. It helps a lot to be using a graph with a
log scale. Then the expected return is how fast the stock is going up, and
the risk is how volatile the stock is. This is the simple answer. Of
course, you need to take into account the earnings and other fundamentals,
otherwise the price could suddenly crash, as in fact it did for the highly
overvalued tech stocks. But if you believe in trends, then the stock will
probably continue in the same trend it has been in for awhile longer.
My StockEval program measures the expected return by curve fitting to the
price data, and the risk (variance) by the deviations of the price from the
fitted curve. It measures the correlations (covariance) between the
different stocks, and then uses a modified Markowitz model to arrive at the
optimum allocation of the equity between the stocks. To take into account
the possible overvaluation of the stocks, you can also include the
earnings/price ratio (actually, the "Theoretical Price") to varying degrees.
This is the kind of calculation that it might be difficult to estimate
manually.
It is true that it is difficult to estimate expected returns, but the curve
fitting method seems pretty good. My program can demonstrate explicitly
that the curve itself has predictive power. Of course, you need to watch
out for sudden crashes by taking into account the earnings, and the overall
economic situation. But I think the MPT calculation is a great aid in
achieving a balanced portfolio, and also in deciding how to allocate the
equity for short-term trading.
What can you do except guess the future outcome in any kind of investing or
trading decision? But personally I have found that effectively allocating
the equity between a number of different stocks is difficult to do
"manually", especially when doing short-term trading.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"David Wilkinson" <da...@quarksoft.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:noWr3UAI...@quarksoft.demon.co.uk...
dufferdon
<ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote:
>When traders do short-term trading, it is inevitable that they are greatly
>increasing their risk (variance of returns).
Can you actually prove that bold statement? It is conventional
academic wisdom that the search for higher returns leads to higher
risk. This is undoubtedly true when you compare alternatives such as
investing in government bonds to corporate junk bonds. The primary
strategy of most experienced short-term traders is good money
management and minimization of risk. If we go to really short-term
trading, daytraders isolate themselves from overnight price shocks and
claim that this risk minimization is one of the great advantages of
day trading. However, I am not a daytrader.
Since I started short-term trading 19 months ago,my compounded return
is just over 100% and my largest drawdown has been 15%. That was when
I was starting, this year it is 10%. Contrast that with the buy and
holders over this period of time. Who has the better reward to risk
ratio?
If we take traders as a whole, most probably do poorly, but I would
argue that this is because the majority of traders who enter the game
treat it as gambling and are inadequately prepared, particularly in
terms of capitalization, risk and money management and
psychologically. This does not make it axiomatic that trading
inevitably increases risk as measured by variance.
Robert, with your repeated pronouncements on the basis of what
appears theoretical and perhaps fragmentary knowledge you seem to be
digging yourself a deeper hole when trying to interpret trading.
I will ask a third time - are you a trader and is your trading
successful? If not and your software is so good, why aren't you?
millstox
>My StockEval program measures the expected return by curve fitting to the
>price data, and the risk (variance) by the deviations of the price from the
>fitted curve. It measures the correlations (covariance) between the
>different stocks, and then uses a modified Markowitz model to arrive at the
>optimum allocation of the equity between the stocks. To take into account
>the possible overvaluation of the stocks, you can also include the
>earnings/price ratio (actually, the "Theoretical Price") to varying degrees.
>This is the kind of calculation that it might be difficult to estimate
>manually.
>
>It is true that it is difficult to estimate expected returns, but the curve
>fitting method seems pretty good. My program can demonstrate explicitly
>that the curve itself has predictive power. Of course, you need to watch
>out for sudden crashes by taking into account the earnings, and the overall
>economic situation. But I think the MPT calculation is a great aid in
>achieving a balanced portfolio, and also in deciding how to allocate the
>equity for short-term trading.
I'm laughing my ass off here Bob. You are busting your ass to avoid
the most profitable of situations and patting yourself on the back as
you do it. Hang in there geenyus, you'll figger it out. ;-)
millstox
>David,
>
>Actually, in Blackjack, the odds of winning are usually very close to 50%,
>if you know what you are doing.
>
>The essential aspect of gambling is that you are doing it because you
>actually enjoy risk. Most people don't think in terms of expected return
>when they gamble, they only think in terms of "getting lucky". Investors,
>however, are risk averse and they do think in terms of expected return.
>
>When traders do short-term trading, it is inevitable that they are greatly
>increasing their risk (variance of returns). The question is, will the
>trading rules they are using lead to a worthwhile expected return to offset
>the risk, or not? That is why I wanted to develop a set of trading rules
>that I could verify actually leads to a good expected return. This has been
>a lot harder than you might think. (Remember, conventional wisdom in
>academia says that it is impossible altogether.) I am sure that many of the
>trading systems in use don't work at all, and they merely lead to greatly
>increased risk with no increase in average returns. So it is just gambling,
>not investing.
>
>Bob
Guess what, Bob. If it suited me to do so, I could attempt to explain
to you a method that would let you make a significant profit by
guessing correctly slightly less than half the time.
I sincerely suggest that you take off your teaching hat and put on
your student hat and trade for a while, it would be to your benefit in
the long run. Good luck. ;-)
Jim Cochrane
dufferdon <"dufferdon" duff...@whoknowswhere.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 11 Oct 2001 12:14:14 -0500, "Omicron Research Institute"
><ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote:
>
>
>>When traders do short-term trading, it is inevitable that they are greatly
>>increasing their risk (variance of returns).
>
>Can you actually prove that bold statement? It is conventional
>
>Since I started short-term trading 19 months ago,my compounded return
>is just over 100% and my largest drawdown has been 15%. That was when
>I was starting, this year it is 10%. Contrast that with the buy and
>holders over this period of time. Who has the better reward to risk
>ratio?
dufferdon, since the stock market has been generally sideways this
year and not trending very much, this is, I think, an impressive return.
Can I ask you if you did this by trading non-trending stocks, finding
the few that are trending and trading those, or doing something else
(what?) entirely? Also, having you mostly been buying, shorting, or both?
Thanks.
--
Jim Cochrane
j...@dimensional.com
[When responding by email, include the term non-spam in the subject line to
get through my spam filter.]
Hauzzzzmann
millstox <kissm...@hell.com> wrote in message news:0jqbsto1atm8vigeg...@4ax.com...
Will you guys please stop trying to convert all the fools on this board into Traders.
We need foolish Assholes in this market more than ever before.
How are any of the rest of us suppose to make a living if you keep preaching the gospel of trading to these yokels.
Mum up i say--and just smile and nod your head as they spew their buy&hold prattle. ;-)
millstox
dufferdon
wrote:
>In article <9gobst87ocpbvu095...@4ax.com>,
>dufferdon <"dufferdon" duff...@whoknowswhere.com> wrote:
>>On Thu, 11 Oct 2001 12:14:14 -0500, "Omicron Research Institute"
>><ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>When traders do short-term trading, it is inevitable that they are greatly
>>>increasing their risk (variance of returns).
>>
>>Can you actually prove that bold statement? It is conventional
>>...
>>
>>Since I started short-term trading 19 months ago,my compounded return
>>is just over 100% and my largest drawdown has been 15%. That was when
>>I was starting, this year it is 10%. Contrast that with the buy and
>>holders over this period of time. Who has the better reward to risk
>>ratio?
>
>dufferdon, since the stock market has been generally sideways this
>year and not trending very much, this is, I think, an impressive return.
>Can I ask you if you did this by trading non-trending stocks, finding
>the few that are trending and trading those, or doing something else
>(what?) entirely? Also, having you mostly been buying, shorting, or both?
>
>Thanks.
In case there is confusion, the return is last year's 68% times this
year's YTD return of 22%. The vast majority of my trades are long,
mainly pullbacks in high relative strength stocks a la Jack Hershey.
The minority of short trades have helped this year although I am still
getting to grips with that aspect of short-term trading.
Omicron Research Institute
I am sorry I ignored your comment about the price of my StockEval program.
I can't understand why everybody is making such a big deal about it. Sure
the charting software that comes with some of the data feeds is free, but
the data feeds themselves cost $60 or $70 per month, which is roughly the
cost of my program per year. Some of the trading programs cost several
thousand dollars. I was afraid I might be undercutting the market by
pricing mine too low. Anybody who can afford to trade in the stock market
at all ought to be able to afford $795, right? What's the big deal?
StockEval is a trading method and portfolio management program, not just a
charting program. I have spent four years and incorporated all my expertise
into the program, so that ought to be worth something. Although I am not a
financial professional, I am a Ph.D. physicist and I have spent a lot of
time studying finance (to be specific, "econophysics"). I really don't
think $795 is asking too much.
Anyway, I have plans to write options, futures, and real-time versions of
the program. I think sooner or later it is going to catch on.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"millstox" <kissm...@hell.com> wrote in message
news:2e7bst8hvlkgso80n...@4ax.com...
Omicron Research Institute
I thought I said somewhere that I have been trading stocks since 1988. I
was motivated to write StockEval by my direct experience with trading. I
worked on a MacIntosh version for a couple of years while I was learning to
program, and then I have been working on the Windows version for the past
four years. I would like to say that I had the basic charting routines
written in about a month. I have spent the past four years developing the
trading rules and the routines to test them.
Anyway, the trading is good practical experience, but I think the
theoretical knowlege is also important. I really didn't understand the
importance of risk management before I started studying MPT.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"dufferdon" <duff...@whoknowswhere.com> wrote in message
news:1r8bsto0l7imdrplo...@4ax.com...
Omicron Research Institute
I am open to any new ideas. On the other hand, there are so many
"profitable" trading techniques in the stock market that I have become more
than a little jaded. Many of them are completely ridiculous. Before I
believe in any of them, I would like to know that they have some kind of
theoretical basis, and that they have been verified to work. Just because
you try a given technique and it seems to work for awhile, that doesn't
prove anything. It might have worked over that time period just due to
random chance, meaning that you were just "lucky". Practical experience is
important, but it isn't enough. You also need the theoretical understanding
of how the market really works.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"millstox" <kissm...@hell.com> wrote in message
news:0jqbsto1atm8vigeg...@4ax.com...
> "Omicron Research Institute" <ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote:
>
> >David,
> >
>
millstox
>StockEval is a trading method and portfolio management program, not just a
>charting program. I have spent four years and incorporated all my expertise
>into the program, so that ought to be worth something. Although I am not a
>financial professional, I am a Ph.D. physicist and I have spent a lot of
>time studying finance (to be specific, "econophysics"). I really don't
>think $795 is asking too much.
>
>Anyway, I have plans to write options, futures, and real-time versions of
>the program. I think sooner or later it is going to catch on.
Developing and selling software is a lot of work, and marketing is
(what I found to be) the hardest part. I hope you succeed.
Omicron Research Institute
This thread is getting a little confusing. I hope you were talking to me.
I remember one memorable trade, I think it was in 2000 or late 1999, on
Excite, when I made $10,000 in a few days. Back then I used the Linear
Prediction routine in my StockEval program, and made the trade based on its
recommendation. Then for some reason I switched to another method last
year. This method, it turns out, is plagued by high-frequency noise, so I
have gone back to the standard Linear Prediction method, but this time using
the Savitzky-Golay digital smoothing. The combination works very well
indeed.
I was getting good results trading during the bull market. I have been out
for about a year now, because I don't like bear markets, and I have been too
busy progamming and studying. Maybe now is the time to get back in.
If I had a large portfolio, I would just make my living by trading. But my
portfolio is not that large. As for the audited trading results, running
the Diagnostic Test does the same thing automatically, and it is a lot
easier. Trying to run a software company, I don't have several hours every
day to trade. What's wrong with using the Diagnostic Test to test the
trading method? It is a much more reliable and objective test.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
> >> > OK, it's time for the acid test questions.
Omicron Research Institute
Well, you have me perplexed. I wish you would explain. I would not call
the crash of the highly-overvalued tech stocks a profitable situation. I
became very leery last year of the dot-coms and got out of them, after
making some nice short-term plays. Luckily, I got out of most of my stocks
before they crashed, with the aid of my program. The only exception was
Apple, which lost 50% of its value in after-hours trading all of a sudden.
Now is an ideal time to buy, of course. The market will almost certainly
head up with interest rates so low. I presume this is the profitable
situation you are talking about. What are you talking about, exactly?
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"millstox" <kissm...@hell.com> wrote in message
news:teqbstgafobf3aug9...@4ax.com...
David Wilkinson
<ORI...@kcnet.com> writes
Bob
It sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. If you look at the
autocorrelations for prices or indices with lags of one day, two days
etc. there is a small correlation over three or four days, but it is not
big enough to significantly reduce the standard deviation of estimated
daily returns compared to real returns below a naive model like zero
return. The implication is that daily price movements are something like
98% random and doing curve fits to them has no predictive power.
Of course there are short periods when a price appears to be following a
trend and a curve fit method will appear to work, but this is just
chance and it will not work in the long term. My autocorrelations were
over periods of like two years or more when most types of behaviour have
a chance of appearing.
I really have to keep asking, do you trade with your own real money and
have you done so over a period and made a profit?
--
David Wilkinson
David Wilkinson
<ORI...@kcnet.com> writes
Bob
>Actually, in Blackjack, the odds of winning are usually very close to 50%,
>if you know what you are doing.
I don't know anything about Blackjack but I have to assume that as there
seem to be roughly as Many Blackjack tables as roulette tables at Las
Vegas it must be as profitable for the casinos. This probably implies
that most of the players do not know what they are doing in your sense
>
>The essential aspect of gambling is that you are doing it because you
>actually enjoy risk. Most people don't think in terms of expected return
>when they gamble, they only think in terms of "getting lucky". Investors,
>however, are risk averse and they do think in terms of expected return.
>
That's why I am not a gambler and never bet on anything or buy lottery
tickets. I go straight for the expected return and if it is less than
the input then I don't want to know.
>When traders do short-term trading, it is inevitable that they are greatly
>increasing their risk (variance of returns). The question is, will the
>trading rules they are using lead to a worthwhile expected return to offset
>the risk, or not? That is why I wanted to develop a set of trading rules
>that I could verify actually leads to a good expected return. This has been
>a lot harder than you might think. (Remember, conventional wisdom in
>academia says that it is impossible altogether.) I am sure that many of the
>trading systems in use don't work at all, and they merely lead to greatly
>increased risk with no increase in average returns. So it is just gambling,
>not investing.
>
I understand that most day traders lose all their initial cash in the
first few months. Others have asked, do you actually trade with real
money? I have not seen you answer that one.
I would expect day trading results to be governed by chance and would
not expect any of the systems to work in the long term. In the short run
some would be lucky and would make money. That would be the time to
stop. However, as I do not day trade this is an expectation only, not
based on personal experience. I am sure that there are some successful
day traders who will tell me they can do it.
--
David Wilkinson
server not recognized
robert the best advice I can give you is ..shut up. As Millstox says stop
tutoring the students. So you've read a few books and put some equations
together. Who hasn't? Until you trade and win a bit lose a bit such that
the jaded experience folk here can see a few scars of experience, whatever
you say will be so much waffle. It might be good waffle, but its damn easy
to tell a good singer from a great one. You analysis in places you've
looked is thorough enough from what I can tell, but it comes across as
someone completed first year at university, all enthusiasm and ideas - and
at the same time no idea. Pause for a moment and think what you might be
posting back here in five years -- "I tried everything and simple crossing
ma with decent maney management is still one of the best". One of the most
obvious failings of the very bright newcomers to trading is their propensity
to think that their high IQ will crack any nut. I'm tutoring someone on
trading now, and its a constant challenge to keep asking "why do you need to
know auto sales trends and whether patterns if you trade financial
futures."
There is this mad belief that with enough effort. data and thinking they can
solve anything. Sadly to me that is how you are sounding. Nobody that has
made money in the market has the arrogance to think like that. Its an
attitude thing, whereby you relax into what's on offer and managing the and
accepting the limitations and uncertainty. Until you trade seriously and
understand what I'm trying to tell you you won't get it.
The fact that you are jaded from all the systems is a HUGE hint that
confirms my comments that you are looking for an equation.
P
--
"Omicron Research Institute" <ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote in message
news:9q5jbm$8gc$1...@news3.kcnet.com...
server not recognized
Again here is an admission, that you'd been trading since 1988, 13 years,
and only then did you recognise risk! How much more might there be that you
don't know and don't know that you don't know. Do you really think us poor
dumb turnip growers here have been sitting with our fingers up our ass and
our brains in neutral waiting for deliverance from our pityful ignorance.
If you had anybrains at all, you would have realized by now that you have
pissed a few people off in this group. If you intend to market to groups
like this, then for every post they'll always be another warning against it.
Just how dumb are you, book smart? Your naivete is showing. More time in
adult rather than student environments would help.
Other than that good luck. We 'll all just sit back and watch as you fall
on your face. Best way for you to learn, it might knock some of the
intellectual arrogance out. Meanwhile I'll sit in my own gloomy ignorance
and continue to look for my own ass with both hands without your help till I
find it.
P
millstox
>Millstox,
>
>Well, you have me perplexed. I wish you would explain. I would not call
>the crash of the highly-overvalued tech stocks a profitable situation.
Never heard of the short side, huh?
>I
>became very leery last year of the dot-coms and got out of them, after
>making some nice short-term plays. Luckily, I got out of most of my stocks
>before they crashed, with the aid of my program. The only exception was
>Apple, which lost 50% of its value in after-hours trading all of a sudden.
>Now is an ideal time to buy, of course. The market will almost certainly
>head up with interest rates so low. I presume this is the profitable
>situation you are talking about. What are you talking about, exactly?
It's those "unexpected" sudden moves you're trying to avoid that
contain the most short-term profit. They're only unexpected if you
don't know any better.
Again, good luck.
millstox
>Practical experience is
>important, but it isn't enough. You also need the theoretical understanding
>of how the market really works.
Gawd Bob, the more you say the deeper you get. You should shut up and
spend a few days reading and thinking. I'm not trying to beat you up
here, I'm trying to help you.
Here's an exercise that will help, if you follow through with it. It
will teach you some accurate theoretical understanding of how the
market really works, not the horseshit you have been reading from
books.
Take $20 in 1-dollar bills. Find a local flea-market. Make sure it
is one where there are more individuals than mini-businesses. Most of
these only operate one day a week, Saturday or Sunday. Show up early
and stay late. Do what's natural with the idea of making a profit.
When you can double your money on a fairly regular basis, you'll be a
bygod trader; come back and look at your software again, and fix the
parts that are clear silliness.
Richard Hale
> I am open to any new ideas. On the other hand, there are so many
> "profitable" trading techniques in the stock market that I have become more
> than a little jaded. Many of them are completely ridiculous. Before I
> believe in any of them, I would like to know that they have some kind of
> theoretical basis, and that they have been verified to work. Just because
> you try a given technique and it seems to work for awhile, that doesn't
> prove anything. It might have worked over that time period just due to
> random chance, meaning that you were just "lucky". Practical experience is
> important, but it isn't enough. You also need the theoretical understanding
> of how the market really works.
>
>
> Before I
> believe in any of them, I would like to know that they have some kind of
> theoretical basis, and that they have been verified to work.
Bob,
Even if some trading technique has worked for a long time, there is an
assumption in your statement that market conditions will continue as
before. But markets change and trading techniques, even if verified,
need to be adapted to new market conditions as they arise. This is the
dilemma faced by anyone who wants to use theoretical, verified techniques
("systems") based on historical data.
Regards,
Richard
ckh_-_too_much_spam
<ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote:
> Well, you have me perplexed. I wish you would explain. I would not call
> the crash of the highly-overvalued tech stocks a profitable situation. I
> became very leery last year of the dot-coms and got out of them, after
> making some nice short-term plays. Luckily, I got out of most of my stocks
> before they crashed, with the aid of my program. The only exception was
> Apple, which lost 50% of its value in after-hours trading all of a sudden.
> Now is an ideal time to buy, of course. The market will almost certainly
> head up with interest rates so low. I presume this is the profitable
> situation you are talking about. What are you talking about, exactly?
>
> Bob
>
What are *you* talking about?
There were certainly people who made big profits on the crash of the
techs, they're called shorts.
As for your "program". I mananged to cash out in November 1999
without it.
In the Spring of 2000, Barrons ran a lengthy series about the Dot
Coms burning through their cash.
Sites such as www.iTulip.com and www.downside.com called the fall
and the subsequent layoffs.
While I expect the market and economy will take a few years to
recover, I've started pushing *small* amounts of money onto the table.
I got wacked buying AMD at 21 in November 2000 but my intent is to
build a portfolio for 5 years from now, not next month. I knew that
the downside risk was great.
This is a unique opportunity but it's not a sure thing. Just because
interest rates are low, that doesn't mean that it's "to the moon,
Alice". CSCO and others are up 40-50%. Might be time for a
pullback. The trick is to identify value and make careful investments.
There's no "secret" or "magic program". Everyone has their list of
stock that have potential. Open discussion here helps everyone think
the issues through.
If you have a "magic program", publish the predictions each week for
the next 6 months. At the end of that time, stop. You'll either be
overwhelmed by checks or you won't. I'm betting that most of us will
do better without access to a "magic program".
--
cory >>>---> Some of us will be @#$@#'ing rich in 5 years, guarenteed.
Richard Hale
> Now is an ideal time to buy, of course. The market will almost certainly
> head up with interest rates so low.
>
Is this prediction consistent with your method of using your software to
trade?
I think this is a risky prediction. How do know when the market has
reached the bottom? The recent rally could just be a bear market rally.
Regards,
Richard
millstox
To add to this, at least take a look at dufferdon's website and
scratch your head for a while. I don't think that I've looked at it,
but I know a bit about the methods it's based on, and it's worth your
while to study it.
I spent about a year building a program to help with my trading.
Eventually I threw it away, between the code that was working around
datafeed glitches and the code that was doing calculations, there
wasn't enough processor left for me to enter an order. If bigcharts
was realtime that would be completely adequate. I use tc2000 for EOD
and I don't do much in the way of formulas, its greatest strength is
that I can hit the spacebar for a couple hours and look at every
chart; by the time I get done with that I have between 20 and 100 very
good trading candidates in all except the very flattest markets.
It isn't about indicators. The more derived your indicators are, the
greater the danger of taking their word for it. A simple candlestick
chart with volume bars contains everything you need to know.
millstox
>I understand that most day traders lose all their initial cash in the
>first few months.
<snip>
>I would expect day trading results to be governed by chance and would
>not expect any of the systems to work in the long term. In the short run
>some would be lucky and would make money. That would be the time to
>stop. However, as I do not day trade this is an expectation only, not
>based on personal experience. I am sure that there are some successful
>day traders who will tell me they can do it.
There are good ways and bad ways to learn. Everybody has to make it
through the learning process in the way that best gets him from the
place he starts to the place where he knows his ass from his elbow.
(Of course I'm convinced that the way I learned is the best because
it's the way I learned; it also has the benefit of minimizing losses
during the learning process and teaching you to maximize profits, but
that's beside the point.)
Daytrading is no more governed by chance than short-term, mid-term, or
long-term trading. The same properties that make TA more useful than
a magic 8-ball work exactly the same way on the intraday fractal level
that they do on an eod fractal level. In fact if you are working with
a stock that moves sufficient volumes things are as easy, or easier,
to see on an intraday level.
The big danger with daytrading is spreads, but that's the conclusion
not the logic. When daytrading you're looking for a point gain, or
less; when I'm daytrading the cubes a point looks like heaven. A
nickel is about breakeven, and twenty cents is a good trade. Of
course to make a reasonable profit off a twenty cent move you need to
trade a significant number of shares, and that elevates the risk. The
obvious solution to that increases the spread and requires that one
trade against the market at reversals. The two primary benefits of
daytrading are (a) you know where you stand every night, and (b) your
compounding frequency is increased by a large factor.
Now that I've probably confused the issue I'll STFU, sorry 'bout that.
;-)
Mike Higgs
news:MPG.1630ba3d336c31fd98969c@news...
Risky prediction?? Not really if you ignore the timing aspect and look at
the level of interest rates. These low rates will percolate into corporate
earnings and the economy just as the rate increases of 2 years ago did and
have the same corresponding effect. With short rates at 30-40 year lows,
its time to start thinking about buying. And if long rates d improve as
well ..................
The risk is in trying to time the entry.
Regards,
Mike
dufferdon
<ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote:
>dufferdon,
>
>This thread is getting a little confusing. I hope you were talking to me.
>
>I remember one memorable trade, I think it was in 2000 or late 1999, on
>Excite, when I made $10,000 in a few days.
So we can take it that you are not a serious day-after-day trader
when you cite one trade made at the top of the tech stock bubble.
>
>I was getting good results trading during the bull market.
Proving.....?
> I have been out
>for about a year now, because I don't like bear markets, and I have been too
>busy progamming and studying.
I don't like bear markets either, because I have not yet developed a
shorting approach as good as my long side style of trading. However,
if your program can dispassionately predict probable future price
ranges, I do not see why you would dislike trading bear markets. If
you are good at it, returns should be better as stocks tend to fall
faster than they rise.
If you are too busy programming and studying, is your program just a
beta version?
>
>If I had a large portfolio, I would just make my living by trading. But my
>portfolio is not that large.
Large or not, you should trade it if you have faith in your system.
You should also trade it so that you know and understand the real
world of trading and how your program fits into that real world. It
may give you great insights into how you can develop it further.
> As for the audited trading results, running
>the Diagnostic Test does the same thing automatically, and it is a lot
>easier. Trying to run a software company, I don't have several hours every
>day to trade. What's wrong with using the Diagnostic Test to test the
>trading method? It is a much more reliable and objective test.
Well I do not know the details of your diagnostic test to comment on
it directly, but I do know that many, many people have developed
systems that work well on paper but fail miserably in the market.
There can be many reasons for this. Principal amongst them are the
inability to actually make the trade at the price the system says you
should have made your entry or exit. There may be others ahead of you
in the queue at that price, resulting in a worse fill than the system
assumes. A seemingly profitable system may have large drawdowns which
might put the trader out of the market if he is undercapitalized or
simply be psychologically unacceptable. I do not know if your approach
would be susceptible to these problems or not as I have insufficient
details.
The reason you should trade and develop an audited trading record
using your software is that it would be the most wonderful marketing
tool you could have. Miserable old sceptics like me may not be
impressed by book larnin', but we sure as hell would sit up and take
notice if you produced demonstrable results.
Here's a challenge, if you don't have enough money to trade, set up a
dummy portfolio at your site and outline your trades in unambiguous
terms before the market opens and let people at least have some idea
of the results your software can produce. If you don't have the time
for that, send me a trial copy and I will do it for you on my bulletin
board. Golf season is ending and I will have some time on my hands.
Richard Hale
moong...@home.com says...
You're right! But I wasn't ignoring the timing aspect. The percolation
into corporate profits may take longer than anticipated. Do you agree
that the Fed's moves in interest rates this year are unprecedented? Yet
the stock market is far from healthy right now.
My guess (not prediction) is that the bear market is not over yet. If
tax rates are lowered significantly for corporations and individuals,
then my opinion would change.
Regards,
Richard
BoneHead
news:9q5nsc$8jn$1...@news3.kcnet.com...
: I was getting good results trading during the bull market. I have been
out
: for about a year now, because I don't like bear markets, and I have been
too
: busy progamming and studying. Maybe now is the time to get back in.
:
: If I had a large portfolio, I would just make my living by trading.
You are not ready for trading. If you think that the only way to 'trade' is
by going long, you're not ready to trade. If you don't have the disposition
to handle bear markets, then you're not ready for trading ( much less for a
living.). If you don't have the mindset to go short, you're not ready for
trading. The 'proper' mindset for trading is having a neutral bias; i.e.,
you don't care if the tradeable goes up or down, as long if it moves (and if
it doesn't, do some option spreads on it to capture the time premium.).
And if you're not ready for trading, what makes you think that the software
you're looking to push is ready for trading, when it has your bias built in?
Mike Higgs
> You're right! But I wasn't ignoring the timing aspect. The percolation
> into corporate profits may take longer than anticipated. Do you agree
> that the Fed's moves in interest rates this year are unprecedented? Yet
> the stock market is far from healthy right now.
>
> My guess (not prediction) is that the bear market is not over yet. If
> tax rates are lowered significantly for corporations and individuals,
> then my opinion would change.
Unprecedented???? Nope. Look at the ratcheting up that occurred when they
were climbing. This is the mirror image. On the way up, the Fed kept
pushing until they finally took the steam out of the market. Unfortunately
and unavoidably, they took the steam out of corporate earnings as well
starting first with the cost of capital and then with consumption as
consumer confidence rolled over. It took a while to get results on the way
up; it'll take a while to get results on the way down.
And don't bet on tax cuts as a positive. Lower tax rates applied to a
smaller revenue stream without cost cutting = debt growth. I would predict
(not guess) that long rates will not come down as the bond market
anticipates inflation. The Terrorist War will likely lead to some
unexpected treasury financings probably in the short end. If that doesn't
spook the bond market, it'll at least get their attention.
I think that we're at the bottom or close enough to it to warrant some
buying. I'm not a bull yet but I'm very close to it.
Regards,
Mike
Hauzzzzmann
it's obvious each trader will want certain different setups for their sftwr.
Why dont we start listing here our fave "chart function" Wishes for Bob to consider putting in his program.
Whats the wildest thing you've always wished for in a chart program but have never seen yet ?
heres one i've wished for for awhile :
On the chart---i'd like to be able to Touch (mouse click) and entry price, stoploss point, and target price---and
automatically (maybe on a side pane) show me the Win/Loss ratio, the % to gain, and % to loss real quickly.
whats your wishes ?
nkhoi <nk...@gatewayone.com> wrote in message news:3BF620B9...@gatewayone.com...
> answer a question with a question, I think I seen this maneuver before.
>
> Omicron Research Institute wrote:
> >
> > dufferdon,
> >
> > This thread is getting a little confusing. I hope you were talking to me.
> >
> > I remember one memorable trade, I think it was in 2000 or late 1999, on
> > (816) 916-5385
> >
> > > >> > OK, it's time for the acid test questions.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > Are you actually a trader? How many times have you made $795 with a
> > > >> > single trade? Has your actual trading using your software been
dufferdon
<idrather...@this.net> wrote:
> This thread seems to have attracted alot of Traders.
> it's obvious each trader will want certain different setups for their sftwr.
> Why dont we start listing here our fave "chart function" Wishes for Bob to consider putting in his program.
> Whats the wildest thing you've always wished for in a chart program but have never seen yet ?
>
> heres one i've wished for for awhile :
>
> On the chart---i'd like to be able to Touch (mouse click) and entry price, stoploss point, and target price---and
>automatically (maybe on a side pane) show me the Win/Loss ratio, the % to gain, and % to loss real quickly.
>
> whats your wishes ?
>
While you are waiting for this feature on a charting package,
www.tonyoz.com is making a trading calculator available for free
after Oct 21. It will certainly show your risk to reward ratio, but I
have only seen screen shots of it to date. However, speed is limited
by the need to enter the relevant prices.
"The crowd never thirsted for the truth" - G. LeBon
Check out my free, non-commercial stock trading bulletin board at
http://communities.msn.com/ShortTermStockTrading/messageboard.msnw
Hauzzzzmann
dufferdon <duff...@whoknowswhere.com> wrote in message > While you are waiting for this feature on a charting
Thanks for the link duffer..... I've already got Calcs out the wazzoo set up in a spreadsheet prog. it would be
nice to have alot of them work directly from the charts, without all that manula entering though.
Jim Cochrane
Omicron Research Institute <ORI...@kcnet.com> wrote:
>Millstox,
>
>Well, you have me perplexed. I wish you would explain. I would not call
>the crash of the highly-overvalued tech stocks a profitable situation. I
Have you heard of short selling? I'm sure some people made a very good
profit from the tech/.com crash.
--
Jim Cochrane
j...@dimensional.com
[When responding by email, include the term non-spam in the subject line to
get through my spam filter.]
Omicron Research Institute
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"Mike Higgs" <moong...@home.com> wrote in message
news:eKCx7.56698$0%.9229675@news1.busy1.on.home.com...
> "Richard Hale" <richar...@home.com> wrote in message
> news:MPG.1630ba3d336c31fd98969c@news...
> > In article <9q5n7q$8jh$1...@news3.kcnet.com>, >
Omicron Research Institute
I agree that it is risky trying to predict market tops and bottoms. I
believe that the exact timing of these buy/sell points is difficult to
predict, and I have tried to change the emphasis in my StockEval program
from timing to price levels. The preferred way to trade, apart from GTC
limit orders, is to SMOOTHLY vary the position in accordance with the
calculated trading rules, not suddenly jump in and out of the stock at
"predicted" buy/sell points.
Maybe I shouldn't have said that we have seen the bottom. The reason I said
that is that interest rates are so amazingly low, and that will provide a
powerful stimulus. My program isn't really calling it a bottom--I am.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"Richard Hale" <richar...@home.com> wrote in message
news:MPG.1630ba3d336c31fd98969c@news...
Omicron Research Institute
I don't think anybody was expecting Apple to crash, not the financial
professionals or anybody else. Such crashes are in principle unpredictable.
It is like avalanches. The probability of an avalanch gets higher and
higher as the snow piles up, but the exact timing of the avalanch is in
principle unpredictable. And you can't profit from a price move that is
unpredictable. Even after Apple crashed, there were professionals going on
record saying that it would rebound in a short time. That event took me by
complete surprise, because at that time Apple had great earnings, so I
thought it was immune to a crash. And since it happened in after-hours
trading, there was no way to protect yourself with a sell-stop.
Yes, I have sold short before, but I try to avoid doing it because it is a
lot riskier than a long position. Also, selling short is a zero-sum game.
You can't profit from a short position unless somebody else loses. When
prices go down, investors in aggregate lose; when prices go up, investors in
aggregate win.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"millstox" <kissm...@hell.com> wrote in message
news:gfqdstg615dns87kv...@4ax.com...
Omicron Research Institute
trading over the past 12 or so years, but I am not claiming to be an expert.
Making a model of the stock market means making a model of human psychology.
If you intuitively understand the psychology of the market then that is
important and you stand a good chance of being a successful trader.
On the other hand, there are basic principles of finance that apply, and as
far as I can tell I am the only one who is trying to take those into
account. Sometimes when you are right in the thick of things, you can't see
the forest for the trees. I think it is important to step back and try to
keep in mind the basic theoretical principles involved. That is what I am
trying to do.
I wanted to try to quantify a set of trading rules in the form of a computer
program, that could be verified to work. If you can't verify your trading
rules objectively, then you will never know whether they are actually
working or not. I don't see anything wrong with developing theories of the
stock market, and trying to approach trading and investing from a scientific
point of view. In order to do that, of course, it helps to have some
scientific training, and that happens to be my strong point.
There are many principles of Technical Analysis, such as support/resistance
and even short-term trend lines, that appear to be non-linear phenomena that
I don't know how to quantify. (Having said this, it appears that the Linear
Prediction method is pretty good at picking up a lot of these.) However, if
the technical indicators are valid, then they should be quantifiable in some
appropriate model. That is what I am attempting to do.
I am grateful for any suggestions you have to offer.
Omicron Research Institute
I checked out your bulletin board and it is very interesting. I bookmarked
it in my browser.
Yes, I have done quite a bit of trading over the past 12 years, except I
have been out of the market the past year. I did pretty well and made a lot
of good trades during the '90s. However, I have seldom had time to spend
several hours per day at it or to trade full-time for a living. I was busy
working on a Ph.D., and then later writing software, so I only traded on
longer time scales, not every day.
However, I think it is possible to be an experienced trader and still be
using techniques that don't really work. If you rely solely on your
emotions or your "feel" for the market, that seems like a precarious way to
trade. I would prefer to find some kind of rational basis for my trading
methodology, which should be quantifiable. I feel that any trading strategy
that really works should be quantifiable, and not just rely on intuitive
feelings.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"dufferdon" <duff...@whoknowswhere.com> wrote in message
> Let me repeat my previous question. Do you actually trade and if so do
> you actually make money trading? If not, you know very little about
> trading and should not pontificate.
Omicron Research Institute
I never claimed my progam was "magic". And I made it a point to say that
people should not slavishly follow its suggestions. You could continue with
your own trading style, and the technical indicators in StockEval would
probably help you quite a bit.
My program simply helps you take maximum advantage of market moves, as
safely as possible. If you are an expert trader, I am sure you can do it
all yourself. My program is simply an aid, and it would probably make it
easier even for you.
I intend to try to maintain a model portfolio, if I can find time. I am
sure it will show good, steady gains with minimal volatility in the overall
portfolio. I am not claiming anything "magical" or "secret". I am only
claiming maximum returns with minimum risk, and a way to do better than the
market with an optimal short-term trading strategy. It is still up to the
trader to actually make it happen, and the trader must still use his(her)
own judgement.
Omicron Research Institute
Thank you for your comments. Up to now I have been busy re-writing my
program, and it has been in a state of flux. Also, I haven't even had time
to trade in a model portfolio. But I just started a new one, and I will try
to keep it up in between more programming and other things. (Actually, I
need to find some different sectors. All the tech stocks that I loved so
well before went bust.) And yes, if I had had the time and the equity to be
in the bear market during the past year, I would have done a lot of selling
short.
I thought it was viewed as impossible to find any trading method or
algorithm that works consistently. I thought that had been tried in
academia, and the results were always that the market was random, and
neither Technical nor Fundamental analysis can be shown to work. I had a
lot of trouble with my own method for a long time, until I finally realized
that the problem was high-frequency noise that is random. I started out
thinking that the gains from short-term trading should be greater the
shorter-term the trades, but that seems to be wrong. The very short-term (1
or 2 day) fluctuations seem to be almost entirely random noise, and only the
longer-term fluctuations contain correlations. This seems contrary to what
many people think, and it is by no means trivial. I have heard that many
people fail miserably in the market by taking too many risks and by doing a
lot of radical short-term trading. I don't see how I am doing anything but
reducing my risk of failure by taking the cautious approach that my program
advocates.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"dufferdon" <duff...@whoknowswhere.com> wrote in message
news:nfudstsbkjn5v94tn...@4ax.com...
> Large or not, you should trade it if you have faith in your system.
> You should also trade it so that you know and understand the real
> world of trading and how your program fits into that real world. It
> may give you great insights into how you can develop it further.
>
Omicron Research Institute
I agree with you that the daily price fluctuations are almost completely
random. I found using the daily (average) prices that the Linear Prediction
routine only had predictive power out to about one day. However, it appears
that each "mode", or frequency, has some predictive power out to about one
period of the mode. So if you filter out the modes shorter than 10 days,
for example, the 10-day modes have some predictive power out to about 10
days. At least that is my best explanation to date. Using my Diagnost
Routine, I can show that the smoothed N-day trading rules lead to gains in
N-day trading.
I don't do curve fitting on only short segments of data. The Regression
Curve is a long-term fit to 1000 days of data, and I am able to show that
the *changes* in slope of this curve have predictive power. (If you change
the position in response to the curvature of the Regression Curve, you do
better than buy-and-hold.)
I am working with four years of data, just so I can identify long-term
correlations and test the trading rules over a long time period. I know
some other people's trading rules are just "fitting to the noise", and I am
trying to avoid that.
Of course, people still need to use common sense, and avoid buying stocks
that are way overvalued, etc. Also, they should avoid trading in too
radical a way. These are the real ways to avoid "disaster". I have been
making it a point to try to make short-term trading as safe as possible,
although it will never be "completely" safe.
Bob
--
Dr. Robert Murray
Omicron Research Institute
www.omicronrsch.com
(816) 916-5385
"David Wilkinson" <da...@quarksoft.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:xd2+6UAI...@quarksoft.demon.co.uk...
> It sounds like a recipe for disaster to me. If you look at the
> autocorrelations for prices or indices with lags of one day, two days
> etc. there is a small correlation over three or four days, but it is not
> big enough to significantly reduce the standard deviation of estimated
> daily returns compared to real returns below a naive model like zero
> return. The implication is that daily price movements are something like
> 98% random and doing curve fits to them has no predictive power.
>
> Of course there are short periods when a price appears to be following a
> trend and a curve fit method will appear to work, but this is just
> chance and it will not work in the long term. My autocorrelations were
> over periods of like two years or more when most types of behaviour have
> a chance of appearing.
>
> I really have to keep asking, do you trade with your own real money and
> have you done so over a period and made a profit?
> --
> David Wilkinson
Trader Joe
tone. There is no question about the fact that you never ever
submitted any useful things to this NG other than repeating what Jack
Hershey mentioned during the years. You should think about what you
have made out of his personal help to you during the last one and a
half years - 68% and 22%? That certainly isn愒 bad at all but shows
that you still have no clues regarding his approach even you got more
personal help from his side than any other newbie. Statements like "I
am running a board" (btw copy and paste others ideas, thoughts and
wisdoms plus adding some charts has nothing to do with running a
board)and "Golf season is ending" (trading is a hobby for you right?
regarding your trading results you couldn愒 afford a single Golf
season)just show that you are a bored & spoiled individual. Stop
pretending being a succesful and experienced trader, it愀 too obvious
that you are not. You have enough money and time to play Golf? Cool,
stay with it! You have enough money and time to fool around with the
market? Cool, go ahead! But PLEASE stop pretending and carrying out
discoveries from others which you don愒 even understand.
"The crowd: Is it me, is it my neighbour? Whats about you? Maybe the
crowd doesn愒 want you to be a part of!"
dufferdon <duff...@whoknowswhere.com> wrote in message news:<9gobst87ocpbvu095...@4ax.com>...
>
Cool stuff snipped
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
dufferdon
wrote:
>I am asking myself why you dare to speak in such an ignorant and rude
>tone.
I guess you are referring to the post in which I advised Robert to
trade as well as develop software. Many others did too. Sorry if my
tone offended you or him. However, in partial defense I don't think
that those who use the newsgroups to try to drum up commercial
business should expect their claims and expertise to go unchallenged
or expect kid-glove treatment.
>There is no question about the fact that you never ever
>submitted any useful things to this NG other than repeating what Jack
>Hershey mentioned during the years.
If you are referring to misc.invest.futures you are probably right,
but the original message did not deal with futures and was just
cross-posted there.
Check the newsgroup record for misc.invest.* Joe. You will find I have
made many, many posts that don't deal with his ideas. Possibly some
were rude but hopefully some were helpful. I believe I made some
warnings about the tech stock bubble last year that should have been
helpful. I also remember predicting when the bubble started to burst
that many tech favorites would decline by 90% or more. No help from
Jack there.
BTW, I did check your newsgroup record. It seems mainly to consist of
publicising something called T-Dates at your own website and blasting
other posters with such stylistic gems as "Grow a brain you moron 1.60
is nothing you idiot" or "Grow some balls while you are growing a
brain" or "Do you have a mental problem ?"
And you call me rude?
> You should think about what you
>have made out of his personal help to you during the last one and a
>half years - 68% and 22%? That certainly isn愒 bad at all but shows
>that you still have no clues regarding his approach even you got more
>personal help from his side than any other newbie.
Absolutely right regarding my performance and understanding Joe. They
are nowhere near as good as Jack expects. I am still trying to
assimilate his ideas. Have you an understanding of them that would
help me and others do better? If so, I wish you would share your
insights with us. His ideas are very hard for me to understand
sometimes and I still have a lot to learn.
Also, he does not trade short and the long side has been a tough row
to hoe most of the time I have been using his techniques
BTW I have never received any private personal coaching from Jack
Hershey although he did once send me some diagrams to share with
others on my board. However, he and I did have an extended dialog on
exiting trades, using MOGN as an example, which I found very useful.
But that was conducted in public in one of the investment newsgroups.
Jack has sometimes said that he hopes that those he helps will in
turn contribute to others. The board is offered in that spirit. It is
a daunting task for a newbie to plow though over 900 newsgroup posts
to try to sort out his ideas.
> Statements like "I
>am running a board" (btw copy and paste others ideas, thoughts and
>wisdoms plus adding some charts has nothing to do with running a
>board)and
I think I have made a few modest contributions, mainly in terms of
posting actual trades illustrating my interpretation of his ideas and
helping others understand his words, which are rather difficult to
follow at times. I would welcome advise from anyone on what I can do
to make my board better.
>"Golf season is ending" (trading is a hobby for you right?
Yes, but a very serious hobby.
>regarding your trading results you couldn愒 afford a single Golf
>season)just show that you are a bored & spoiled individual.
Actually my short term trading results this year and last will pay
for my golf for the rest of my life.
> Stop
>pretending being a succesful and experienced trader, it愀 too obvious
>that you are not.
Well Joe I have been trading (longer term until recently) for about 20
years and it did help me retire in my early 50s to play golf and spend
some time trading short term. But I am sure there are many traders
more successful than I. Perhaps you are one. If so, please help us get
better.
> You have enough money and time to play Golf? Cool,
>stay with it! You have enough money and time to fool around with the
>market? Cool, go ahead! But PLEASE stop pretending and carrying out
>discoveries from others which you don愒 even understand.
Again I would welcome your contribution in helping me understand
better.
>"The crowd: Is it me, is it my neighbour? Whats about you? Maybe the
>crowd doesn愒 want you to be a part of!"
Sorry Joe I don't understand that bit.
millstox
>I had a
>lot of trouble with my own method for a long time, until I finally realized
>that the problem was high-frequency noise that is random. I started out
>thinking that the gains from short-term trading should be greater the
>shorter-term the trades, but that seems to be wrong. The very short-term (1
>or 2 day) fluctuations seem to be almost entirely random noise, and only the
>longer-term fluctuations contain correlations.
The books say that long-term is more reliable than short-term, I have
found that the opposite is the case. The most profitable trades seem
to have a duration of only a few days, usually significantly fewer
than 10 days; an off-the-cuff estimate would be 2-4 days. This is
very convenient in that it increases your rate of compounding.
> I have heard that many
>people fail miserably in the market by taking too many risks
Absolutely.
>and by doing a
>lot of radical short-term trading.
Wrong.
It is not the duration of the trade that makes the difference, it is
the correctness of the direction and the volatility of the move.
People get killed by taking large risks. It's a matter of money
management and trade management. Almost any trade will go profitable
at some point. People get greedy and stay in the position for too
long, that is probably the primary killer. On top of that their
position sizes are too large, that excaberates the situation.
Mechanical stops can remove much, or possibly most, of this type of
danger.
millstox
>However, I think it is possible to be an experienced trader and still be
>using techniques that don't really work.
Not if you're trading for a living it isn't. ;-)