One year, 3 months, and 11 days ago (made up), we had a string of 14 higher days on the SP500, where the intraday price moved below the open but rallied back to close above the open by the end of the session.
(insert any other kind of historical chart analysis here)
This in no way means that you can look at this pattern to repeat itself. Any pattern. Head and Shoulders, Elliott Wave, CCI cross over, Zero line Rejection, Moving average Death Cross, you name it...
That is because for each of those past scenarios, there was an infinite amount of data that goes well, WELL beyond the Open High Low Close data presented to you on a chart. And yes, well beyond volume. Was there a war? Was there a new Apple product launched? Was there a financial conspiracy and cover-up? Was there an election? Was there a dictatorship overthrown? Was there a terrorist attack? Was there a republican in office? Was there a democrat in office? Was there a bailout? Was there massive layoffs?
The list goes on forever. All of the reasons price moved a year ago were relative to the events of the world at that time, and not simply static based on a combination of price action alone.
So we can only look "left" (historical) for trade ideas, or for rough guesses on what price may do, based on these prior patterns. Which is why trading is far more about discretion (for me) than it is about some methodical or analytical way to try and define the market as "X+Y+Z = long".
Due to time constraints, please do not PM me if your question can be resolved or answered on the forum.
Need help? 1) Stop changing things. No new indicators, charts, or methods. Be consistent with what is in front of you first. 2) Start a journal and post to it daily with the trades you made to show your strengths and weaknesses. 3) Set goals for yourself to reach daily. Make them about how you trade, not how much money you make. 4) Accept responsibility for your actions. Stop looking elsewhere to explain away poor performance. 5) Where to start as a trader? Watch this webinar and read this thread for hundreds of questions and answers. 6) Help using the forum? Watch this video to learn general tips on using the site.
If you want to support our community, become an Elite Member.
The following 2 users say Thank You to Big Mike for this post:
I agree with Mike pretty much but would like to add that depending on your system/methodology you might have to change in my opinion.
I tried a lot of stuff with indicators back in the "old days" before I figured that simple PA stuff gets you through all conditions and environments.
Have you noticed that so and so's method works great today and sucks ass a month from now with whatever indicator package they have ...I think you know what I mean, you've been around long enough.
That being said even simple PA guys like me have to make adjustments too but it's more along the line of changing entrys or stops a little kind of thing....we don't have to abandon our methodology because it doesn't work anymore.
I would also note without rambling on to much about it that things have changed in terms of volume (I know quite a few disagree with me) the past few years...intraday speaking there aren't as many trades as there was and it has made it different.
That's something I KNOW....All I have to do is look at the charts to prove it....I don't care what others say about volume and them pulling out stats and so forth.
Maybe it's because of darkpools or something, I don't know the reasons why but I do know what my charts show me.
Sorry for the rambling/ranting, I hope some of it makes sense.
Edit: forgot to mention as another exmple of how things change look at the 6E it's absolutely worthless now....
Last edited by kbit; March 28th, 2012 at 10:06 PM.
The following user says Thank You to kbit for this post:
Thanks for your feedbacks and interesting angles presented.
But what about someone that makes a semi-automatic strategy tested over an extended period of time and giving an expectation of 65%. Given any strategy can show some fluctuations around its mean, how could we possibly react in a timely manner to so called changing conditions? I mean since we expect some fluctuations, how could we differentiate between a normal fluctuation and real changes in the markets? At first sight, it seems a herculean task in the same league as looking for a needle in a haystack.
But isn't it true that IF a method is based on a market phenomemon with is relatively timeless, the method if based on indictors can survive if the parameters of the indicators are adjusted to the changing environment. ( and in some form it is discretionary then :-) )
For example, trendfollowing and mean reversion strategies are very old and still working, yet the form they take changes over time due to new market participants and conditions.
So if a method with indicators is based on such a phenomenon it can survive, if the user adapts the parameters to the environment. When a method is based on some arbitratry collection of indicators which do not support/measure a good concept, the method will likely fail. At least, this is what I think within my limited experience.
One of my worst enemies are my own false assumptions
Last edited by Zwaen; March 29th, 2012 at 10:38 AM.
The following 2 users say Thank You to Zwaen for this post: