/biz/ - Business & Finance

[Anonymous No.874112]

Is technical analysis based trading witchcraft? What are /biz/'s thoughts on this subject?

[Anonymous No.874119]

It's seriously retarded.

[Anonymous No.874123]

>>874112
Even if you make money doing pure TA, I think you should really reconsider your life

[Anonymous No.874125]

>>874112
Where do I learn it?

[Anonymous No.874130]

>>874125
Only on my personal website or workshops
membership is $99.99 annually

[Anonymous No.874137]

>>874130
Awesome! Can I also get the weekly newsletter in my emailbox?

[Anonymous No.874140]

>>874119
>>874123
Do people actually trade using pure TA? As far as I know, intraday traders aren't remotely concerned with the movement of securities outside of like a 1-2 week range, so do they use pure TA??

[Anonymous No.874167]

It makes sense for checking resistance/support levels, for gauging entry/exit points and so on.

But the thing is that it's not what's going to make you a good trade, it's a nice extra to good understanding of fundementals.

[Anonymous No.874173]

>>874112
Imo technical analysis is shit altogether and fundamental analysis is only useful for institutional investors.

[Anonymous No.874244]

>>874112
TA is shite long term. Longb term movements are pure fundamentals. TA is only useful short term because not much news that can change the fundamentals of a stock happens in a very short time frame.

[Anonymous No.874376]

>>874112
Goldman Sachs uses TA and shows the work of their TA in newsletters to clients.

Only a money losing, shit breathing, shit for brains, butt plugged footfag would deny the value of TA in making a trade.

[Anonymous No.874403]

>>874137
Can you? Buddy once you sign up you'll be getting premium offers twice daily for life

>>874140
There's probably thousands of "traders" shilling their TA strategies, or lessons on youtube from their parents basement.

Even if I was making a living purely trading TA from home I would take literally any job offered to me
Fuck it I'd even trade pure price action instead of technical analysis, I'd rather be a lucky mystic than be an autist who has spent years learning quite possibly the least useful least productive thing on the planet.

That said, if there's any TA traders listening: Don't stop trading, I need your liquidity

[Anonymous No.874405]

>>874376
Yup. And if you folks don't believe me, you can go ahead and check the order books/real volumes around techincal chart patterns. There are plenty
of institutionals as well who use chart patterns. This board is full of memesters thinkiny they are the next Warren Buffett because they know some babby tier formula and think that alone can make them money, and these are the same guys whose portfolios get consistently outperformed by a portfolio made of random stocks.

Do yourself a favor and stay away from this board,nothing more than cancer and shilling now

[Anonymous No.874416]

>>874403
Lmao, babby is mad cuz his meme Tesla stocks didnt made him rich like cnbc said.
That being said, i will gladly take your advice and enjoy my statistical edge over you poorfags wannabe buffetts, with your little TD account thinking you are hot shit

[Anonymous No.874422]

>>874112

> CMT here (Chartered Market Technician)

Most of TA is bullshit. I'll be the first to admit as a CMT (don't worry, I don't parade that designation around like its worth a shit - it isn't).

So much of TA is based on annotating charts in hindsight and seeing everything with razor-sharp hindsight genius. When it comes to projecting forward prices, some of the most highly regarded technicians got everything gloriously bum-fucking heil-hitler wrong. Joseph Granville said the Dow would decline 1000 points per quarter until it was something like 6000. That was in 2012 before he died. Robert Prechter (of Idiot Wave fame) made a method of "counting waves" in such a fashion that every fuck-up can be corrected by changing wave counts and redrawing waves. He was also bumfucking wrong in 2011 when he called for an end of capitalism and dow 4000.

The point is, everything (vast majority) of TA is based on ideal, over-fitted data, hindsight genius, and hocus pocus. Throw in shit-headed market prognosticators and market charlatans, and it is an embarrassment as a field of study.

Notice how Market "Technicians" (PC term for magic-bean or snake-oil salesmen) will always form opinions in the form of questions: Is the S&P poised for a Pullback? Is XYZ overpriced?

I've been around long enough to see every TA genius I know to get completely BTFO at some point or another.

[Anonymous No.874457]

TA is bullshit. Its literally snake oil for the stock market. You can't predict the market, if you can then you'll have physicists telling you how can see into the future when we can't even "travel" faster than light. Everything is based off hindsight. Which is something any serious investor knows you should not do while investing.
>>874416
>>874405
>>874376
These are the kinds of retards I love selling bullshit too, by the way. Its how people like Jordan Belfort made millions because these morons believe they can beat hte market or have a hot stock. I used to work for a hedge fund and well the only people who used TA were I banks retards and day traders. No one serious used it. If they did, they're just putting their eggs in every basket. If I recall TA has yet to make someone money. You get lucky, just like /pol/ saying this past week was the super smahitah. But they were saying this downturn would happen every fucking time the market took a dump. This is how TA works. It throws deterministic models saying this will happen or this. Its just guessing with no accuracy.

[Anonymous No.874470]

We're not in the 80s anymore, TA is useful now.

Well, Price Action is anyway. Everything in life revolves around patterns and the market is no exception (it's not a coincidence that there is a market crash every 7 years, around the same time you know...) Sure if you've filled your chart with every indicator going you're a fucking retard, but I've actually been quite profitable in using TA (PA) to make money.

How? I utilise fib ratios and supply and demand (order blocks). I recognize patterns and trade near breakouts (if you think that market breakouts and patterns are a coincidence then I suggest you put your shitty disco clothes back on and go back to that cave with all your 1970s stuff in it) and only use certain indicators (RSI, MA) in confluence with my price action. I also trade sessions (Asia, London, NY, I don't care which) to maximise my chances.

High-frequency trading has made technical analysis a self-fulfilling prophecy and believe me there will be hundreds of thousands of profitable TA traders in the next decade, I already know a few millionnaires from it.

Example: Every man and his dog has a short order on DICKUSD at 666.06, high-frequency bots detect 500,000 orders being processed at this level and recognize an opportunity. Their act of shorting then engages algorithm traders which in turn shorts the currency as well. All of this in less than a millisecond. The big institutions will have the HFT and Algorithms which detect these orders and they start raping the market with short orders, thus bringing the market down to a support level where there'll be another hundred thousand or so long orders (in which the bots will start longing).

It's simple, these bots look for certain datasets. When they get wired bad employment rates, they automatically start shorting the shit out of USDX pairs. When they notice hundreds of thousands of orders at a certain level, they get in on the action.

[Anonymous No.874556]

>>874173
>fundamental analysis is only useful for institutional investors.
So what do we just use the recommendations on our broker's?

[QL !Xn0IrXf3ig No.874571]

You just know somebody is retarded when they say things like "TA is bullshit". Like, what a complete joke.

Why am I complaining? TA got me 27% gains last week, and 22% this week. Keep getting excited with your 4% weekly gains, though.

I've made calls weeks ago that played out to this day. How? TA

[Anonymous No.874588]

>>874403
>Fuck it I'd even trade pure price action instead of technical analysis
Threadly reminder that candlesticks are a form of TA. If you're doing anything other than staring at an endlessly changing order book, /biz/ thinks you're a dirty little peasant.

>>874422
>[Strawman intensifies]
Price action, resistance/support levels. Dangerous scary technical analysis that never works, because how could one possibly be helped by visualizing the past?

Also, scientists have lied before, therefore the scientific method is invalid and any results achieved are pure coincidence. Real scientists only invent by divine guidance.

>>874556
No, you dumbass. You go long/short when the greys communicate with your illuminati masters, who then tell you when to act and how to. Remember, /biz/ knows what'll happen way before it does, because reasons. Also, we're all multi-millionaire playboys, fund managers, or both.

[Anonymous No.874596]

I make around 1200$ a week from scalping.
I've been doing it full time for a year now and I rely on TA about 30% of the time.
MACD, Volume, MA and Momentum is what I follow when I use TA. The rest is "feelings" and luck and reading news and reports.

[Anonymous No.874696]

>>874470
Proprietary data feeds are complete bullshit honestly, but I guess it is capitalism

[Anonymous No.874706]

>>874112

Welcome to /biz/

It's a bit weird. Within the 5% of /biz/ that actually owns some kind of security, it's like 5% quant, 20% forex, 5% pure TA, and like 70% of /bizraelis/ fall into one of the following categories

>muh value investing
>gotta look at the fundamentals
>dont even bother looking at individual companies the market always goes up
>muh vanguard
>buy the dip dip dip dip dip dip

I actually trade using pure TA and I don't diversify either. Lynch me

[Anonymous No.874709]

>>874706
Do you do well?

[Anonymous No.874730]

>>874422
OP here. I've never even heard of CMT before you posted. What do you actually do? How much do you get paid?

[Anonymous No.874755]

>>874706
>I love to day trade
Enjoy losing all your money.

[Anonymous No.874764]

>>874706
>I actually trade using pure TA and I don't diversify either. Lynch me

lol enjoy your NOGAINS

[Anonymous No.874766]

>>874596
>"In fact I make 150% return a day"

[Anonymous No.874787]

>>874112
there are tons of forex scams and other bullshit, /biz/ is full of these shills, perps and cucks (people who enjoy being scammed and insufferably shilling their scammers as it gives them a sexual thrill) trying to get people to use their trading platform so they get tons of commissions or whatever, there are cucks on /biz/ right now

the only way to make money from this (in the long term) is by basing your trades on the fundamentals, as opposed to purely reading the tea leaves

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=newsarchive&sid=aL35vJ3hfXBA

[Anonymous No.874788]

>>874709
>>874755
>>874764

I do all right.

I have a brokerage account with TD ameritrade, it has $3927 in it.

My yearly returns for the last 2 years have been 20% and 27% respectively.

My average trade consists of identifying a stock in a sideways trend and then using MACD or RSI to make a purchase within the trend channel.

Most times, I only scrape out like 2 to 3 percent per trade, over the course of maybe 3 days or so.

It works out to less than a minimum wage job, but the goal is to gain practical experience, not to make money.

I'm a college freshman, and I plan on doing this for 4 years so that by the time I get out, i'll have around 4 years of experience and hopefully a bit more capital so that I can apply for margin/options privileges.

My latest trade consists of making $200 after the SP500 tanked, but I will confess that this is unusually high. I identified it by looking at the symmetrical triangle that is visible from July 26 to August 18

[Anonymous No.874804]

>>874788
good for you man.

i thought the interface looked familiar. i'm on TOS as well. albeit on a paper money account.

got $7k in saving atm but won't fund my account for another year so i can put in $25k. i'll be capitalized appropriately to make scalping trades low as 0.2% profitable even after commission fees.

what is the order execution like live vs papermoney? i'm assuming you've used both. papermoney is through simulated fill servers.

[Anonymous No.874864]

>>874804

This is what it looks like live, and i'll reply to this with papermoney

[Anonymous No.874866]

>>874864

Oh woops forgot the image

Live

[Anonymous No.874867]

>>874866

Well, that image was paper money, this green one is live.


The "Instruction" is basically a choice between FOK or AON.

There are some other differences too, and little things that differ from papermoney, especially in the options screen.

Luckily, my orders fill nearly instantly because I like go trade high volume stocks.

[Anonymous No.874874]

>>874788

The aforementioned triangle

[Anonymous No.874880]

>>874867
>high volume stocks.
same here. doubly important because i don't plan on holding until end of day. my papertrades complete in no more than 2 hours.

[Anonymous No.874925]

>>874457
>nobody ever made money with TA
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dennis
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dan_Zanger
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Lauriston_Livermore
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Eckhardt_(trader)

Listen up kid, we all know you are mad because S&P500 decided your sympathy stocks were overinflated and shitty because you and some other big group of retards listened to the "muh value investing" meme, and only needed a good reason to bumfuck you. I get it. Apparently learning some babby tier formula and looking at P/E ratio during a bubble wasn't a very bright idea, but hey, we all know that's more than enough to outperform the big brains of wall street, paid millions to make quantitative models (because THIS is fundamental analysis, not buying sympathy stocks at random like you do)

Nevermind the fact that a random portfolio consistently outperform the average investor's portfolio,nevermind the fact that indexes are subject to periodic crashes that erases years of meme gains of you good goys still throwing cash at them. You obviously don't have a quantifiable edge, but randomness and the long holding time fools you into believing you have one. Meaning you will be slaughtered over a long enough timeline, just like the rest of you memesters

TA is not about making predictions, is about giving you tools to develop a robust trading system that has a quantifiable edge over a reasonable amount of markets for a reasonable amount of time. I developed several algos that still work to this day using basic TA principle, and they have consistently outperformed S&P500 since 1990 in backtest, and have kept working in forward testing during the last 5 years. I also have other discretionary strategies i use, and they all employ TA. Those too with a statistical edge. I suggest you get a serious broker giving you market depth and some software giving you liquidity distribution to see how stocks behave around technical levels/chart patterns.

[Anonymous No.874934]

>>874422
>When it comes to projecting forward prices
I don't, and you shouldn't either. Price action doesn't predict future levels of price, just give you a good entry on the trend exploiting the momentum you have after breakouts. Price levels are not predetermined, it's still order flow dictating wheter or not that level is valid or not. And that can't be obviously predicted. In theory, if you had the exact market depth around a certain historical level, you could decide if that level is posed to hold or break, but that's it.

TA has been vastly misused and a lot of bullshit have been put under its umbrella, but it doesn't mean that is TA. And you being a CMT should know it more than i do. I spent an ungodly amount of time separating the good things from the bullshits that pass for TA. And i can assure you breakouts are among the good things.
You literally failed at failing. You don't need a special designation to learn to recognize a breakout or a trend. Because in the end, that's all that matters in trading, at least for me

[Anonymous No.874954]

>>874112
TA is real. anyone who says otherwise is ignorant or retarded. just look at any chart and you can see an oscillating pattern, it's obvious if you aren't literally retarded. there are plenty of other patterns too but the oscillating pattern shows up everywhere, it's never a perfectly straight line as long as trading is active. sure no one can get it right 100% of the time but you just need to be more right than wrong on average to make a lot of money.

[Anonymous No.874957]

>>874571
How do I get smart like you?

[Anonymous No.874965]

>>874925
> I developed several algos that still work to this day using basic TA principle, and they have consistently outperformed S&P500 since 1990 in backtest, and have kept working in forward testing during the last 5 years. I also have other discretionary strategies i use, and they all employ TA.
>outperformed the S&P 500
Boy, you're truly retarded. You don't beat the market, if you do then you got lucky or you're involved in insider trading. Which isn't that uncommon among TA fags. So you're saying SP 500 or any index fund will lose money over time, when countless studies have shown that performed much better than any stock.
>But muh risk for higher gains.
You're actually not making that much. Those big risks you're taking is costing you a lot of money, and you don't even know it. You're blinded by the amount of money. Also you do understand TA is just day trading with snake oil tools? But what do I expect from a board filled with entitled douchelords who want their ten millions before 30. You're not going to get it, and I've seen countless idiots like yourself crash and burn. Also the four guys you posted already had money when they started. They saw TA as another risky venture, rather than a sure thing. You're comparing yourself to people you shouldn't because you do not have the same wealth as them. Not to mention one of them, I'll let you guess who; is suspected of insider trading. I told you I used to work in hedge funds. I know two of those guys, personally. Scummy guys who I wouldn't trust with a butter knife.

[Anonymous No.874972]

>>874965
>o-okay t-then TA w-works.
>BUT ITS ILLEGAL, HOW DARE YOU MAKE MONEY, ITS INSIDER TRADING DURRR
I swear to God i've never seen this much anger and butthurt condensed in one single post.You are also retarded enough to not understand that insider trading may actually hurt your money, due to the pricing gap between real and estimated value of a stock. As an example, you may know from insiders that a stock isn't worth anything because the underlying company is almost bankrupt, so you short it. Meanwhile a huge mass of retards keep buying for months, raising the value of the stock, and you lose money

>Those big risks you're taking is costing you a lot of money, and you don't even know it.
I used Monte Carlo simulations on all my algos, i know my maxDD in advance, and it's nowher even near 30% down my equity and have already seen them in action on decades of price patterns. I also have a stop loss on all my trades, so i don't know what you are talking about.
>I told you I used to work in hedge funds
Sure you did, big boy. And your work experience there obviously didn't teach you about the difference between trading and investing. And, you know, mopping floors in a hedge fund, eh i don't know if that counts

[Anonymous No.874990]

>>874972
>I used Monte Carlo simulations on all my algos, i know my maxDD in advance, and it's nowher even near 30% down my equity and have already seen them in action on decades of price patterns. I also have a stop loss on all my trades, so i don't know what you are talking about.
You're just gambling doesn't matter if use advanced statistical algos.
>stop loss on my trade
Oh wow so you figured out how stop your bleeding when the market takes a shit, and then resume when you see an opportunity. That's not beating the market. You're literally following it. You lose your money then you make it, then lose it again. I've seen this before. You're not being smart. One day this is going to bite you in the ass. If you can predict the market with your trading, then you're essentially predicting the future with predictive analytics. Such tools don't exist. Predictive analytic tells you this may or may not happen, but what you're trying to do with your algo is literally tell you this is going to happen. You don't see your bias in your algo.

[Anonymous No.875005]

>>874990
if you piss on the floor you don't have to be psychic to tell that the floor is probably going to get wet.

[Anonymous No.875006]

>>874990
>You're just gambling doesn't matter if use advanced statistical algos
You don't seem to understand the difference between gambling and trading. You only know how to spout the memes you have so carefully learned from this board and that's it. You need validation because obviously buying and holding wasn't a very bright idea, after what happened next week.
You have no statistical tools to see where the smart money is buying or selling, you have no idea what moves the prices, because if you did, you would understand that people like me don't give a fuck about speculating on the future value of the market. Because that, my friend, would be gambling. We simply follow the flow of money and that's it. We make money on the back of those who gamble.
If the market is up or down, i simply don't care, because as long as it moves, there are retards tossing money at it. And that provides me opportunities.

Enjoy being poor and pleb. This conversation ends here. I hope you can learn from it

[Anonymous No.875014]

>>875006
>Enjoy being poor and pleb.
You'll be surprised. But of course hurr durr run away like a little boy.
>statistical tools to tell you where the smart money is buying or selling
You mean I need algos to see who is buying or selling? I hope you realize that you're making your life more complicated than it is.
>follow the flow of money
You're too retarded to see the error.
>buying and holding isn't a bright idea after what happened next week
So now you can see the future. Okay, Mr. Snake oil salesmen.

[Anonymous No.875023]

>>875014
>Okay, Mr. Snake oil salesmen
I don't se the future.I'm not selling anything. If only i'm just trading a few of my free time to buy some delicious butthurt from guys like you, believing investing is a meme you can learn from /biz/ and shill it in every thread ad nauseam to cope with the fact that your account is being slowly, but consistently raped. I'm sure your coin flipping will gift you untold riches, if you shill it long enough on a chinese cartoon imageboard :^)

[Anonymous No.875027]

>>875023
>I don't see the future
Yet you're expecting a bloodbath next week.
>TA doesn't predict
Yet that's what TA does. It looks only at price trends, instead of the entire company. You assume everything is okay and I don't need to analyze it further. Just because a few guys became rich off it doesn't mean you will too. But you assume everyone just hopes that the price will go up, when in fact its the only part of TA that agrees with fundamental analysis. Prices always mimic past behavior.

[Anonymous No.875032]

>>875027
>Yet you're expecting a bloodbath next week.
Where did i say that. Please, tell me. And about TA working, i don't know if what i am doing is TA, i don't even know what do you mean by TA. I only know i use price to identify opportunities without a specific knowledge of the underlying (and i explained you why this actually helps you, most of the times, due to the pricing gap), because i simply capitalize on market moving and that's it

[Anonymous No.875034]

>>875032
You sell your asset at a higher price. I know what it is, but you expect the market to perform better than before. Which is not always true. That's the issue I have with TA, and the methodology is too new. So the lines we are shit throwing at investing and trading is blurred. You like to see your gains in the minutes to days frames. While I perform in the long term. I know you're saying this has some validity but I've yet to see it historically. Its too new, and well there is always something new. That's why I see as gambling because you follow the trends and that's it. You buy the asset and sell at a higher price than your initial price. Hoping hte market goes up. I'm still learning more about TA but I recently come across the efficient market hypothesis.

[Anonymous No.875043]

>>875034
>Which is not always true
Nothing is certain in the markets, that's the nature of the game. About the assumption that market goes up, that's a given if you know that enough people are buying or selling. That's about supply and demand, and market microstructure. Each time an accumulation pattern appears, you basically see buyers and sellers fighting. When the patterns break out, you see the winner pumping orders with the liquidity provided by the loser who got his stop loss triggered. Stops are usually set in clusters and defending or trying to take them out to generate liquidity is what creates s/r levels. When the price interacts with these levels, you can see where is most reasonable for the price to go next.

And remember the EMH has already been debunked, because it assumes all the operators in the market act like logical entities. It doesn't take mass psychology into account (that is, how greed and fear affect markets), by assuming every operator acts like a robot.

[Anonymous No.875056]

>>875043
You're right that EMH assumes the market is logical. Which is how I think. That's why I can't put the variable of psychology into the equation. But I've always been doing this inside of my head. When the stock goes down because of a board member being arrested for jerking off in front of kids, then investors sell because of moral reasons. You can use FA and TA together but I found out that its taboo among investors. I see your point of trends that it has high lows, high highs, low lows etc. I've actually been doing this the whole time, but I used it in the long game. Most TA stuff I read is on short term stuff aka day trading which what I associated it the whole time. A mistake I made. Also reddit seems to think TA is black magic. I've seen threads on there and too many people hate it. I see the issue with TA its not perfect and the assumption of predicting is in the model. It shouldn't be call predicting because it implies you can see in the future. It should be call forecasting.

[Anonymous No.875059]

>>875056
>That's why I can't put the variable of psychology into the equation
And that's what TA does. Also yes, day trading is gambling, unless you are a pit trader with knowledge of market profiling

[Anonymous No.875063]

>>875056
>I see the issue with TA its not perfect and the assumption of predicting is in the model. It shouldn't be call predicting because it implies you can see in the future. It should be call forecasting.
Oh and exactly. I see you got to the point finally. That and using it along fundamental analysis to get a good entry point. That's why you shouldn't listen to reddit or the memesters from /biz/. I remember seeing a survey made here regarding trade experience and how big was the account used. 92% of the folks you take advice from here basically trade with less than 2000$ with 2 years of experience. Go figure.
Do yourself a favour and leave this board

[Anonymous No.875066]

>>875059
That's pretty much what TA does. It brings the human factor into trading/investing. Something everyone hasn't been doing. Look at China for example. That was just a shit show of human greed. Pit traders are fucking machines in organic flesh. Day trading is gambling and I believe my odds are better in Vegas. What programs you use? I'll try to find osme for my phone.

[Anonymous No.875068]

>>875063
I am leaving this board and site. Going back to my old roots of reading up the forums and industry publications. But I just love shitposting on this board. I never listen to anything on this board, beside the obvious ROTH IRA in your portfolio. Using FA and TA does make your portfolio perform better.

[Anonymous No.875086]

>>874422

I don't fuck with it. Seems like it's very easy to get fucked up even if you're on a hot streak. I've felt like a majority of the people that use TA are just using confirmation bias to paint the picture they want to see.

They do provide liquidity to the market though, so I'm polite and just let them do their thing.

I'll just buy and hold as usual. Fast money and the stock market only work out for like .1% of people while the rest get fucked. Hell, anyone telling you they can help you make fast money is shady as hell. If they could actually do that then they would have no benefit in telling you how to do it anyways... they would naturally keep it to themselves.

[Anonymous No.875096]

>>875068
you are right you need both FA and TA and to treat them by their merits, logically and smartly, though you're gone now, which is a shame, there are a few trolls here and there but they don't represent the whole and their criticism helps deter circlejerking, oh well

>>874925
>Richard Dennis
http://www.automated-trading-system.com/turtles-just-lucky/

"The result of such back-test shows a drastic drop in performance after 1986, and even a flat performance from 1996 to 2009."

>Dan Zanger
He confirmed it was a bubble using fundamentals.

>Jesse Livermore
http://www.r-5.org/files/books/trading/speculation/Jesse_Livermore-How_To_Trade_In_Stocks_(1940_original)-EN.pdf
His TA involves monitoring how the market reacts to fundamental events. Read a little, you will see the merits of connecting your ideas to reality instead of relying on pure abstract theories.

>William Eckhardt
http://www.automated-trading-system.com/stats-and-bill-eckhardt/

>– Chart patterns do not work

Also I have a suspicion that he was scalping before it was cool.

[Anonymous No.875099]

>>875096
I"m still here.

[Anonymous No.875110]

>>875066
>What programs you use
cTrader at the moment. Think or Swim is pretty cool as well.
>>875096
Disclaimer; i'm in no way advocating TA alone, like i stated before, i'm just saying that TA works, given the proper context. In my case it's using relatively simple algos to see who is buying and at which levels using price alone, which makes me a TA user. Still, my algos are not fully automated because they tend to generate trend signals when the trend has changed direction due to fundamental factors. It means that there are still active traders in that direction, but i am inclined to believe they are wrong. In this case, i use FA to figure out why.
In no case i would be using those two methods alone, but during "calmer" markets, TA is still the way to go to see the price action in context

About Eckardt saying that chart patterns don't work, well Thomas Bulkowski has made a living out of it. Just because your chart shows a pattern, doesn't mean you have to buy or sell because of it, blindly

[Anonymous No.875149]

>>874112
>tudor jones is a giant elliot waver
>non structural hft is all technical
>renaissance uses TA
>marty schwartz uses the 10ema

but youre right, TA is mysticism, but probably only the way YOU are using it.

[Anonymous No.875245]

>>875086
>I've felt like a majority of the people that use TA are just using confirmation bias to paint the picture they want to see.
"Confirmation bias", as you put it, is how a smart traders support a trade's risk.

[Anonymous No.875324]

>>875245
pls go to school

[Anonymous No.875396]

Jesus fuck you guys are retarded.

Making money trading is not about predicting the future. It's about intelligently managing risk.

I'm willing to spend y to make x with z probability. If you have a reliable way of calculating z, you can make money.

[Anonymous No.875647]

>>874112
It's redudant at best, often downright retarded.

>mfw on every news site there's mathematically impaired idiots mumbling about "fib levels"

Top fucking kek. Might as well pick those resistances and supports at random, faster and same effect.

[Anonymous No.876674]

>>874112
A little bit can help, just don't expect it to do everything for you or you'll get upset like half the posters in this thread.

[Anonymous No.876770]

>>874416
>technical analysis
I'm libra mate, tell me how I'll do with TSLA in the next month. give me some of that gypsy magic

[Anonymous No.876773]

>>874112
It's witchcraft in a sense, because any method of analyzing markets becomes itself a part of the market, and no algorithm would be able to account for itself, it's a contradiction.

[Anonymous No.876814]

>>876773
There actually are ways of accounting for your market impact when running backtests and shit. It's still not perfect though, you can't predict if someone is sniping you.

[Anonymous No.877011]

>>875647
>Might as well pick those resistances and supports at random, faster and same effect.
No, dickhead. Those "fib levels" you shit on become self fulfilling prophecies if enough people follow them. If enough people follow them the odds of your trade becoming successful grow larger.

90% of untrained people lose money in markets.

90% of trained people make money in markets.

For fucks sake,, a multi millionaire brokerage owner and trader fucking GIVES IT AWAY in his book"The Logical Trader" and we still have to look at shithead posts like yours that deny the power of TA! But, if their weren't dumbasses like you I wouldn't be making money. So, carry on......and thanks!

[Anonymous No.877184]

>>874422
>Most of TA is bullshit. I'll be the first to admit as a CMT (don't worry, I don't parade that designation around like its worth a shit - it isn't).

So to you, when did MTA go off the rails? For me, it was when I realized they still took shit like Elliot wave and Gann (WHAT THE FUCK? THERE'S NOTHING MAGICAL ABOUT 45 DEGREE LINES WHEN THE GRAPH PAPER IS IN SOFTWARE, AND DO YOU NOT KNOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN LINEAR AND LOG SCALE MOTHERFUCKER?) Lines seriously.

I was like, "I can answer the questions and get the right answers for the exam, and I know there's a small segment of grey-haired retail traders who still take this shit seriously, but if I ever caught a rep using it to do analysis, I'd fire his fucking ass."

Congrats/condolences on getting the CMT, though. Even though some of the curriculum is total bullshit, the parts that aren't bullshit are worth it. And while it's no CFA (no CFA here either!) it's still a hell of a lot of work. You're doing it right by using it, not parading it.

[Anonymous No.877219]

>>875056

Even though many actors in the market believe they are acting logically, they often times aren't, and are even subject to psychological biases which they are unaware of.

For example: loss aversion. Losing $1 hurts twice as much as the pleasure of gaining $1

There's a huge list of behavioral quirks in the market.

1. Domestic investors tend to focus far more on domestic stocks. For example, the typical US investor holds 93% U.S. stock, even though the US stock market is only half of the world.

2. Investors gravely overvalue brands they work for or know.

3.Naive diversification (people tend to think that a little of everything is better than concentrating on a limited number of things.) Don't get me wrong, diversification is fine and all, but many investors tend to do 1/N diversification (splitting their money equally across several securities) rather than the more financially savvy Markowitz diversification.

4. Confusing good companies and good investments. People tend to think of well-run companies as good investments, but many times even companies that are not run perfectly can be profitable in the hands of a savvy investor.

5. Psychological recency effect. People tend to chase winners, for example, if a stock goes up a few percent yesterday, many people will chose to buy the stock (even if the profit opportunity might not be there anymore)

6. Gambler's fallacy. Investors tend to make the mistake of seeing a string of independent events and tying them together mentally. For example: "There's no way XYZ corp could go up 10 days in a row!" If each trading session is independent of the others, then yes it can.

7. Conformity bias. Investors tend to change their judgement in order to fit with the majority of people, even if their original judgement was right.

8.Overconfidence and self-inflated self-esteem, Most investors tend to see themselves as "better than average" even when they might not be.

9.Hindsight bias. "I knew it all along."

[Anonymous No.877311]

as someone above said, TA is a self fulfilling prophecy. it may occasionally work because others use it.

basically https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_fool_theory

also I'd rather spend my time learning or doing something useful.