JohnThainsLimoDriver Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > former trader Wrote: > -------------------------------------------------- > ----- > > I’ve worked with people who used exclusively TA > > and who made 7 figure incomes year after year. > > There are people who deal drugs who make 7 figures > year after year. There are people who put a round > ball in a small hoop who make 8 figures year after > year. There are people who wrote in 6 random > numbers on a small ticket and walked away with 9 > figures. Point is there are always those outliers > in each profession who are successful in the most > unlikely of ways. Doesn’t legitimize what they do > over the broad population of participants. Isn’t anyone who makes a living trading an outlier? I heard that less than 2% of people who make a living out of trading actually survive 4 years. Even those that make it using fundamental analysis are outliers.
I get a kick out of these technical analysis fights. Probably second only behind CFA vs. MBA.
i think its BS to fall to conclusions abt a topic without having an understanding in the matter…i would suggest ppl go out and read abt TA first and then make judgements as to whether its helpful or not…i personally find TA extremely helpful and use both TA and FA to the point where the line between them has blurred… TA is all abt understanding human behavior and mkt psychology …if u believe human psychology plays a role in mkts then u will find TA useful
i thk its BS to wrte lke a 12yo grl txtng on a cllfone. nxt tme u wrte lke ths ur gtting blcked.
Ok, masters of the universe. I didnt even read the rubbish you spouted. Lets just use the evidence. Some names for you: Aspect Bridgewater AHL Campbell John Locke Renaissance Crabel Niederhoffer Graham Capital IKOS Without even giving a half thought about this subject, i’ve listed over 100 billion dedicated to this strategy. These are no chop shops. Jamie Simons at Renaissance anyone? There are dozens more I can think of without breaking sweat. Google them and don’t bother me any more. One example of one product offered by one of these managers: Man AHL Diversified 26 March 1996 to 27 April 2009 Annualised return 18.4% AUM 3.2bn Yes, ‘only’ 13 years, I know. Link: https://www.maninvestments.com/products/funds/adpfund/performance/performance.jhtml?_requestid=79893 Are you guys really professionals in the investment industry?
That list is incomplete. You forgot to list the thousands of funds that went out of business trying to use technical analysis. And by the way, Bridgewater most definitely does NOT run a technical analysis strategy.
JohnThainsLimoDriver Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > That list is incomplete. You forgot to list the > thousands of funds that went out of business > trying to use technical analysis. 1. I can’t be bothered to argue this point. There are enough successful high quality shops employing thousands of people. You seem to be arguing survivorship bias or some other index bias. Moot point. It is an industry. I am not trying to promote it one way or the other, just stating what is a rather large fact. And by the way, > Bridgewater most definitely does NOT run a > technical analysis strategy. 2. How much do you want to bet? Let me guess - you receive their daily observations (excellent analysis, my favourite macro overview) and think they only do fundamental investing? Think again. You are wrong. Specifically they run the Pure Alpha Fund which uses a combination of momentum and value in a systematic approach. Over USD 20 billion. What is momentum if not technical analysis? Who is their peer group? Yes managed futures. Link below. http://www.bwater.com/home/strategies--research/pure-alpha.aspx Post your evidence if you have any to the contrary. Makes for a better argument than just stating the contrary…
Muddahudda Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > 2. How much do you want to bet? Let me guess - you > receive their daily observations (excellent > analysis, my favourite macro overview) and think > they only do fundamental investing? Think again. > You are wrong. Specifically they run the Pure > Alpha Fund which uses a combination of momentum > and value in a systematic approach. Over USD 20 > billion. What is momentum if not technical > analysis? Who is their peer group? Yes managed > futures. Link below. > > http://www.bwater.com/home/strategies--research/pu > re-alpha.aspx > > Post your evidence if you have any to the > contrary. Makes for a better argument than just > stating the contrary… The evidence is my old pay stubs.
High frequency algorithmic trading is a fancy name for technical analysis.
JohnThainsLimoDriver Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > http://www.bwater.com/home/strategies--research/pu > > > re-alpha.aspx > > > > Post your evidence if you have any to the > > contrary. Makes for a better argument than just > > stating the contrary… > > > The evidence is my old pay stubs. +$50mm invested > your old pay stubs
Ross Perot had $300 million invested with Parkcentral. Didn’t seem to give him any more insight into their strategy considering he lost it all when they blew up. I think Fairfield Greenwich also has something to say about their $7 billion investment in Madoff. Enough said.
BTW, other than the location and the time and the organization who is sponsoring this, do we know anything about what is supposed to happen or be talked about at this event? philip.platt Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I haven’t ever been to one of these events, but > looks interesting - > > > http://www.mta.org/eweb/DynamicPage.aspx?webcode=n > yregion > > > IMPORTANT NOTICE: For security purposes attendees > will not be admitted more than a half hour prior > to the start of meetings held at the Bloomberg > offices. In addition, all those who plan to attend > this live event, must register 24 hours prior to > the start of this event. No registrations will be > permitted the day of the event. > > DATE: Monday, June 8, 2009 > > > TIME: 5:30 PM EST > > LOCATION: Bloomberg building, 731 Lexington Ave, > between 58th & 59th Streets. The Bloomberg > reception area is located on the 58th Street side. > As you walk up from Lex on 58th, enter Beacon > Court halfway on the left. You will see a > Bloomberg awning to enter the building. Please > make sure to bring photo IDs for security purposes > at Bloomberg. > > COST: This event is free for all attendees > > SPEAKERS: Tony Dwyer > > REGISTRATION: Important notice - Please register > no later than Friday, June 5th. Due to security > purposes there will be no registration the day of > the event. > > MTA Members and Affiliates: Click here to > register. (Please be sure to select > “Affiliate/Member” in the “Registrant Type” drop > down menu, and to check the “Event Fee” in the > product line.) > > Non MTA Members and Affiliates: > Please contact Cassandra Townes, 646-652-3300. > > CHAPTER CHAIR: Katie Stockton, CMT; 203-987-4061 > > VICE CHAIR: Paul Ciana, CMT; 516-849-3121
Muddahudda I don’t think that just because you are a quant fund you are using TA. Sure you can say that price momentum is TA, but what about earnings mo? What about using price mo that is risk adjusted with fundamental factors? Most people don’t use simple price mo unless they want to get absolutely killed around inflection points. If we are saying stat arb is TA, that is just not how I talk about it and not how most of the people at the funds you referenced talk about it either. Try telling Jamie Simons that he is a technical analyst, and he will certainly disagree with you (see below links for evidence of this). Maybe the phrase just has an unwarranted bad stigma, or maybe you are just broadening it’s usage beyond what it really is. http://seekingalpha.com/article/59187-why-technical-analysis-is-nonsense http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&refer=home&sid=ayjImYcoCiH8 In quant land the line blurs pretty quickly and I just consider it quant, not TA, because the signals distilled are just not pure price pattern or pure fundamental data. Like I’ve said it previous thread, smart people use both and people that want to be smart should probably know about both.
JTLD: That applies to any asset/fund/investment at any time in history and is meaningless. Um, Enron, um money market funds, um Tbills 
You still have not come back with anything yet. I am still receiving my monthly returns until proved otherwise. If you know something about fraud and claim to have worked there, do spill the beans old chap. Would save a lot of pain… And if you also worked there, what have you to say about the Pure Alpha Fund. Do speak up. It would give us a really good insight into what your really know. Eureka: Renaissance Institutional Futures Fund LP. Not Medallion. Not the equities fund. RIFF. Yes it is a trend follower. It does use technical analysis. I’m not going to bother having a semantic discussion on TA/quants. RIFF is a trendfollower. Nuff said.
> Eureka: > > Renaissance Institutional Futures Fund LP. Not > Medallion. Not the equities fund. RIFF. Yes it is > a trend follower. It does use technical analysis. > I’m not going to bother having a semantic > discussion on TA/quants. Oh, you were talking about the fund that lost 12% last year and waived fees for this year? Given how you were talking positively about TA, I assumed you weren’t talking about that fund, or at least you weren’t at all clear. I have not more time for this. >RIFF is a trendfollower. > Nuff said. Ok, I can get on board with that, if that’s what you mean by TA and we are not having a semantic discussion. I doubt the people that run RIFF would agree wtih you though.
I am not implying fraud anywhere. I’m implying that just because your firm invested money with them doesn’t mean you know anything at all about what goes on within company walls, and certainly not more than employees who work there.
bchadwick Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > BTW, other than the location and the time and the > organization who is sponsoring this, do we know > anything about what is supposed to happen or be > talked about at this event? I’m not really sure. Maybe it is just a regular get together of all the TA folk with a few words by the speaker. The July 13 event might be more insightful and June 8th is pretty brutal for my schedule, so I might look at attending the later date. I am interested in TA and seeking to develop another perspective.
Eureka: laughable really. I never claimed it was always and everywhere successful. Find where I said any fund had to post consistent year on year returns. Every fund can have a drawdown. But here’s the thing: if it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, walks like a duck: it’s a duck. Capiche? Your point does not diminish my argument. Why do they use futures? Trend following, simple. Why did investors redeem? Because it underperformed employee only funds and every other fund in its peer group. Why did it underperform? Because they are new to the game and dont have any edge in the market. What was your point again? My point is that there is a large industry that uses technical analysis, using price trends to guide investment decisions. And many are successful. Some are not. All ducks are not white. Have you actually met the RIFF people? Invested? Hmmmm. I await your response with avid interest. We can go semantic if you like, I am acutely aware of market neutral funds as well, but none of what you have written negate my points at all. JTLD: still waiting for your rare insight into what the Pure Alpha fund does, seeing as you have intimate knowledge. Not interested in conspiracy theories. Do tell. We are all waiting. I’ll read the latest Daily Observation in the meantime.
There was an interesting article in the WSJ (not endorsing that p.o.s. newspaper or anything by making this statement) about how the indices that show that CTAs and managed futures generated extraordinary returns is biased. I lost my online account and only receive print, but if anyone is ambitious enough to locate it - it offers some evidence against their track record. Asset weighting schemes and survivorship bias were mentioned but don’t rely on my memory - I think it was published within the last two weeks.
Muddahudda, not arguing with you, just saying you were not clear.