[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[amibroker] "Random prices" (was Re: Backtest using equity curve)



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links

It is impossible to assess the quality of the knowledge we are 
gathering without allowing a share of randomness in the manner it is 
obtained and cleaning the argument from the chance coincidence that 
could have seeped in its construction.  In science, probability and 
information are treated in exactly the same manner...

rgds, Pal
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, uenal.mutlu@xxxx wrote:
> Why should there be a random component in price movement?
> Supply and demand (plus News) drives the price.
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Tomasz Janeczko" <amibroker@xxxx>
> To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 5:18 PM
> Subject: Re: [amibroker] "Random prices" (was Re: Backtest using 
equity curve)
> 
> 
> > Hello,
> >
> > No, neither I nor quanttrader are saying that prices
> > are pure random (white noise).
> >
> > We are just saying that there is random component
> > in price movement.
> >
> > Did you hear about deterministic chaos ?
> >
> > Suggested reading:
> > Stocks & Commodities V. 9:2 (49-52): Of Trends And Random Walks 
by E. Michael
> Poulos
> >
> > Stocks & Commodities V. 7:11 (391-395): Chaos theory and market 
behavior by
> Bernd Anders
> >
> > Stocks & Commodities V. 8:8 (319-322): Making Money With Chaos by 
Hans Hannula,
> PhD, RSA, CTA
> >
> > Stocks & Commodities V. 9:9 (361-365): Nonlinearity, Chaos Theory 
and the DJIA
> by Victor E. Krynicki, Ph.D.
> >
> > Stocks & Commodities V14:6(258-261): Statistics Of Chaotic 
Markets by Hans
> Hannula, Ph.D., C.T.A.
> >
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Tomasz Janeczko
> > amibroker.com
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: <uenal.mutlu@xxxx>
> > To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 4:46 PM
> > Subject: Re: [amibroker] "Random prices" (was Re: Backtest using 
equity curve)
> >
> >
> > > I naturally disagree :-)
> > > So, you and quanttrader are really saying that
> > > the stock prices are indeed really random?!
> > > So, then why use T/A or AB at all?
> > > Why on hell would anybody invest in random things (except in 
lotto etc.)?
> > >
> > > Ok, here is a practical example: imagine a stock
> > > closed at 25 yesterday. Do you really believe that
> > > the intraday price of this stock today will make
> > > random moves between 0 and say 50 ?
> > > Intraday it will move around 25, but will definitely not make
> > > fe. something like the following: 25, 1, 50, 25, 10, 40, 0, 1, 
50
> > > If this practically is not possible with this stock then
> > > it definitely is not random. IMHO a basic fact.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "Tomasz Janeczko" <amibroker@xxxx>
> > > To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 3:49 PM
> > > Subject: Re: [amibroker] "Random prices" (was Re: Backtest 
using equity
> curve)
> > >
> > >
> > > > Uenal,
> > > >
> > > > I fully agree with quanttrader.
> > > >
> > > > Even code you supplied can be modified to produce chart that 
is random too
> > > > but looks much closer to 'real' prices.
> > > >
> > > > Graph = 100+ Cum( -1 + Random() * 2.0 );
> > > >
> > > > Plot(Graph, "Random graph", colorBlue);
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Tomasz Janeczko
> > > > amibroker.com
> > > >
> > > > Best regards,
> > > > Tomasz Janeczko
> > > > amibroker.com
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "quanttrader714" <quanttrader714@xxxx>
> > > > To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 3:39 PM
> > > > Subject: [amibroker] "Random prices" (was Re: Backtest using 
equity curve)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > This proves nothing.  Your model is flawed.  Generate a chart 
with one
> > > > dimensional Brownian motion and there's not a person on this 
board who
> > > > would be able to tell it from a "real" price chart.  An 
omniscient
> > > > being could create perfect deterministic models of the 
markets but for
> > > > mere mortals, there's significant randomness caused by an 
incredibly
> > > > complex mix of competing forces that "nudge" prices in 
different
> > > > directions, from institutional purchases to Johnny Jones 
cashing in to
> > > > pay for his daughter's wedding to daytraders, etc., etc., etc.
> > > > Certain forces will prevail and/or be in synch to varying 
degrees over
> > > > time.  But even in a totally random process, anything that 
can happen,
> > > > will happen if you wait long enough.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, uenal.mutlu@xxxx wrote:
> > > > > // generate random series in the range 0 to 100 and plot it
> > > > > Graph = Random() * 100;
> > > > > Plot(Graph, "Random graph", colorBlue);
> > > > >
> > > > > Does any real chart look like such a random chart: NO.
> > > > > This proves the basic fact that nothing in the markets
> > > > > is or was ever random.
> > > > > UM
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > From: "palsanand" <palsanand@xxxx>
> > > > > To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 1:19 AM
> > > > > Subject: [amibroker] Re: Backtest using equity curve
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > In his book "The Profit Magic of Stock Transaction Timing", 
J.M.
> > > > > Hurst proves that market movement is not random, and by 
analyzing a
> > > > > large "stable" of underlying instruments one could find 
excellent
> > > > > opportunities for profit each and every day.  The movement 
is not
> > > > > random but non-stationary because markets do not move 
without a
> > > > > purpose or a goal, they move because of an imbalance 
between supply
> > > > > (sellers) and demand (buyers) with the price tending to 
equalize it.
> > > > > However the outcomes are random, i.e, unknown and the 
probability of
> > > > > winning is undetermined, i.e., not a constant.
> > > > >
> > > > > Identifying persistent price patterns helps one to 
determine the
> > > > > dependance of the outcomes.  The existence of a pullback or 
a rally
> > > > > situation is dependant on the existance of a previous 
uptrend or a
> > > > > downtrend and so is the existance of a trend reversal.  
What's real
> > > > > price movement in response to a clear signal and what's 
just random
> > > > > noise? Figuring out the difference is vital and according 
to John F.
> > > > > Ehlers in a recent article in S & C Magazine such a 
distinction can
> > > > > be important to trading. If one could avoid periods when 
the market
> > > > > has no clear trend (just enjoy being flat), one could avoid 
whipsaws
> > > > > and get cleaner trades. If one could identify periods that 
were
> > > > > filled with noise and no clear signals in either direction, 
one
> > > > could
> > > > > also switch trading tactics to suit the situation, for 
e.g., day-
> > > > > trading instead of position-trading. At the very least, one 
would
> > > > > know what situation one faces.
> > > > >
> > > > > rgds, Pal
> > > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "quanttrader714"
> > > > > <quanttrader714@xxxx> wrote:
> > > > > > You guys are confusing randomness, independence and 
stationarity
> > > > > big time.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Dave Merrill" 
<dmerrill@xxxx>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > agreed. if the fact that a trading system did well in 
the past
> > > > > has no
> > > > > > > bearing whatsoever on whether it does well in the 
future, how
> > > > can
> > > > > we
> > > > > > know
> > > > > > > anything at all about the future performance of a 
proposed
> > > > trading
> > > > > > system?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > dave
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >   The gambler”Ēs fallacy is a fallacy because the 
gambler
> > > > ignores
> > > > > the
> > > > > > > independence of the outcomes and looks for patterns 
that do not
> > > > > > exist.  If
> > > > > > > we have designed trading systems based on recognition of
> > > > patterns
> > > > > that
> > > > > > > precede profitable trading opportunities, and if those 
patterns
> > > > > are
> > > > > > > persistent, then we no longer have random, independent 
outcomes.
> > > > > Our
> > > > > > > trading systems do have serial dependencies and upward 
sloping
> > > > > equity
> > > > > > > curves.  So analysis of the equity curve provides an 
indication
> > > > > of the
> > > > > > > health of the trading system.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >   Howard


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Buy Ink Cartridges or Refill Kits for your HP, Epson, Canon or Lexmark
Printer at MyInks.com. Free s/h on orders $50 or more to the US & Canada.
http://www.c1tracking.com/l.asp?cid=5511
http://us.click.yahoo.com/mOAaAA/3exGAA/qnsNAA/GHeqlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

Send BUG REPORTS to bugs@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Send SUGGESTIONS to suggest@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
-----------------------------------------
Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: amiquote@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 
(Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
--------------------------------------------
Check group FAQ at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/