|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Thanks for sharing this. I like the conclusion there by Mr. James S.
Chanos:
"First and foremost, no one should depend on Wall Street to identify
and extricate investors from disastrous financial situations. There
are too many conflicts of interest, all of them usually disclosed,
but pervasive and important nevertheless. In addition, outside
auditors are archeologists, not detectives. I can't think of one
major financial fraud in the United States in the last ten years that
was uncovered by a major brokerage house analyst or an outside
accounting firm. Almost every such fraud ultimately was unmasked by
short sellers and/or financial journalists."
I rest my case.
rgds, Pal
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Franco Gornati <francogornati@xxxx>
wrote:
> Well .. should be said that Enron was the big short of Jim Chanos
just on
> the merit of its fundamentals but his analysis was not the of kind
that
> can be systemized or backtested and sure one that needs a high
level of
> expertise.
> Here's his testimony to the Full Committee on Energy and Commerce
>
http://energycommerce.house.gov/107/hearings/02062002Hearing483/Chanos
782.htm
>
> -Franco
>
> ----- Original Message ---------------
>
> Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re: Technical Vs technofundamental trading
> From: "duke.jones" <Duke.Jones@xxxx>
> Date: Mon, 07 Feb 2005 22:38:47
> To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx,
> amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> >
> >Have to agree with Fred here...by the time the fundamentals turned
the stock was in the teens. Here is a little history.
http://208.149.108.73/pubfiles/enecollapse.pdf
> >
> >Duke Jones, CMT
> >
> >-------Original Message-------
> >> From: "Fred" <ftonetti@xxxx>
> >> Subject: [amibroker] Re: Technical Vs technofundamental trading
> >> Sent: 07 Feb 2005 22:31:13
> >>
> >> Price action in Enron was more than enough to tell one where
Enron
> >> was going or at least that one didn't wnat to be long in it way
> >> before in serious price trouble. The fundamentals lagged in
that
> >> case simply because they weren't being accurately reported but
in any
> >> case fundamentals lag. One can certainly use general market
prices
> >> as an indicator of where the economy is going but it doesn't
work the
> >> other way around.
> >>
> >> --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Pal Anand" wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I agree with what was said in another forum by another
member, that
> >> > if people had followed the proper fundamental criteria
(inaddition
> >> to
> >> > technical criteria), they wouldn't have bought Enron and many
other
> >> > financial basket cases.
> >> >
> >> > rgds, Pal
> >> >
> >> > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Claude Caruana"
> >> > wrote:
> >> > > Hi all,
> >> > >
> >> > > I am an Amibroker user for a few weeks now and I must say
it is
> >> > about to
> >> > > turn my trading method 180%.
> >> > >
> >> > > I initially purchased Amibroker to be able to generate
optimal
> >> > signals for a
> >> > > watchlist of around 100 stocks which I have selected for
their
> >> > fundumentals,
> >> > > however I am finding that my results work much better and
more
> >> > consistently
> >> > > on the entire stock universe (The 7000 tickers I have
loaded in
> >> my
> >> > db) than
> >> > > if I try running it on any watchlists containing less that
200
> >> > tickers.
> >> > >
> >> > > I find that, in general, the most reliable entry signals
occur
> >> very
> >> > > infrequently, and hence, signals are too few and far apart
to
> >> create
> >> > > consistent results when the basis is my 100 stock
watchlist. If I
> >> > try to
> >> > > "loosen the parameters" and get an optimal number of
signals for
> >> my
> >> > 100
> >> > > stocks, then the system will not be as reliable as the one
> >> > with "tighter
> >> > > parameters" scanning the entire stock universe.
> >> > >
> >> > > Before I ditch my fundumental approach (which quite franky
has
> >> yet
> >> > to give
> >> > > me positve results!) altogether and start using a technical-
only
> >> > system, I
> >> > > would be very grateful if anybody could confirm whether my
> >> > observation about
> >> > > entry signals is normal, or whether I am missing something.
> >> > Finally, are
> >> > > there any of you out there who trade using technicals only?
> >> > >
> >> > > thanks for any feedback!
> >> > >
> >> > > Claude
> >>
> >> Check AmiBroker web page at:
> >> http://www.amibroker.com/
> >>
> >> Check group FAQ at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
> >>
> >> YAHOO! GROUPS SPONSOR
> >>
> >> ADVERTISEMENT
> >>
> >> -------------------------
> >> YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS
> >>
> >> To visit your group on the web, go to:
> >> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
> >> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> >> amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
Service.
> >-------Original Message-------
> >
> >
> >
> >Check AmiBroker web page at:
> >http://www.amibroker.com/
> >
> >Check group FAQ at:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
> >Yahoo! Groups Links
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
In low income neighborhoods, 84% do not own computers.
At Network for Good, help bridge the Digital Divide!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/EpW3eD/3MnJAA/cosFAA/GHeqlB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Check AmiBroker web page at:
http://www.amibroker.com/
Check group FAQ at: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|