|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Maas:
Since the distribution of stock prices is log-normal, your entire discussion
of standard deviations is flawed. Refer to Peter's book "Chaos and Order in
the Financial Markets..." for documentation of this.
Lionel Issen
lissen@xxxxxxxxx
----- Original Message -----
From: "A.J. Maas" <anthmaas@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 9:58 AM
Subject: Re: Simple question on Bollinger Bands
> Are we here discussing the Kaufman's definition for his method in
calculating
> an everyday very common Standard Deviation value?
> Or anyone else's sd-calc methods?
> ----------------------------------
> Nope.
> We are discussing here the use of the Bollinger Bands (which bands already
> include the MSK Standard Deviation function in their formulas), that will
have
> to catch 90% of the Price, eg A.Torchio's original question:
> "Could anyone tell me the number of standard deviations allowing
to
> contain within the bands 90% of price data?"
>
> Find the answer using MSK and Bartjens:
>
> In MSK click "Help"|"Index"|"Bollinger bands:sample custom indicator:"
> for the bands-formula that catches 100% of the Price.
> Like said, the BBands already include StDev, thus no need to add more or
> alter its function. What needs adjusting -lowering- is the times that the
function
> needs to be multiplied to have the bands come down to catch 90% instead
> of the 100% it does at the moment. So, yet again unraffled:
>
> The CF Bollinger Bands
> -uses 2 times the StDev function for Upper band
> -uses 2 times the StDev function for Lower band
> ------------
> -totals 4 times the StDev function
> (for the bandwidth "to contain 100% of price data")
>
> Then in a CF to catch 90% of the Price is using this as follows:
>
> -uses 1.8 times the StDev function for Upper band
> -uses 1.8 times the StDev function for Lower band
> ------------
> -totals 3.6 times the StDev function
> (for the bandwidth now "to contain 90% of price data")
>
> and where the "3.6" then also equals to 90% of the original "4 devs"
((4/100)*90).
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Whatever Kaufman then wants to use in and for his method {haven't checked
it}
> is -like your silly+stupid remarks- unimportant and irrelevant here.
>
> You can however check Kaufmans calculations by using Bartjens, but note
that
> on the contrairy, Bartjens doesn't need a Kaufman to be right or to be
spot on, eg
> Batjens Law is always right.
>
> Like said, it's that is simple, but can be oh so difficult to understand
for 8th grades
> or a belg.
>
> Regards,
> Ton Maas
> ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Dismiss the ".nospam" bit (including the dot) when replying.
> Homepage http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas
>
>
> ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
> Van: "Jossart Alain" <Alain.Jossart@xxxxxxxxx>
> Aan: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Verzonden: zaterdag 28 oktober 2000 8:57
> Onderwerp: Re: Simple question on Bollinger Bands
>
>
> >
> > " Trading Systems and Methods " - P. Kaufman, iow the reference in TA
and
> > trading systems
> >
> > I provided the answer to a question you have not even understood yet. Is
> > Bartjens free gift too ? [Kaufman ain't]
> >
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "A.J. Maas"
> > To: "Metastock-List" <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Saturday, October 28, 2000 5:38 AM
> > Subject: Re: Simple question on Bollinger Bands
> >
> >
> > > Obviously has to be a belg............Bartjens goes beyond 8th grades.
> > >
> > > The formulas delivered in below mail ARE FOR USE IN METASTOCK !!
> > > Not in a chatbox.
> > >
> > > They are available to you, if you also do have a copy of MetaStocK,
> > > which I strongly doubt you have.
> > > =============
> > >
> > > For other List members that are -now- truely concerned :
> > > They make use of the program's StDev(DataArray,Periods) function, that
> > > you can find in the MSK7x-manual p.264.
> > > See my other mail send tonight for more detailed info.
> > >
> > > And for the Jossarts, Jagows, Stevensons, Manascos and other here not
> > named
> > > brown marks among us, think twice before writing + posting
> > crap..................go by
> > > the facts, else you just don't stand the chance!!!
> > > Quality and prime trading + money earning stuff is what we're after
here.
> > Offensive,
> > > even disgrading words, cannot and will not effect me, since you'll get
> > easy tackled
> > > on your silly writings and sending in your own nonsense.
> > >
> > > Regards,
> > > Ton Maas
> > > ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > Dismiss the ".nospam" bit (including the dot) when replying.
> > > Homepage http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
> > > Van: "Jossart Alain" <Alain.Jossart@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > Aan: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > Verzonden: vrijdag 27 oktober 2000 13:50
> > > Onderwerp: Re: Simple question on Bollinger Bands
> > >
> > >
> > > > Probability distribution tables :
> > > > - +/- 1 std = .3413 x 2 = .6826 = 68.3 %
> > > > - +/- 1.8 std = .4641 x 2 = .9282 = 92.3 %
> > > > - +/- 2 std = .4772 x 2 = .9544 = 95.4 %
> > > > - +/- 3 std = .4987 x 2 = .9974 = 99.7 %
> > > >
> > > > and...
> > > >
> > > > - 1.64 std = .4495 x 2 = .8990 = 89.9 % of the data
> > > > or
> > > > - 1.65 std = .4505 x 2 = .9010 = 90.1 % of the data
> > > >
> > > > So the answer to Alberto Torchio's question is : Bollinger (95%) is
+/-
> > 2
> > > > std, while 90 % is +/- 1.64... std
> > > >
> > > > What did you say ? en dus en dan, aah ja, zeker en vast...
> > > >
> > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > From: "A.J. Maas"
> > > > To: "Metastock-List" <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > Sent: Friday, October 27, 2000 4:11 AM
> > > > Subject: Re: Simple question on Bollinger Bands
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > > The mean=middle=0
> > > > > and
> > > > > 100%=da width difference between "+1 stdev"{+100%} and "-1
> > stdev"{-100%}
> > > > > thus
> > > > > 100%{2*1}=2*stdev(da,pds) {width is then mean + 1*stdev up
+1*stdev
> > > > down}
> > > > > and
> > > > > 50%{2*0.5}=1*stdev(da,pds)
> > > > > then
> > > > > 90%{2*0.9}=1.8*stdev(da,pds)
> > > > >
> > > > > Regards,
> > > > > Ton Maas
> > > > > ms-irb@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > > > > Dismiss the ".nospam" bit (including the dot) when replying.
> > > > > Homepage http://home.planet.nl/~anthmaas
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > ----- Oorspronkelijk bericht -----
> > > > > Van: "Lionel Issen"
> > > > > Aan: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > Verzonden: dinsdag 24 oktober 2000 4:23
> > > > > Onderwerp: Re: Simple question on Bollinger Bands
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > I cant find my statistics book, but I think its close to 2 std
dev.
> > > > > > Lionel Issen
> > > > > > lissen@xxxxxxxxx
> > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > From: "Alberto Torchio" <atorchio@xxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > To: "Realtraders" <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > > > > Sent: Monday, October 23, 2000 2:27 AM
> > > > > > Subject: Simple question on Bollinger Bands
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > > Dear Listmembers,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I have been asked a simple question on Bollinger Bands and was
> > unable
> > > > to
> > > > > > > answer...
> > > > > > > Could anyone tell me the number of standard deviations
allowing to
> > > > contain
> > > > > > > within the bands 90% of price data?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Alberto Torchio
> > > > > > > Torino, Italy
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
|