|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
With TA software packages, as with virtually all software packages, it is
unusual to find a single product which excels in all areas. IMO it is really
a case of "horses for courses". I use Metastock, AIQ and several other
products.
Metastock is excellent for charting, the best in the business IMO. Therefore
if your personal trading style relies on eyeballing charts and patterns etc.
then MS is probably a good choice. AIQ charting facilities are much less
sophisticated than MS but facilities for analysing and exploring market data
are good. If your trading revolves round sector rotation, spotting relative
strengths/weaknesses of industry groups etc. then AIQ has much to offer. For
realtime daytraders Tradestation seems very popular so it is reasonable to
assume it does the job (I don't use TS).
My favourite TA product is Metastock (I'm just a sucker for charts!). I
would however make the following commnets (all IMHO).
1. Formula Language
(Yes I'm in the "it ain't brilliant camp"). The MS Formula Language is
essentially a set of powerful functions specifically designed for
manipulating time series data. What it lacks is any real programming
constructions and this prevents you developing even relatively simple custom
indicators requiring basic iteration or conditional logic. It is surprising
however to see what some users manage to achieve with the MS formula
lanaguage but the trying to read and understand long formulas is not easy -
I think of the language like a scientific calculator with lots of brackets.
While it is true that by using the Developers Add-On you could probably
write almost anything IMO this is not what most MS users would want. In my
experience users today expect all functionality to be in a single integrated
product e.g. charts, data download & management, system development, system
test, portfolio management.... Once you get into relying on add-ons there
will be user resistance due to concerns about learning another different
product, future compatability issues (keeping products/versions aligned)
etc.
IMO Equis could greatly improve the usefulness of the MS formula language as
it stands by simply removing some of the needless restrictions which are
currently built in:-
Remove max 20 variables limit
Remove max formula size/complexity limit
Allow formulas to take variables as parameters (not just fixed values)
Allow parameters in calls to custom formulas (instead of forcing defaults)
2. System Tester
The MS System Tester can only test a single issue at a time. To develop
robust trading strategies you need the facility to test out on multiple
selected issues at a time. This is a big omission - one of the main reasons
I use other products in addition to MS.
3. Portfolio Manager
There isn't one!
4. General
IMO Equis seems to have taken its eye off the ball in recent times.
Competitor products such as AIQ have made rapid advances into the market and
their products are improving significantly with each release. In contrast
development of the Metastock product seems to have stalled. Personally I
thought the last upgrade from 6.52 to 7.03 offered very little of
substance - in particular no enhancements to Formula Language or System
Tester - surely the areas most requested by users. I hope Equis will
address these issues urgently for the next MS release.
John
.
----- Original Message -----
From: Allan Havemose <havemose@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, February 01, 2001 5:10 PM
Subject: RE: new user questions
> I agree with Michael. There are only a handful of features that I feel
> metastock needs that really are outside of what can be implemented
> using MSX:
>
> 1. Entry and Exit on stops, where the entry/exit price accurately
> reflect the stop order
> 2. Same for limit orders
> 3. A BarsInTrade() function. This can be done in MSX, but I feel it
> should be a basic system function
> 5. A OpenTradeProfit() function.
> 6. Ability to share calculations and variables across "Long Entry",
> "Long Exit", "Short Entry" and "Short Exit"
> 7. Ability to run systems with multiple dataseries where the
> base-periodicity of the dataseries/securities are different.
>
> For simple tests and experimentation, I find the formula language
> sufficient.
>
> Allan
>
> --- michael <mslist@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> >
> > "The only way to use complex indicators in MS is to have them built
> > into the
> > program. MS would be a very powerful program if it had a more
> > functional
> > "formula language". Something like visual basic or a subset of C++
> > or
> > visual C would do it."
> >
> >
> > MS has a the ability to build anything through the DLL function and
> > MSX
> > add-on. Why do you need a subset of C++ when you can use full C++,
> > Delphi,
> > or any other DLL capable lanquage to build anything you want? You
> > could
> > even build a separate program that uses MetaStock Data and builds the
> > Price
> > by Volume that's being talked about in a separate window.
> >
> > I think the people who are complaining about the MS formula language
> > want
> > something that does not exist anywhere. They want the easy to use,
> > simple
> > function commands to do incredibly complex stuff. If you want
> > complex stuff
> > it takes a complex programming language. If you want ease of use,
> > then you
> > want a simple set of function commands. MS has both. So I don't
> > know what
> > people are complaining about.
> >
> > Michael
> >
>
>
> =====
> ---
> Allan Havemose, Ph.D.
> havemose@xxxxxxxxxx
> havemose@xxxxxxxxx
>
> __________________________________________________
> Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35
> a year! http://personal.mail.yahoo.com/
|