|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Fellow Traders:
Just to show I'm not down on everyone in this business, just most..
Futures' feature article for their September '99 issue (as introduced on
the front cover) which I saw yesterday was about data accuracy among 10 of
the most visible end-of-day data services.
I wanted to call your attention to the fact that even though CSI has not
advertised with them for many months including the current September issue,
they bravely named CSI as the best data vendor with the fewest errors over
the period of study. They published their article, written by Sheldon
Knight, knowing that at least nine firms would not look good including Omega
Research's historybank.com who had an error rate that was 392% higher than
CSI's error rate. Omega logged 106 errors over the
three year study period of two commodities vs. CSI's 27 "errors" over the
same period on the very same markets.
I thought you would like to know this because if you remember I asked
John Sweeney why an advertisement suddenly appears from a given "system
promoter" on his initial trading-method exposure in S&C magazine. Futures
apparently was doing a service to the public instead of to its advertisers
and they told the story in an unbiased manner.
Dial Data, by the way, didn't do too well, Their error rate was 1,188%
higher than CSI's and, in fact for the S&P500 they committed an error every
third day over the three year period studied. The closest challenger to CSI
was MJK who had an error rate of only 244.4% higher than CSI.
Take a look at the article. It included a simple chart showing the
consequences of using a flawed service by comparing the trading results of a
simple breakout system using the data supplied by CSI, Omega, and MJK,
respectively. There was a significant difference between the hindsight
performance of the three data sources.
Mark Brown
PS I am still having trouble with the promised automated downloader, other
than that I appreciate CSI for their attention to detail..
|