|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
There’s no question Mathlab can be useful to right people. But do you need
it? Even the power of TS is more than many can deal with. If TS fails, it’
s not the platform that fails it’s the trader. Exotic techniques can work
but they are not used by the majoirty because probably most don’t have the
background to develop them. If you can’t build a profitable system in TS
you are very unlikely to build one Mathlab. Very profitable trading systems
can be developed in TS. So the difference in terms of profitability between
your system in Mathlab and my system in TS is probably small. I also like
TS ability to monitor several systems at once with relative ease. I like
the integratedness of TS which I belive Mathlab lacks. Again, TS is not
Mathlab but for the price, TS does a lot of stuff well and still even after
over a decade of being on the market, there is little if any real
competition for it.
Aspen Grpahics -- a fairly high end charting package that I know is used by
top professionals -- do about has much as TS graphing-wise when last I
looked (a couple years ago). These professionals have been using it’s basic
time-based charting capabilities for years and profiting from it. So it’s
really a question of perspective. Both realtively simplistic and
sohpisticated approaches can be profitable in markets. If you have the
skill to really use a product like Mathlab and feel that it gives you a
better more profitable trading system than something that can be developed
and backtested in TS, then you should buy Mathlab. But for most, TS does
just fine for considerably less.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ztrader [mailto:ztrader@xxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Sunday, April 01, 2001 11:47 AM
> To: omega-list
> Subject: Re[4]: Why futures truth doesn't care about stealing your
> system
>
>
> On Sunday, April 01, 2001, 9:52:18 AM, Brian wrote:
>
> B> Reading back a little further in this chain, you’ll see that we all
> B> agreed that TS was not Matlab charting.
>
> True. :-)
>
> B> We aren’t really talking
> B> about charting because if you’ve systematized your trading then
> B> charts aren’t really that nec.
>
> I, and others, find it extremely useful to SEE some of these 'strange'
> relationships that will be used as a basis for systems. If you never
> get to see it, it is less likely you will even have a system.
>
> B> Obviously, TS was not meant to be a mathlab charting package and if
> B> you needed that you shouln’t have even considered. Bad investment
> B> on your part. If you need 3-D charting for your trading, TS is not
> B> the platform for you.
>
> Even some simple ideas, such as volume-weighted graphs where the bar
> widths are varied from bar to bar, are not possible in TS. I suspect
> there are more people interested in this than in 3-D charts - it does
> not take very much to hit the analysis limits of TS. :-) The time-only
> charting of TS is a real pain.
>
> B> Also, could you explain how you’d get server data into Mathlab.
>
> Once you have the system in Matlab, you can use it to produce C code,
> so you don't have to interface data to Matlab.
>
> But, at that point, you say you don't need charting or EL, so why use
> TS? There might be other options.
>
> Most traders use simple techniques, and TS is OK for these. It is NOT
> good for sophisticated traders who might want to use 'exotic'
> techniques. Omega does not pay much attention to the needs of
> technically-advanced traders.
>
> New traders, especially, are not likely to want sophisticated stuff.
> Omega has made a good business of appealing to new traders, and
> getting a continuous stream of them after the 90% blow up ("95% of
> traders", as you say). I would agree that TS is fine for "most
> traders".
>
> The real dividing line is for traders who want to use
> technically-advanced techniques. Not gonna happen in TS. They can't
> even do double precision. :-)
>
> ztrader
>
>
>
|