|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
<HTML>
<HEAD>
<META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1 http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content='"MSHTML 4.72.2106.6"' name=GENERATOR>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Good Morning RTer's:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>This whole concept of validity in technical
analysis surprises me. Up until five years ago I managed stock and bond
portfolios for pension plans on a fundamental basis. <U>It
worked.</FONT></U></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Now I trade the forex markets on a technical
basis. <U>It works</U>. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#000000 size=2>Point: Both of these approaches have been
around for years, both have been written about in millions of books by the
academia community. Most CTA's use technical analysis in managed accounts. Most
RIA's use fundamental analysis.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I believe this is more of a personal preference rather than
question of methodology. Besides, how do you trade intraday on a
fundamental basis? </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Any takers?</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Richard J.Chehovin</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>PS Talked with R&W yesterday. They are appealing the
$6.7 million dollar decision. Sales are hurting and the doors are open, but they
have put new verbage in their website, giving better disclosure information.
However it is still probably lacking from a CFTC point of view. They are arguing
the first amendment as part of their defense for not being registered as a
CTA.</FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Fri May 15 09:44:03 1998
X-POP3-Rcpt: neal@xxxxxxxxx
Return-Path: <owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from accessone.com (list.listserver.com [198.68.191.15])
by purebytes.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP
id IAA01188 for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fri, 15 May 1998 08:43:24 -0700
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with SMTP id JAA10160;
Fri, 15 May 1998 09:32:09 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from kfv-law.com ([207.158.95.3])
by accessone.com (8.8.5/8.8.5/PIH) with SMTP id JAA09965
for <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Fri, 15 May 1998 09:28:11 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from KFV-Message_Server by kfv-law.com
with Novell_GroupWise; Fri, 15 May 1998 11:28:37 -0500
Message-Id: <s55c26e5.078@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 15 May 1998 11:28:20 -0500
Reply-To: Steve@xxxxxxxxxxx
Sender: owner-realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx
From: "Steven C. Walker" <Steve@xxxxxxxxxxx>
To: RealTraders Discussion Group <realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Technical Analysis
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Disposition: inline
X-To: realtraders@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx, GalacticFXInternational@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
X-Mailer: Novell GroupWise 4.1
X-Listprocessor-Version: 8.1 -- ListProcessor(tm) by CREN
I use Worden Brothers for my end of day data. Usually, there is some commentary that comes along with it. I thot today's comments were interesting and I pass a portion along to you.
"It is important to know what technical analysis can and cannot do. A good start is to accept the fact that something like eight of ten stock charts have nothing to say. Many technicians go wrong by thinking they can find the basis for an intelligent technical opinion in any chart if they are astute enough to ferret it out. Not true. A typical chart is like a Sphinx - silent and mysterious. It can only show you the results of the struggle between the bulls and bears. In some cases it offers clues as to who are the smartest . In most cases it cannot. The trick is to devote your energy to those charts that are actually betraying something about the opinions of, for want of a better phrase, somebody in the know."
There is more but this captures what for me is a surprising message. Comments?
|