⚰️ A thread like this has no expiration date. Anyway I didn't see anyone in the first pages point out the paper does not say TA works, the UK paper says it will lose money... "The paper concludes that although the technical trading rules examined do have predictive ability in terms of UK data, their use would not allow investors to make excess returns in the presence of costly trading." And they find the same as the Dow one: buy signals on the top 30 companies will win (making money buying based on some random TA in a uptrending market wow good job) and lose on the short side (ye the few shorts generated lose because the entire stock market does not just goes to zero but it does go up thousands of percent over decades). And then factoring costs... the winning goes away. Even with 0 costs I imagine the gamblers stupid enough to use these strategies would lose to inflation. The way to make those basic TA systems is to buy only. So basically you'd be taking plenty of trades long rather than just buy and stay in, and obviously strongly underperform (since you are only catching small bits as well as taking losers) which is basically retarded . I can imagine the hundred of thousands of dumb noobs that wasted countless days trying to add indicators that say the same thing in the hope of somehow magically finding the right combination that will make them money
There are right combinations. The problem is that these combinations vary over time,, Nobody has figured out how to predict the right combination at a given moment/period of time. As usual hindsight is 100 per cent.
Someone interested in using this in current market conditions should at the minimum backtest it and then simulate trade it in current market conditions prior to application in real money trading (small size)... To satisfy their own curiosity if it works or does not work. wrbtrader