Does War Make TA Irrelevant????

Discussion in 'Technical Analysis' started by Corso482, Mar 27, 2003.

  1. I think most will agree that the market is completely taking its cues from the news. In such a context, how can historical information be of any use? Ok, maybe I'm being extreme...TA hasn't gone completely out the window, but still, it's definitely taking a back seat to war news. Any thoughts?
  2. News only changes one thing, the speed with which you move from one area of supply/demand to another. TA is working more predictably now than any time in the past.
  3. but the market activity might have shifted more towards the midday which could be news driven. At least that's what I am observing. More trending periods during the midday, say 11:30-14:30 EST.
  4. 0008


    Those econ data seem to have much less impact on the market. The war takes over.
  5. When you look at historical charts, excluding the Sept 11 event, can you remember what it was that caused the spikes and dips? Or can you look at a specific low and say, oh yeah, I remeber this was when blah blah occured? And several years from now you won't look back at these prices with anymore recognition than you do those in the past.

    It will still be a game of connect the dots.
  6. I use more than 80 indicators for N100 in regular daily basis. Nothing "peculiar" the last 10 bars.
    I could say "What war !", from the T/A point of view.
    March20 anticipating and March21 confirmation verified the great March21 "SELL AT CLOSE".
    No surprise at all.
  7. Pabst


    Since markets are no more random than any other expression of behavior, participants are Always compelled to act based upon an external force that shapes their perception of what future valuations will be.
  8. I notice that the change of administration had an effect. Now a days there is a slight war factor maybe.

    I measure bottom line effects related to the market by looking at the compound interest formula and its variables. The cycle for trading has shortened significantly for equities. I have shifted from the 6 to 8 day expectation to as short as 4 days. At the end of Clinton's admin it was at short end of the 6 to 8 days. Profit per cycle is different as well. It is easier to take profits; I am getting more of the potential and the potential per cycle is less

    The most demonstrable change I think is the amount of money sidelined. It is a tough call on who is out but I think new money (people who are new to investing) is sidelined to some extent and the mainstream (brokerage and mutual funds) are still harping on fee based themes but they are loosing clients to annuities, insurance, etc. Smart money is really cleaning up apparently.

    Thus the shrinkage of market size is why the markets are in their specific trends. For example, you can track the estimated DJ value, were capital to return to former levels; 12,500 is not an uncommon value. The market activity within the trends is very rewarding because of the shorter time cycle of taking profits. When you couple this with the current margin requirements for equties, you have a nice situation.

    I think the cycle compression is a war phenomena now as much as it is the administration. The single thouht that come to mind is how rapidly the news changes and how news, today, is done to get market sector. It is very very helful for making money but it stinks for how the public is treated by the media.

    If you want to ajust your indicators just a little; reduce the smoothing because the transients are shorter these days.

    A reduction of 25% in cycle time, on an annual basis, has a great impact. I can't articulate it here because it brings out the crazies. Rough it out,though, based on whatever planning rules you use.

  9. those who recalled the start of the war in 1991 and acted upon it, as if it was repeating in 2003---- did quite well.

    remembering cause and effect is critical.


    psyclical surfer