Well last time I checked there were not too many radioactive nuclei trading on the NYSE so we don't really need to worry about that. People who don't understand or who have failed at trading based on technical always always say it is impossible and the market is random. They need to replace "the market is unpredictable" with "I can't predict the market."
Of course its not. but even if it was making money would still be extremely easy. Much easier than a casino.
You are almost there whenwood. The markets are tradeable or they are not. It is entirely up to each individual. regards f9
I agree, if you substitute the word "unpredictable" for "random". The digits of π exhibit statistical randomness. But they are obviously not randomly generated. The next uncalculated digit of π is unpredictable, but it's not random. The problem is that economics, despite all the numbers, is the softest of the soft sciences, and the academics were looking for a quick fix to make themselves look like physicists. So they clung to the pseudo Brownian-motion theory because it looks impressive. Wrong but impressive looking. Lest we forget, economics is the only social science that set up a fake Nobel prize, clearly out of medal envy of chemistry, physics and medicine, which all have real Nobel prizes.
This site is hosted by guys that made $100 million in their own lifetime yet academics will come on here with their "proof" that it is impossible I kind of hate academics anyhow, I don't agree with them on anything really, trading is another example of how smug and wrong they like to be... they don't have to be right about anything as long as they are the "experts" and control the debate and get their living from public funding same as any welfare recipient......
While I appreciate an empirical analysis, the Creator of the universe precludes the absurdity of randomness.
Actually the typical random walker rant is more like this: I don't think the 50/50 crowd deserves any mercy with adjustments for T-bills and the like. They set the rules ("it's 50/50, idiots!") so they should have to live with the consequences when they are PROVEN WRONG.
Now I don't think markets are random, but your post doesn't really prove anything. The Wald-Wolfowitz runs test is for a TWO VALUED data sequence. Sorry, but the market cannot simply be broken down into 'up' and 'down'. Those 'ups' and 'downs' have magnitudes, volumes, advance/decline ratios ... In my opinion, your test doesn't take advantage of Occam's Razor to reduce noise ... it just ends up completely slicing any relevance away... Then again, the '50/50' coin flip is an equally pointless point ... so your counter is perfectly applicable ... if they can't see the fault in their own tests, they probably won't see the fault in yours
Dear fellow medieval inquisitor, this thread is for YOU. The next time some âround earthâ idiot tries to rain on your efforts to find an edge of the earth while talking down to you like you're a small child, just direct his arrogant ass to this thread. Maybe it's not too late for *him* to learn something. I never thought it would be this evident, given all the preaching about "proof" that the Earth is Round! Guess what? It's all BULLSHIT! I just ran a little robust measurement tool called âriver testâ that was specifically designed to test the âflatness of the Earthâ. First I collected 10 years of data on all the rivers in our area. The results are: 2,514 rivers 2,513 turns in each river 1,315 left turns 1,197 right turns 1 zero (ignored) Applying the âriver testâ to this data I concluded that none of the rivers fell from the face of the Earth simply because the Earth is FLAT! The chances of that âriver testâ being wrong is ONE OUT OF 1,073 ! I got your âround Earth theoryâ right here! P.S. 10 years of S&P 500 data is just one path of a random walk. You cannot run z-score test on one run. The result is meaningless! Before you state something like that you should really look into educating yourself a bit in the probabilities theory and have a little more understanding of math. You are a simple common idiot that is trying to protect you system of dogmas and religious beliefs by attacking scientists who really understand a lot more that you ever will! I have come across of many cement heads like your self that think they figure out everything! It is very common among the decision makers (traders) to be certain about things because they simply cannot stand the uncertainty! It is your psychological deficiency that has nothing to do with the understanding of the markets phenomenon! Suffering from ADD and lack of knowledge is a very common syndrome among people like you. I donât know what hole you crawled out of but your blindness amazes me!
You did everything but state the hypothesis clearly. Are you saying it is not random because it goes UP more than it goes down? [1315 ups, 1197 downs] ?? If so, then you have proven nothing, because it is obvious that the markets continuously move up over time. It is pushed up over the decades by forces such as inflation and corporate profitability. But the problem is, that buy and hold outperforms ALMOST all market timers. B&H doesn't have the trading costs. Modern EMH is more like "random with a drift" They know it moves up over time. Your thesis is little better than "regardless of what they say, pennies are still copper colored!!!"