Sure, nothing is right all the time which is why stops were invented I was using Fibs as an example to show that thinking 'nothing that is obvious to you and to many others can make money' isn't exactly true.
I'm amazed every day by how they work, if it was this easy everyone would be millionaires wouldn't they? This is what gets me about (forex) traders, a lot of them think they need some secret strategy or that the more they pay for an indicator or system the better it will perform. Everything I use is free, didn't cost a dime.
I keep it simple and use just the profit factor to screen systems. Some people may object to this but I have determined PF is one of the best filters. Bill
Why? Only posts that mention paramilitary, Muslims and Syrians are worthwhile to you? http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?postid=1915127#post1915127 Bill
That's way too expensive for what appears to be a program based on an inexpensive genetic programming engine. Keep in mind that genetic programming is in principle a fairly simple idea. I believe it can only lead to good results when you start with a set of well-defined trading strategies. These "seeds" are not required to be profitable. What the genetic programming algorithm will do is try to find an "evolution" of those strategies that will produce good performance results. I think such process is inherently very limited. It is also not very far from fitting. Automatic generation of trading systems is in its infancy. IMO data mining techniques like those used by Michael Harris can be more effective. He seems to be down to earth and AFAIK he is the first who developed a commercial product doing it: http://www.tradingpatterns.com/About_Us/articles/synthesis.pdf Alex
Here is a pattern of success. Out of over 5,000 systems on c2, we have the top 5. Out of those 5, the best tracked forex system continues to be RT Forex North. An elite pattern and proof that some or at least one edge based system can actually trade forex profitably over a long time period.
Good for you but selection bais dictates that this is purely random. People win the lottery after each draw very often but each one person has very low probabilities to win. To say that someone won the lottery means nothing: it's just selection bias. Good for them though. Bill