Everything has a purpose in TA including ew theory. So Dow is now below its 200 dma (11977). My short term MACD has already showed a cross since 5 days now. The bulls are trying to hold up the price above the bollanger band average. Wouldnt be surprised is they get it back to par by end of day in order to ward off the bearish technical trades despite the macd being right 95% of the time. Expect some hopium euro headline around 2-3 pm.
I don't understand technical analysis a lot. That's why this thread is so dissapointing. I thought there would be real substance here. So please explain it to me. How does having multiple time horizons do anything for you? What does it mean? Shouldn't you only have 1 conclusion which can only be either buy, sell, or do nothing?
So many reasons...here are just two. If you are buying a house, you care about the long term horizon, but futures, short term horizon. You might also want to optimize taxes -- LT gain vs ST gains, or realizing more losses before the end of the year, etc.
You are certainly right in two different asset classes. But not if you have the same asset class. You can't be simulataniously long and short unless you are deluding yourself. So take last week, the market was up 1%, he was down like 5%. His long term call was bearish and his short term calls were all over the place. His long term view is down 1% but his short term view is down 5%. Which view is consistent? You can have only one actionable view. You are either long, short or flat. It's okay to say "I think the SPX will be a good buy over 30 years, but I will wait till next year." But then you are flat or short now and your long term view is irrelevant until you buy.
Ummm... this thread is disappointing if you do understand technical analysis. And I've been using technical and statistical analysis in order to trade live markets for 20 years. In fact, Bloomberg wants to comp me on a workstation in exchange for consulting work in order to improve their lackluster technical study platform. eSignal is in discussions with me with regards to licensing and distributing my custom spread technical studies as a premium add-on module. So, yeah, I know a little about technical analysis. It isn't magic or predictive, but when used properly you can make a consistent living with it. And sometimes a very good living at it.
Yeah. That's my impression. It's about knowing which tools to use and when. Not really different than fundamental analysis in terms of application. Both are very descretionary in that you can justify many different signals with the same data so it's up to the analyst to understand which signal is appropriate to listen to. Bloomberg guys are pretty shrewd. They are to the financial technology industry what Microsoft is to PC software except they are good at crushing everyone. Hang your hat with them.
There is no right way or wrong way to make money trading markets... if you are consistent trading the markets by reading the peanuts in your shit, then who am I to judge ? I have used a Bloomberg on and off for the past 20 years - the only reason I have done without the past three years is because I didn't have a firm covering that long two year contract. The Bloomberg is expensive for a reason - it is simply the cat's ass. I love that Beta Scatter Plot Correlation functionality, and I currently have a workaround with a commercial stats package ( which I admit is not as robust ).
Let me check Grand Poo Pah's 610 minute chart and then after comparing it to the 377 hour chart I'll get back to you.
Bone's post is the sign of a winner... open minded, humble in saying: "there is no right or wrong way to make money trading markets... if you are consistent reading the peanuts........" instead of saying that he knows it all and how it must be done. Too many are dogmatic about only being able to outperform by backtesting and use of automated systems, or how trading off T/A "does not work" (how many times have I heard that?!!) or you can't trade options successfully etc. etc. It is that dogma and need to only see it our way, that gets many of us in trouble. I used to be that way in the 90s; cost a lot to learn that lesson Mark Douglas makes a good point: "If you really believe in uncertain outcome, then you also have to expect that virtually anything can happen. Otherwise, the moment you let your mind hold onto the notion that you know, you stop taking all of the unknown variables into consideration... if you believe you know something, the moment is no longer unique."