I suppose I don't understand this line of thinking. If you merely respond to the market you ARE in effect predicting the response your responding to will continue. If you go long, you're effectively predicting that the price will rise. It may be semantics, but I think true-none-the-less. Am I wrong? maybe forcasting and/or targeting is probable a more apt wording, ...
Those are crackmonkey statistics. A standard approach is to use 1-3 sigmas of the daily IV/SV/MV to yield a probability distribution. -segv
This is really not a predictictable thing because if you do not mention a time,you will never know WHEN any of your numbers might apply. You will know afterwards. Like everyone else. Prediction is when you include a time when something will happen . Like tomorrow reversal in nasdaq100 at 9:50 est and 10:05 est in S&P500. That is a prediction.
Hasn't it been proven that whether one uses Implied volatility versus Actual volatility, future pricing will not really differ dramatically in either case? This would imply that you have a 50/50 chance of knowing whether the volatility is going to be higher or lower tomorrow... Anyone with a better knowledge of option pricing care to comment? I may be spewing incorrect garbage here...
==================== PaTT; You are right on the word ''forecasting'' or probabilities; if one could REALLY predict, you wouldnt need to use a stop Same reason I usually use the word derivatives rather than futures; as Chick Goslin said futures arent abouit the future , past & present is whats left. Helpful discussion. murray TT
How about something like this: http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=1093997#post1093997 Q OddTrader Registered: Mar 2003 Posts: 2896 06-07-06 02:40 AM Quote from Ivanovich: It's a slow day, ... Probably a narrow range section between 1.2850 and 1.2820. UQ