You say that, because you will never be able to prove that TA works better. Even *cough* index funds outperform TA (assuming no leverage is used). All academic papers prove that fundamentals outperform the market and TA.
You know who understands how the stockmarkets work by what they say. A lot of ignorant fools think they know squat---they don't. They are too damn lazy to work at learning what they have no clue about. All they want is others to hand it to them. Not going to happen. They will absorb all the lies and disinformation of ET trolls----just like them and believe it too.
I use some form of TA and posted this a few months ago. Seems like it works sometimes. We are a few months later and BTC lost roughly 50% of his value.
How many academics are filthy rich billionaires by the way? They are pretty good writing and selling their useless books to morons who hang on their every word. If their trading systems were any good, wouldn't they just use it and become filthy rich billionaires already? Why the hell would they need to write and sell so many books? They do not have a clue of how the stockmarket works but, any fool can curb fit models to impress the legions of morons who follow them.
True. I do not read the books by academics/billionaires, however The Intelligent Investor is a timeless masterpiece, and following its principles will always be better than TA.
Chief, I don't see why should we convince you? Even if we do, will you suddenly be a profitable trader using TA? No. Then what is the point? Not our problem. I refuse to believe that bumble bees can fly, yet here they are... That is my problem. But since I like a good challenge, here we go: It is really very simple. Patterns. TA users believe that certain patterns REPEAT. So once you recognize a pattern, you have a positive (more than 50%) expectation that you can predict price movement. Let's use an example of pattern, not trading related: Deer tend to move in groups. You believe it or not, no matter, drivers can confirm it. Let's say for arguments sake, if you see a deer crossing your road, there is a 72% of chance for at least one more deer coming soon. So even if one deer passed, you better slow down and watch for another. Same with chart patterns. No pattern works all the time, but we can assign a certain % repeatability probability ratio to each. Obviously a pattern with a 54% probability is not very good, but another one with 72% is pretty dandy. So you are basically just playing the odds with certain recognized patterns that have a high probability of repeating. That is TA for you. What do I get?
You use the old questioning for someone to prove to you when in reality you do not use TA. Therefore, it's best you state specifically what type of "proof" do you want and then you sit back and wait for someone to be willing to waste their time providing you that proof while knowing you don't use TA. For example, do you want backtest results, simulator results, broker statements, bank statements, government tax records, or all the above. Lets say some idiot does provide you with the info...what's their reward ? Also, what verification do you have that someone was actually using TA to achieve those trade performance results because you could easily just say... You were lucky and it will not last or you say its fake. Only a small percentage of people can profitably use TA but they are not using TA alone...as in all by itself. Thus, that would disqualify them (e.g. Martin Schwartz)...correct ? For example, what if you find someone to play this game with you and they select only fundamentally good stocks or vice versa without telling you that was their selection criteria but they then use TA on the stocks... How can you determine that TA doesn't work for them when you do not know they're also using fundamental analysis or something else with their Technical Analysis...pretending they're only using TA and nothing else just to fool you ? Yeah, sure you may then ask for access to their TA rules to see if you can replicate their TA but you'll then fall down the rabbit hole of a different type of debate because what if someone else can replicate profits of the TA and another person can not...is it the fault of the TA or is it an issue with the trader ? Seriously, someone can tell someone to only use "higher lows" to buy, and it's a simple rule for most but there will be a handful of traders that it's a very complex TA rule. Here's my advice to you...don't waste your time worrying about something that you're not using. wrbtrader
Yet, the great traders, Jesse Livermore, Nicolas Darvas, Turtles taught by Richard Dennis all use technical analysis and made hundreds of millions of dollars in the stockmarket. Richard Dennis himself made like $200 million with the Turtle traders who were taught by him. Top hedge funds make billions year after year using technical analysis but, it does not work? That is hilarious.