There is a common theme here about the consistent short comings of each and every responder (except Holmes who is on even a lesser level of misunderstanding) Holmes was not subtle or sly or his post would have been a corker. Why everyone misses the boat completely is their problem and not something to focus on, just let their comments pass as unessential and incorrect. There is no point in getting sidetracked by other's screw ups, no matter how long they spent screwing up. After that, if you wish, lets nail it down cold using where you are as the starting point.
Sherlock, You sound like you might have something of value, cause ...., you're not offering it for sale. nono
Thanks for all the replies so far. I will post some intraday (5 min bars) cycle analysis and swing(30 min or 60 min or daily) cycle analysis when I get a chance. So far it seems most of you have not found cycles useful. I do not come from an engineering background so most likely I fail to see the complexities behind cycles. I simply saw someone using them with success, and became interested in what could be achieved using them. I don't expect a holy grail, and certainly one model is not enough to look at the different cyclic possibilities, but typically several models should all come close to each other(increased confidence level) and when using this information along side price action analysis, I feel that it could definitely help to forecast market behavior. If anyone wants to share specifics of their research, I'm all ears. What were the difficulties that you ran into? Just simply too inconsistent? You could model one week perfect and then the next week would be a bust? A big part of the cycles I am playing with in Esignal is when to update them. Also, I hope to also hear from those (apparently few) who have had success. Grob, we discussed this(well, some anyway) already so I understand your view. Holmes, care to expand on your success story, if not thats ok.
You chose a maths for this that has three coefficients per contributing element to handle a one variable single market component. From this starting point you can see how every prior contributor in this thread was left in the dust of time. Why would it be prudent to properly use this approach anyway with these severe math conditions. Obviously, it is because of the power of the concept. The big three Q's can be handled. where are we now? What is next? and How fast are things changing? Big incentives it looks like. You post a chart that shows that you are like a kid who received a chemistry set as a birthday present in the first of second form I am not dealing here in condencention, arrogance, insults or whatever. I am just plainly communicating how it is as would any person who has a job to do with some people who chose of their own accord to say stuff. Most of us have been in great learning situations and we know how learning works. Teammates, classmates, coalitions and others have little tolerance for underperformance when there is potential for achievement. If a person ignores a lot of math considerations, then nothing comes of what they do. So you are using an approach that has adjustments of Amplitude, Frequency and Phase Angles. These are plugged in automatically and have proper values. We have that straight. There are detectors for each of these, of course. And they are simply adjusted the the proper operation in terms of fineness and how often thay are sensed for adjustment application FOR EACH OF THE CONTRIBUTING ELEMENTS OF THE SYNTHESIS. That brings us to the basic way the synthesis is done just after we define the proper description and defnition of what makes up an element in the composition. So we have both FM and AM on the table as well as phase modulation. All of these work with carriers. Look at an oboe and a flute. What predominates frequencywise in each? It sure isn't the fundamental for the oboe and it obviously is for the flute. What market are you playing in? My bet is a LEVERAGED derivative market that depends upon a massive primary market whose alglomeration of signals is extremely complex. Starting conclusion: I have introduced about 100 things you have failed to give consideration to. The posts prior to mine are not even a warm up drill. they are just footnotes by others who never got a handle on anything. Naturally, we all know the answer to the opportunity. For pulling down a multiple of the H-L using cycles stuff, you run two parallel analyzers and off set the fundamentals in each by 1/2 cycle and interlace the signals just like a TV transmitter used to do before digital. You can google the prints of the charts i previously posted on this. What do you learn in one post? Go to digital. Footnote: The things you failed to do where to use a carrier (your graphs ride horizontally in the market besd upon and intial setting). Get the values of the coefficients of the amplitudes, frequencies and phase angles for each element to be synthesized and chose good additional elements to synthesize. Most people who examine this do the sythesis based upon periodic functions trather than economic multi cycle theory. This is a hoot when you sit in high level meetings with people who are busting thier nuts to even thry to beat the indexes. This thread is not going to yield very much in coming up with the proper algorithm for making money. There are some really great uses of time for nailing the periodicity of the market, however.
The fundamental frequency for interlacing is slow and the data extraction frequency is not too swift either. The projection of the analysis is very "hard" up to 15 minutes ahead of the market. Roughly speaking the people I have used it with regard it as "a pisser". This is beyond "unbelievable". Color graphics are required. My bet is that no one who has posted ever once projected the analysis results into the future. All of which is the utility of this effort in the first place.
tokyo --- i have definitely found an oscillation cycle with the er2 that i trade profitably. the es has one from what i can see, but it has less consistency to exploit as a specific trade strategy. so i trade the es with different systems and styles then i do the er2.
There is a Morton's steak dinner, of your choice, to the person that can prove to me a cyclic system that has more than an 80% accuracy in any Market, even exists.
TASC can't allow backtesting because then 90+% of their content goes out the window. TASC reminds me of the muscle mags Herr Guvenator Schwartzenazi shills for: the same articles get recycled every 12-18 months in a new format, year after year. It's amazing how many "new" indicators keep cropping up, most of them looking like Rube-Goldberg rejects.