Trend Following--Another Nail In The Coffin

Discussion in 'Trading' started by marketsurfer, Jan 26, 2007.

  1. Trading Markets just published this interesting bit of research regarding buying/selling stocks after consecutive up/down days.

    trend following, stocks, what else can be said??

  2. The trend in stocks is UP, no trend follower in his right mind would short the stock market.

  3. This article reminds me of overbought / oversold oscillator type systems that attempt to buy when the indicator reports oversold condition and sell when indicator reports overbought condition.

    I do not read any mention of stopping losses in the article. If losses are not stopped then I expect a occasional big loss.

    Volatility (draw downs) might be great due to the occasional big loss.

    I do not read any mention of risk level used.

    The article does not describe a method, rather some statistical observations.
  4. Sorry but that article has nothing to do with following a trend.

    Tracking stocks that have risen or pulled back for "x" period of time has as much to do with following a trend as the type of seats in the stands have to do with winning a NASCAR race.

    In order to follow a trend one must define it first. You can't follow anything you can't define.
  5. LOL. You may be a wanker but at least you're a persistent wanker.
  6. In any trend (up or down) there will be days of retracement no matter how shallow or steep.

    Ths article was about as "trend refuting" as me saying the Titanic Didnt sink.

  7. if i recall, you defined a trend as 3 units in one direction.

    is this still the case or have you refined your definition>

    regards surf

  8. all excellent points. it seems to me to refute the basic notion of trend following which is buying new highs or selling new lows.

    regards, surf
  9. Ok, I'm a wanker . . . but I'm right.

    The only people that say trends don't exist are those that can't define them. They are also the ones that wont sit still for anyone to show them how to define them for fear of being taught something they thought was mindless. The potential of shaking the foundation of their belief system scares them to death. So they lash out at it with misdirection and rhetoric but never facts. They can never offer up facts because they won't allow themselves to see "outside their box".

    Like proving to a dentist that fluoride is bad for ones health.

    Full circle . . . that article had absolutely nothing to do with following a trend or debunking trends. Trend following is not buying new highs or selling new lows as some believe. It isn't even in the same country.
  10. I have never ever ever said that the definition of a trend was, 3 units in one direction.

    I said that Trends are first defined as Price Oscillations validated by Momentum Oscillations existing on only a single chart at a time. Price/Momentum Oscillations making 3 sequential higher highs, higher lows and higher highs at DEFINED EXTREME LEVELS designate a Bull Trend & Price/Momentum Oscillations making 3 sequential lower highs, lower lows and lower highs at DEFINED EXTREME LEVELS designate a Bear Trend. The key is the DEFINED EXTREME LEVELS and it is discussed in detail here:
    #10     Jan 26, 2007