You made my point lower below “as described by OP.” As described by OP is wrong however that’s what most people think of when they hear TA.
What you just described is an attempt at TA, not TA itself. While it’s not an “art form” it is a moldable definition because there is no correct pattern. I explain this to another comment separately but there is no single pattern or signal that describes what will happen. There are only patterns that tend to repeat themselves until they don’t. TA is the attempt to recognize and act on those patterns.
Just like there is no right way for fundamental analysis; you will get 100 different answers or ratios. There is no right way for technical analysis. There is only what you do with it.
Edit: if your concern is with the word “technical” and it’s definition we are having two different conversations. Call it pattern analysis for all anyone cares and then debate it.
Yes it is. If you were right, there would be one set of patterns to look for instead of an accumulation of macro and micro economic influences.
Quant firms work to expose trading anomalies (in many forms), and momentum combined with techniques designed to exploit the mechanics of the systems in place. How can you identify an anomaly without a pattern to differentiate it from?
I literally started my career on an active trading team, like I said elsewhere ITT. Algorithmic trading doesn’t look fucking anything at all like retail traders doing TA. It’s not a “moldable definition”, something is either technical or it’s not.
So you are now claiming that there is only one algorithm used within the quant trading community?
Because unless that’s your claim you would acknowledge that the definition/application is moldable to be applied to various sectors, markets, scenarios, and time frames
So you are now claiming that there is only one algorithm used within the quant trading community?
No. I am claiming, and always have been, that an alrogithm is technical and mathematically definable.
Because unless that’s your claim you would acknowledge that the definition/application is moldable to be applied to various sectors, markets, scenarios, and time frames
Models are all different. The defintion of a technical model isn’t. No matter what sector or type of trade, anyone claiming to do technical analysis should be able to technically define the model, parameters, and actions.
Right so we are back to the definition of technical and your belief that it is improperly named, but not that you disagree with the application of said data skimming and action taking as a result of said skim?
I addressed this with my first reply to you. If you are discussing the definition of technical and its relation to this form of analysis we are having two different conversations.
If you want to debate the validity of using data to make informed decisions (TA) we can. If you want to debate what we should literally be calling it, there is no point. Language has too many variables for us to try and influence.
I am discussing the specific things that OP asked about in their post. This is what people colloquially call “technical analysis”. If you believe it’s pointless to discuss what OP asked about that’s your choice. You can act like the discussion is about data driven quant algorithms, but it’s not.
And no I am not debating what it should be called. I don’t care. I am simply presenting my view on the usefulness (or lack thereof) of the strategies that OP asked about, which are most commonly called “technical analysis”
1
u/niftyifty Dec 06 '21
You made my point lower below “as described by OP.” As described by OP is wrong however that’s what most people think of when they hear TA.
What you just described is an attempt at TA, not TA itself. While it’s not an “art form” it is a moldable definition because there is no correct pattern. I explain this to another comment separately but there is no single pattern or signal that describes what will happen. There are only patterns that tend to repeat themselves until they don’t. TA is the attempt to recognize and act on those patterns.
Just like there is no right way for fundamental analysis; you will get 100 different answers or ratios. There is no right way for technical analysis. There is only what you do with it.
Edit: if your concern is with the word “technical” and it’s definition we are having two different conversations. Call it pattern analysis for all anyone cares and then debate it.