In fact, in my experience of using Candlestick charts for the past 5 years, the accuracy rate has been 100%. The few mistakes I have made using these charts were due to my erroneous interpretation of the signals. Most Traders do not know how to interpret Candlestick signals and hence, when they screw up, they blame the Charts instead of themselves.
Hi Socrates, glad you contributed to this. I have no problems with the research methodology, or indeed its findings. They formed a hypothesis, and tested it. Obviously they could have saved themselves a lot of time trouble and expense, as the outcome was obvious !
However, If I remember correctly, the study didnt include the use of volume, Id be genuinely interested to hear your thoughts on that, for example do you feel that certain patterns may have proved to be statistically significant if perhaps volume had been included in the analysis ?
If I where a vendor, peddling a product that was candlestick based, I think Id try to defend my product, by pulling the "lack of volume" argument, and Im genuinely surprised that to date no one has. I'd be interested to hear your take on this.
regards
zu
Hi Zu, others
I have previously discussed volume at some length in this post.
http://www.trade2win.com/boards/showthread.php?p=288638#post288638
The just of it being, it is less functionally indictive of direction and more of an amplfier of the action/direction the pricing denotes of itself.
Simply stated the greater volume on a strong down move, the more significant/broad the market opinion is of the rerating.
I do not feel the revelance of Volume in a candles context is any more relevant than in any other charting format hence the post linked in is not candles specific.
Best Wishes
Has anyone a clue why untill now, almost no serious academic research about the profitability of Japanese candlesticks has been done?
The reason why I ask this, is because I use this paper from Marshall for my master thesis. And, although it is about 16 years ago Nison has published his book, charting programs offer candlestick charts etc. I can't find an answer on this question. So I hope one of you has a clue!
Has anyone a clue why untill now, almost no serious academic research about the profitability of Japanese candlesticks has been done?
The reason why I ask this, is because I use this paper from Marshall for my master thesis. And, although it is about 16 years ago Nison has published his book, charting programs offer candlestick charts etc. I can't find an answer on this question. So I hope one of you has a clue!
Has anyone a clue why untill now, almost no serious academic research about the profitability of Japanese candlesticks has been done?
The reason why I ask this, is because I use this paper from Marshall for my master thesis. And, although it is about 16 years ago Nison has published his book, charting programs offer candlestick charts etc. I can't find an answer on this question. So I hope one of you has a clue!
youp
Research about "the profitability of candlesticks" is rather like researching the artistic merit of a paint palette. It's the craftsman who delivers the goods, not his tools and that's what most academic research into trading fails to recognise.
good trading
jon
Jack Schwager did a similar test and concluded that candlesticks taken on their own are not profitable.
The point that seems to be missed is that candlesticks become profitable when combined with other supporting factors.
E.g A hammer at a swing low INDICATES a possible reversal. Rather than blindly take it long we would look for confluence.
Does the nose of the hammer hit any key fib levels? Does it hit any support levels? Does it hit a calculated pivot point?
This is how your probability of success when trading them rises.
If tests were done with this in mind (virtually impossible however since TA is largely subjective) then the results would be vastly different and would show profitability.
Everbody thanks for your input.
Almost everyone says the same but with different words.
It is the context which is important to include in the research. This is of course very true, but also very difficult. By putting the candlesticks to test you must make the context objective and when you see the chart in reality some objective points combined with subjectivity decides if one places a trade or not.
But for my research its more obvious. Under the circumstances included in the research are the candlesticks profitable or not:!: This is very important, when you include different circumstances, a different outcome is possible. And then is the question: What's more important, the candlesticks of the circumstances?
![]()
When finished I will post the context of the research and the conclusions in this thread.
Everbody thanks for your input.
Almost everyone says the same but with different words.
It is the context which is important to include in the research. This is of course very true, but also very difficult. By putting the candlesticks to test you must make the context objective and when you see the chart in reality some objective points combined with subjectivity decides if one places a trade or not.
But for my research its more obvious. Under the circumstances included in the research are the candlesticks profitable or not:!: This is very important, when you include different circumstances, a different outcome is possible. And then is the question: What's more important, the candlesticks of the circumstances?
![]()
When finished I will post the context of the research and the conclusions in this thread.
Sorry, I just like to graduate.
I have chosen a topic that I like...do some research and get my degree.
I will also incorporate a research upon the importance of the open and close prices as the literature says this are extremely important moments. Just see if this is true under the tested circumstances.