“Now from my previous brief descriptions regarding the function of the market it is plain to see that valuation does matter within the structure of the market.”
-------------
You say that there are inconsistencies in my trading system, but none are ever shown in your replies. Not sure why?
Who’s valuation? How many primary, large scale players/participants are there in the Forex jockeying for position for various reasons and various purposes? What are their valuations at 0800 GMT, 1100GMT, 1315GMT, etc?
Because other market participants use, rely upon and administer valuation based trading mechanisms, does not require that another trader or market participant do the same, or use the exact same valuation concepts that everyone else uses. That does not mean that there are any inconsistencies in the views of those who do not use the same valuation methods. To force a market participant to use the exact same valuation methodologies that everyone else uses, would eventually lead to a rather inefficient market that no one would want to trade. There would still be structural participants who use the Forex for other purposes, but the trader would soon go away.
Not every participant in the Forex is there to make a profit on ever single transaction. This is part of the structure of the market. Some large scale players (banks and other large financial institutions) are there for the
Compensating Balances effect that the Forex provides as a hedge of sorts against other non-performing or underperforming assets in other portfolios of various kinds.
Because of the underlying differences in currencies (exchange rates), a bank can do a fine job of off-setting the poorer performance of other instruments where they have capital invested, by setting up a compensating balance effect through the buying and/or selling of their natural currency, or that of another country – whether they make a profit or not is not important to them in this regard. They are able to establish a sufficient compensating balance, and that is why they might buy/sell any particular currency at any given time – it would depend on the performance of their other portfolios.
Here’s a better example of
valuation distinction:
In the NFL on Super Bowl Sunday coming up this January, there will be millions of bets being placed on the game through various booking sources. Some will be Long the AFC, some will be Short the AFC (the same for the NFC). On the
playing field there will be “valuations” being made for the 60 minute bet that others will be placing. Quarterbacks will be “evaluating” the respective Defenses on the field. Defensive Coordinators will be making “valuation” decisions about the Offense on the field, but they will be making their valuations from a
different vantage point – in the booth well above the playing field. Each player (all 22 of them) will be making
real time valuations about individual players and individual situations on the field.
Everyone engaged in the process of
making decisions that will
give them an advantage in the game will be making valuations about various aspects and from various locations within the stadium itself.
Yet, the Joe Sixpack in Reno or Las Vegas, sitting down inside the Casino, who’s
not on the playing field and
not inside the stadium and
not part of the game plan on the field, could give a hoot about the
valuations being made inside the stadium by those who provide the structure that everybody else bets on. Joe Sixpack is doing his own “valuation” of the game, but it has absolutely nothing to do with the Double Ace Right – Blue Shift – Z Check With Me on 2, call that the Quarterback just made inside the Red Zone during a 3 and long call on the field that was handed down to him from his Offensive Coordinator who is sitting several hundred feet away from the field and high above the stadium floor.
Multiple “valuations” being made at the exact same time inside the exact same arena, but from very different
vantage points, while Joe Sixpack could care less.
Joe Sixpack is monitoring the situation from a completely different perspective and with a completely
different motive associated with his valuation. Joe Sixpack does not care about the Wells Fargo Compensating Balance entry made for $105 million dollars at 0831 GMT. Or, the BOJ intervention move at 1220 GMT of $700 million. Or, the RCB dump of USD on the market to adjust their foreign holdings down below 49%. Joe Sixpack uses a methodology (if you insist on referring to it that way) that takes all of these market gyrations into consideration and then he applies an additional layer to filter them in his own unique way.
Joe Sixpack has a completely different perspective AND reason for being involved, and therefore his task is not to try and figure out what call the Quarterback will make next, or what defense the Defensive Coordinator will use next, or what skilled position substitution the coach will make next from the sidelines. No – Joe’s job is to use the historical statistics, facts, figures, empirical evidence and current real-time information just before kick-off AND inside a completely different model, to get an understanding of whether or not he will take the AFC, or the NFC.
With trading, I have the ability to set stops and limits and control to some extent the final outcome. Which you don’t get with a bet on the Super Bowl.
So, there is no inconsistency in my model. Rather, a misunderstanding of how I apply it – which is to be expected – there is a massive amount of information that I have not talked about.
“As valuations are not core to the system, you are speculating on price volatility and the short term trend of price to trend in a direction for an indeterminate amount of time.”
-----------------
No. I might suggest a re-reading of what I posted. Several times, I’ve said that I don’t trade trends. On more than one occasion, I’ve indicated that I trade Trajectories and I’ve stated more than once that this trading technology has the ability to calculate the
Magnitude of that Trajectory. The
time for how long a Trajectory lasts, is not relevant to this system. The relevance to this system is the
length of the Trajectory and not its
time in one direction or the other.
The
Timing aspect of this system is directly proportional to the
Magnitude of the Dominant Trajectory and inversely proportional the Subordinate Trajectory. Therefore, when I’m following the system’s recommendations, the length of the Trajectory is already known
before the trade is made within 20 pips on average. It is a very simple Draw-Down factor per entry and it is a variable that is calculated by the system in real-time.
All traders and market participants whether they make their decisions based on traditional methods of “valuation” or not (which I do not) – use speculation to some degree in their trading models. There is no such thing as a trader who does not speculate in the Forex, as I’ve also stated on several occasions.
“This must be true as you claim not to calculate value, therefore you will not arbitrage, you seek movement, therefore by definition you need price to trend in a consistent direction for a period of time.”
-----------------
No. I don’t use
traditional and/or conventional forms of valuation in this system – that is correct. However, every trader has to use some form of value in their trading methodology. I just don’t use the same tools, nor do I place the same emphasis, nor do I use the same “definition” of valuation that the rest of the market uses. There are “values” in numeric form all over this system. In fact, this system is all about Numbers, Mathematics and Logical Statements that generate Plain Text Messages generated in English and Numerical “values” that are part of the Decision Support Infrastructure.
So, I use “numerical numbers” extensively – I just don’t use a standard, formal, and/or conventional market valuation schemes that others use when they speculate where the price is going next. This system utilizes a
different approach to viewing and assessing the market. So, language like traditional valuations, and trends have no meaning here.
“This would just confirm that you are in point of fact taking a directional trade for a predictive pip total. The right location within a trade would indicate inflection points, or pivot points, or support / resistance points from a more orthodox trading terminology. This methodology is well known and understood, the accuracy and reliability of these points is open to much debate however.”
--------------------
For those who use Pivot Points, Resistance & Support Levels and all the other orthodoxy, conventional and traditional TA tools, that statement might true. Since I don’t use any of that, the statement does not apply, here. It only applies if you use it.
Here’s an example of the distinctions – conceptually:
I use Enhanced Synthetic TCD’s which are Transequential Contiguous Delta’s. I use Direction Finder Dimensions and Pointers. I use Enhanced Trajectory Ratio’s in the form: Internal, External Real-Time, and External Tactical. I use Enhanced Distinct Vega. I use a 5 Day Micro Trajectory Cluster. I use TCD Exception Markers. I use TCD Frequency Markers. I use an A4D Contrarian along with an LVF and SVF Functions as inputs. I use Target Probability Look-ups. And, at least 590 other
non conventional and un-traditional technical analysis creations that cannot be found in any TA book on the market. This does not even scratch the tip of the iceberg.
So, the reliability exists within separate domains and is based on different things. If conventional TA was as reliable, I would be using it in my creation. Since it is not – I don’t see the need to degrade my system with underperforming indicators and tools.
“Fundamental news vectors imply a "valuation" is calculated. Macro-economics implies that a value has been calculated. Now we know that this is in point of fact incorrect as I have queried this previously.”
------------------
Who said that, “fundamental new vectors imply a valuation is calculated?” Also, who said that macro-economics implies that a value has been calculated? You are saying that it is in point of fact incorrect, but I don’t see where anyone made that conclusion in this thread? Can you show where these two conclusions were actually made?
“Therefore, ( an assumption ) the history of past "news" of the same "type" or content has been analysed to "probable" outcome, not in a valuation context, but an impact upon short term beta and psychology. This of course is not a valuation, it is irrational, emotional, and momentum based.”
-----------------
No. It is not a conventional “valuation”. And, no – it is not irrational, emotional and momentum based. This is a partial understanding of a much bigger concept that cannot be relayed in a few internet posts. You are missing the bigger picture and thus the full probability equations (algorithms), so you can’t possibly have a full understanding of exactly how probabilities inside of this trading technology work, or how they are calculated. I’ve only given you conceptual information in an attempt to describes “some” aspects of the system. You don’t have total knowledge about this system and therefore cannot make valuations about the systems capabilities are efficacy. You’re just not in that position.
However, I have given some information that describes certain aspects of how the system works, which is all I can do without giving away about 5 years worth of work, and that is not very probable to happen. In reality, the News Module in this system works very well and I’m more than happy with the results. It is only
part of the probability equation and not the entire equation itself. However, it is one of the most sensitive components of the system in terms of how much detailed information that I will release to the public.
“It will result in trends that drive substantial overvaluations and undervaluations. And as such relies not upon a quantitative analysis of the facts, but a qualitative analysis of the human psychology. This contradiction and inconsistency would give me pause for thought.”
-------------------
Well, it should – because it is a gross misunderstanding and over-generalization of what I’ve already posted. I works just fine for me – but I have the benefit of using it every day and the particularly interesting vantage point of having been the designer. So, I probably can see things from a height that others will not – simply because they don’t know enough about the technology.
Again, I can only communicate so much and it would behoove the one truly interested in understanding the tool, to avoid making over-generalizations about it without having the benefit of knowing the Mathematics and Logic behind its structure, as well as
all of the inputs that go into generating the trading output.
“The news vector that does the damage would therefore be the news that would revise the underlying fundamentals ( value) in a way that would impact the current valuation, or imply a serious change in underlying fundamentals.”
-----------------
Impact who’s current valuation and why does that matter to this trading technology? And, does “serious change” in the underlying “fundamentals” equate to a
change in the Price Structure? If so, to what degree will the Price Structure change and how does that impact the current trade decision to Hold, or take the Loss?
The key here is the Price Structure which defines that parameters of the trade for a hyper-short-term period of time. Much of the effects that you allude to, are longer term in nature and may or may not have detrimental impact on the Price Structure at any given point along the Trajectory.
The news vector only does
permanent damage when it destroys the Price Structure making the normative recovery process impossible, or beyond the difficulty level that I am willing to accept as a trader of this technology. Otherwise, adverse news
can be such that a full recovery is not only possible, but highly probable. Knowing this, saves me a tremendous amount of money when I don’t bail out of a trade that most other traders who entered near the same price point – will.
Knowing the location and condition of the Price Structure alone – can save the average trader thousands, hundreds of thousands or even millions of dollars in unnecessarily lost profits due to ill-timed bail-outs after adverse news. This is why categorizing, classifying and codifying the various news vectors work so well in this system.
“No not flawed, just imperfect. There simply is not a perfect system as the future is an unknown quantity.”
----------------
True. However, if nothing more than a “simple” profit is required to define success in trading – then I can most assuredly come to within 99.999% of a 100% perfect solution. To wit: I have a side project running. It has been running for exactly 25 months 1 week and 3 days (at this typing). It is a simple profit trading plan that has not lost money since inception. It uses no price targets and it has no minimum design criteria like my prototype has. All that is required is that the trade nets a simple profit. As of 12/21/04, it has not failed one single time to do that task.
So, when you say that perfection does not exist – I would have to disagree. It really all depends on how you define
Accuracy in your trading, which is exactly what my very first post on this forum was all about. And, precisely the reason why I selected that topic as my very first post here – just to see what people really understand about trading – an experiment of sorts.
By the way – this 25 months old test is very easy to do. On the day that it fails to make a simple profit, I’ll come back to this forum and post that failure – but I think that will be years down the road given the data that I’m looking at.
When you say perfect, you obviously mean to a significant profit target. But, then again – who’s definition of “significant” are we talking about? If all one needs to do is maintain a few billion dollars, or a few hundred million dollars, then one does not need ANY trading system at all. All one needs to do is wait until a specific time of the week and enter a trade in ANY direction and that trade will net a simply profit about 100% of the time – according to the results that I’m getting from this little side project that I have working right now.
Perfection is therefore, in the eye of the beholder.
“Analysis is concerned primarily with values which are supported by the facts and not those which depend largely upon expectations .”
-----------------
But, that is exactly what this is not. This is not a Trend Following Analysis. One would have to simply “let go” of that way of thinking. This is a Predictive Model and therefore, the use of
expectations is highly desirable – in fact, absolutely necessary. How can a system “predict”, without taking as input into its calculations, that which is an expectation? That would be like saying that the Golden Gate Bridge can take you across the water
without a span.
I look at this type of analysis as being an examination
of the facts, and not one looking for support from the facts. In a Predictive Model, the model itself is really responsible for projecting certain “facts” before they actually enter the physical world. This is the essence of Predictive Models – to bring about some kind of probability for future events that have yet to happen.
“He views the business future as a hazard which his conclusions must encounter rather than as the source of his vindication.”
-----------------
I’m sorry, but I view the Forex as a place where I plan to blow the doors off of Bill Gates hold at the top of the billionaires list in the U.S. I view the business future as an
opportunity to be explored to the fullest extend humanly possible. I do believe in a place called “perfection”. I do believe that it can be accomplished with the right amount of faith, hard work, smart work, patience, diligence, and a systematic approach to always improving upon what you already have.
There is no way that I would have a 93% to 98+% (it changes depending on the last trade) accurate to a specified target trading system if I did not believe that “perfection” was possible. I’ve had many reasons to quit many years ago, but if I had, I would still be just a mediocre trader obtaining average results at best. It was the believe in conquering the impossible that has got me where I am today – among the top traders in the world in terms of accuracy and consistency and profitability on a per trade percentage basis.
“The need to be right time after time, possibly several times a day puts an immeasurable strain upon the system, and possibly the trader who will need to make the final decision as to jump or stay.”
----------------
It sure does and that is why I typically only make 3-4 trades per week! I’m not a purist. I don’t sit down at my machine and go after 7 pips here, and 10 pips there, although some people do. I personally think that it nuts – to be quite honest with you.
Instead, I am a Trajectory Hunter (or, the system is). I look for the “next” Trajectory (or, the system does) and then I get into position. Each currency pair is different in terms of its Magnitude. However, the system is designed to capture a minimum profit per trade which is based on the historical and empirical evidence shown in the pair since the inception of the Retail Forex Market.
Right now (as of 12/21/04), the EURUSD has a Daily Magnitude of 122 pips. But, its Long Trajectory has daily Magnitude of 84 pips, and its Short Trajectory has a daily Magnitude of 75 pips (all Strategic numbers). Now, there are two additional sets of the same value points but they are calculated differently – they are Tactical Values and Real-Time Values. Or, put another way – the system has three (3) different types of Trajectories: Strategic (which I just gave you), Tactical and Real-Time.
Inside the engine these Trajectories are called TCD or Transequential Contiguous Delta (core system indicators), and there are six (6) of them one for each trade type (Long and Short). So, when I trade, I’m going after these pip classifications as minimums. I put the minimum design profit just under these classifications, so as not to place too much stress on the system. Day trade minimums are 50 pips, so you can now see how I can do this as they fit nicely under the strategic, tactical and real-time TCD numerical values. This is all part of the Enhanced TCD Double Helix Module.
“This exponential increase the reduction of margin for error, is the reason for the vast failure rate in daytrading generally, it remains to be seen if the decision and recognition process can be automated, as this is clearly the intent of your proprietary methodology.”
--------------
Automating it all – yes. Allowing for 50 billion trades per day – no. I’ve never found any real benefit to inflicting that kind of massive headache on myself. Besides, when you understand TCD’s and Price Structures, you really don’t have the need to engage in so many trades on a daily basis. Some day’s I don’t even make a trade because there are no signals with a high enough probability – so I just pass and wait for higher probability numbers.
“These are driven by the fundamentals, it becomes a moot point that you must be able to analyse, understand, and select the correct investment to profit from any decision. This has always been, and probably remains a big ask.”
--------------
The point is the ease with which one can boost their annual returns over what their Mutual Fund Manager is getting them – that’s the things that blows my mind. The Forex has got to be one of the easiest trades to make for an
Investor with a 5-10-15 year event horizon.
Example: The EURUSD is right now running inside of an approximate 10 year, 4000+ pip range that is fairly predictable. It is now nearing that high point again – which is where it was some 10 years ago. If I were a long term trader, I could pick up at least 2000 pips (being very conservative) on the EURO to the downside at some point during the same amount of time into the future. The dollar simply cannot get much weaker against the Yen, and the EUR before both Japan, Europe and the U.S. begin to turn the currencies (through policy actions) around. Sometimes the pattern snaps at 5 years and the recycles back to a 10 year pattern.
So, if I were a long term investor in the Forex – I’d be getting ready to Short the EURUSD – just not quite yet. There is still some topside of about 800 to 1000 pips left in this EUR bull run on a much shorter time frame. How far ahead of the game would the typical Mutual Fund Investor be with a cool 2000 pip run on the EURUSD, as compared to the 15% per year they get from the stock market.
That was my point.
“While it may be argued that you have indeed rewritten the rules on "technical analysis", and that will be proven or not as the case may be in the fullness of time, you have not yet made a case for the suspension of valuation as a methodology for profiting from the financial markets.”
----------------
Nor, do I want to! I
need those people in the market doing their “valuations” and moving the marketing up and down, or just sideways. I’m not trying to shoot my meal ticket (LOL!)
I need those who bring “order” to the market. I can’t do what I do without their “order” conduct.
So, I will never be making the case that conventional valuations should be suspended. However, I have made the case that I simply don’t need to do
exactly what they do, in order to profit consistently and accurately.
“Unfortunately, banks now seek to derive revenue from speculative trading.”
----------------
Be very careful, here. Not all of them do. See my examples of “Compensating Balances”. They use it as a hedging device, too. Not only to make a profit and in some cases they don’t immediately turn a profit – but they might be holding a currency that is doing better than there own homeland paper. This could give then an off-set they the otherwise would not be able obtain with their overly inflated paper, or overly devalued paper in the short-term.
“From a purely daytrading perspective I would have to agree, however from the standpoint of making and keeping a substantial profit, I must seriously disagree. And it is about earning a return on invested capital.’
---------------
What else can a highly accurate trading system for Day Trading and Swing Trading do, other than make and keep substantial profits? That’s my goal. I can’t speak for anyone else. My goals are to make and
grow by geometric proportions, and substantial account balance. The
only way that I know to do that is to trade efficiently which means doing so with a high degree of accuracy to a substantial target, rolling over a high percentage of profits into the next trade (I personally roll 100% for now because I simply don’t need the money to live off of), and then repeat with consistency that same process.
Isolated and individual Fundamental “valuations” don’t help me in this regard when using this trading technology. It might help me if I were using something else, but I would not be in the Forex with any other tool simply because I have not found one that works as well, or that I am as comfortable with. I have not seen one that is as precise, or as accurate, or as consistent as this one – so, I can only speak to this system – and – under it, no individual and isolated fundamental “valuations” are required. They don’t even make sense in this environment – there’s no where to plug them in, other than that which is already accounted for in the historical data.
“He uses vertical red,green,yellow and orange lines.They are spaced at a specific timeframe apart, and traded upon a cyclical analysis.”
------------
If they are vertical lines, then they are definitely
time based TA tools. And, if they are time based conventional TA tools, then they must be tweaked by him to yield specific buy/sell/hold recommendations. Most conventional TA has at its core some form of mathematical averaging concept. The vast majority of traditional TA falls into this category – which is why the vast majority of all TA lags behind my TA – basically, can’t see far enough down the road to make any projections with any real degree of clarity that my profiles contain (when I post them – have not done that here – only parameters with a trade signal).
“Value investors in the FX, well Warren Buffett is $600M short the USD from 2yrs ago, I guess he just liked the look of the chart, but seriously, Buffett is an exception, however if more people had his acumen, more people would have wealth.”
--------------
Yeah, but that’s cheating – invoking Buffett is like invoking King Kong at the local zoo. The guy is extraordinarily amazing. Besides, he’s not a day trader and that is a very long-term event horizon. It is also a very powerful trade!
I have every intention of catching Mr. Buffett and Bill Gates at the top of America’s billionaire list. Not, to make a name for myself, but just to validate my work as being beyond reproach. I have a long way to go, but I have already driven my revenue model through several 56 trade cycles and it worked just fine using a 30/30/100 formula (30% net return per trade, 30% of total account balance used as per trade cost basis and reinvesting 100% of al profits for X number of trades required to reach $1 million). I’ve only done this once using the new 50/30/100 formula and I am working on number two (a test run) right now.
So, my trades are only in the low 7 figure range for now – no where near Mr. Buffett, but if I follow the revenue model and do what this system tells me to do and only take high probability trades, then I fully expect to get on that list some day in the not so distant future. You have to believe you can, or you won’t. You also have to have a solid tool.
“As to daytraders utilising value, probably none........but how many daytraders make money?”
----------------
Correct.
“Let,
E = expected earnings (GDP)
R= expected growth rate
Y= current Yield on AAA Bonds........then
E(2R + 8.5 ) * Y/4 = intrinsic value of the currency.”
----------------
But, this is a
Predictive Model. The word
expected shows up twice. Expected growth rate of what – the earnings themselves? Also, current yield on A3B’s, which ones - are you talking about the street’s aggregated estimate – or do you just pick one? You can’t be just picking one – so it has to be the listed/tracked aggregate.
How frequently does this generate a Trade Signal? And, can you calculate the Probability for the target (your Intrinsic value of the currency) to be struck before the trade? Lastly, what is the time-line for such a trade? In other words, when you back-tested this Model against historical data, what was the average holding period before the target (intrinsic value of the currency) was struck?