It's like trying to predict the weather. Some make big money doing this.Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Technical analysis is a joke played on people to think they can predict market movements. You can't predict the unpredictable (humans).
All you need to get started is access to stock charts - price, volume, etc. There are plenty of sites that offer some level without paying. You should also look at some sites with business info since very few people can do well with ta alone.Originally posted by: Sea Moose
Originally posted by: seemingly random
No. It's an example of logically and exhaustively examining a problem. The basic scientific principles can be applied to the stock market.Originally posted by: Sea Moose
Originally posted by: Babbles
Originally posted by: Sea Moose
Originally posted by: us3rnotfound
Originally posted by: Sea Moose
myth busters, its a good show to learn about diagnostic techniques.... the way they sit down and think problems through and solve the problem.
Seriously? lol
yeah, when i was doing my apprenticeship, years ago, i found that by trying to think like the guys on mythbusters,
ie breaking down a problem and solving it step by step,
i found that this helped me when learning how to fault find.
Sorry if it sounds stupid, just trying to help
Seriously?
yes
Self pwnage for mentioning this hey.
You have to remember that you're posting amongst those who consider themselves light-years past such simple reasoning. How about you applying your logic to the stock market (you don't have to use real money) and seeing if it pans out.
thank you SM, i thought i was gonna get pwned. not a bad idea about the stock market, i know there is a site somewhere where you can play with fake money on the stock market.
Originally posted by: Sea Moose
Originally posted by: Babbles
Originally posted by: Sea Moose
Originally posted by: us3rnotfound
Originally posted by: Sea Moose
myth busters, its a good show to learn about diagnostic techniques.... the way they sit down and think problems through and solve the problem.
Seriously? lol
yeah, when i was doing my apprenticeship, years ago, i found that by trying to think like the guys on mythbusters,
ie breaking down a problem and solving it step by step,
i found that this helped me when learning how to fault find.
Sorry if it sounds stupid, just trying to help
Seriously?
yes
Self pwnage for mentioning this hey.
Not necessarily. Swing traders use ta. Do you know what a swing trader is? or the swing trader's timeline. There are some greatly respected "stock market investors" out there who are really just swing traders. And, they appear on tv and tell you when to get in but not when to get out. You only hear about when they got out after it's too late for you.Originally posted by: gevorg
technical analysis = day trading = gambling
...
Originally posted by: seemingly random
It's like trying to predict the weather. Some make big money doing this.Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Technical analysis is a joke played on people to think they can predict market movements. You can't predict the unpredictable (humans).
I believe the reason ta does indeed work sometimes is that it can reveal insider (or those with insider info) trading. For example, if a company has a new, profitable product in the works, it's next to impossible to keep it a secret. Another example, is the leaking of accounting info that the next quarter will be better (or worse) than expected.
The same could be said of any stock market methodology.Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: seemingly random
It's like trying to predict the weather. Some make big money doing this.Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Technical analysis is a joke played on people to think they can predict market movements. You can't predict the unpredictable (humans).
I believe the reason ta does indeed work sometimes is that it can reveal insider (or those with insider info) trading. For example, if a company has a new, profitable product in the works, it's next to impossible to keep it a secret. Another example, is the leaking of accounting info that the next quarter will be better (or worse) than expected.
It just depends on what they bet on and how big the bet was. A broken clock is right twice a day. TA is great for showing what happened, not what will happen. Any conclusions to the future is nothing but spit and wishes.
At the end of the day there isn't a single empirical study that has conclusively shown that TA aids in positive risk-adjusted returns, especially when looked at in-depth and repeatedly.
Originally posted by: seemingly random
It's like trying to predict the weather. Some make big money doing this.Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Technical analysis is a joke played on people to think they can predict market movements. You can't predict the unpredictable (humans).
I believe the reason ta does indeed work sometimes is that it can reveal insider (or those with insider info) trading. For example, if a company has a new, profitable product in the works, it's next to impossible to keep it a secret. Another example, is the leaking of accounting info that the next quarter will be better (or worse) than expected.
Cup with handle? Are you familiar with ibd?Originally posted by: LiLRiceBoi
Originally posted by: seemingly random
It's like trying to predict the weather. Some make big money doing this.Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Technical analysis is a joke played on people to think they can predict market movements. You can't predict the unpredictable (humans).
I believe the reason ta does indeed work sometimes is that it can reveal insider (or those with insider info) trading. For example, if a company has a new, profitable product in the works, it's next to impossible to keep it a secret. Another example, is the leaking of accounting info that the next quarter will be better (or worse) than expected.
I think the weather analogy works. You know where it's been, and you're trying to figure out where it's going. Of course there are other factors which you must factor in, in making your decisions. I have found that technical analysis does have some merit and when I back test my strategies or theories, technical analysis does provide valuable information.
I didnt create this threat to debate the merits of TA, I'm simply looking for a more complete understanding of the art (not science). I dont want to start a debate about indexed funds and modern portfolio theory...
Are there any other indicators that you traders use? Such as TD signals?
Originally posted by: LiLRiceBoi
Originally posted by: seemingly random
It's like trying to predict the weather. Some make big money doing this.Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Technical analysis is a joke played on people to think they can predict market movements. You can't predict the unpredictable (humans).
I believe the reason ta does indeed work sometimes is that it can reveal insider (or those with insider info) trading. For example, if a company has a new, profitable product in the works, it's next to impossible to keep it a secret. Another example, is the leaking of accounting info that the next quarter will be better (or worse) than expected.
I think the weather analogy works. You know where it's been, and you're trying to figure out where it's going. Of course there are other factors which you must factor in, in making your decisions. I have found that technical analysis does have some merit and when I back test my strategies or theories, technical analysis does provide valuable information.
I didnt create this threat to debate the merits of TA, I'm simply looking for a more complete understanding of the art (not science). I dont want to start a debate about indexed funds and modern portfolio theory...
Are there any other indicators that you traders use? Such as TD signals?
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Cup with handle? Are you familiar with ibd?Originally posted by: LiLRiceBoi
Originally posted by: seemingly random
It's like trying to predict the weather. Some make big money doing this.Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Technical analysis is a joke played on people to think they can predict market movements. You can't predict the unpredictable (humans).
I believe the reason ta does indeed work sometimes is that it can reveal insider (or those with insider info) trading. For example, if a company has a new, profitable product in the works, it's next to impossible to keep it a secret. Another example, is the leaking of accounting info that the next quarter will be better (or worse) than expected.
I think the weather analogy works. You know where it's been, and you're trying to figure out where it's going. Of course there are other factors which you must factor in, in making your decisions. I have found that technical analysis does have some merit and when I back test my strategies or theories, technical analysis does provide valuable information.
I didnt create this threat to debate the merits of TA, I'm simply looking for a more complete understanding of the art (not science). I dont want to start a debate about indexed funds and modern portfolio theory...
Are there any other indicators that you traders use? Such as TD signals?
In general, you need to look for divergences. One of the easiest is when strength doesn't follow price.
Originally posted by: seemingly random
The same could be said of any stock market methodology.
There doesn't seem to be any point of doing a post-event analysis if you're not going to try to use the results for future predictions.
Do you think o'neil is full of it? that the cup with handle formation is spit and wishes?
Yes.Originally posted by: LiLRiceBoi
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Cup with handle? Are you familiar with ibd?Originally posted by: LiLRiceBoi
Originally posted by: seemingly random
It's like trying to predict the weather. Some make big money doing this.Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Technical analysis is a joke played on people to think they can predict market movements. You can't predict the unpredictable (humans).
I believe the reason ta does indeed work sometimes is that it can reveal insider (or those with insider info) trading. For example, if a company has a new, profitable product in the works, it's next to impossible to keep it a secret. Another example, is the leaking of accounting info that the next quarter will be better (or worse) than expected.
I think the weather analogy works. You know where it's been, and you're trying to figure out where it's going. Of course there are other factors which you must factor in, in making your decisions. I have found that technical analysis does have some merit and when I back test my strategies or theories, technical analysis does provide valuable information.
I didnt create this threat to debate the merits of TA, I'm simply looking for a more complete understanding of the art (not science). I dont want to start a debate about indexed funds and modern portfolio theory...
Are there any other indicators that you traders use? Such as TD signals?
In general, you need to look for divergences. One of the easiest is when strength doesn't follow price.
I'm familiar with cup and handle formation and other well known technical patterns. ibd, investor's business daily?
Do you know anything about elliott wave analysis? i keep hearing about it but i'm not familiar with it and i havent looked it up yet.
Seems there might be some bad history with you and ta. Have you ever tried it? Do you care how you make money?Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: seemingly random
The same could be said of any stock market methodology.
There doesn't seem to be any point of doing a post-event analysis if you're not going to try to use the results for future predictions.
Do you think o'neil is full of it? that the cup with handle formation is spit and wishes?
Not "any". that's a massive generalization and many other methodologies have shown to provide superior risk-adjusted returns, such as FA of general "value" analysis. This has been proven many times in statistically significant studies, unlike TA, which has yet to be proven.
You cannot refute this because there simply is no evidence to support your faith in your system. Which is what it comes down to, blind faith, with no grounding in reality, fact, or data. Arguing against a zealot of faith is impossible since all they fall back on is "well, it worked for me". So fucking what, show me a statistical study that it works for large numbers.
Yes, I do think anybody who says TA returns superior risk adjusted returns over long periods of time is full of it. I've read many journal articles and studies both before, during, and after my CFA studies (Financial Analyst Journal is a great source) and I haven't seen one study that has convinced me.
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Not necessarily. Swing traders use ta. Do you know what a swing trader is? or the swing trader's timeline. There are some greatly respected "stock market investors" out there who are really just swing traders. And, they appear on tv and tell you when to get in but not when to get out. You only hear about when they got out after it's too late for you.Originally posted by: gevorg
technical analysis = day trading = gambling
...
Index funds are for grannies. Might as well keep your money in a savings account.
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Seems there might be some bad history with you and ta. Have you ever tried it? Do you care how you make money?
I've never said that ta is superior to anything. What's superior is considering all that is available. If you want to ignore ta, then that's fine.
Buy the rumor and sell the news has been profitable. Is this ta or fa or something else?
How many companies with great fundamentals do you know of whose stock price is glacial? They may be safe but so is a savings account.
I'm not sure about the zealot comment. Are suggesting that I am? It would be a very weak argument if you are.
Originally posted by: Special K
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Not necessarily. Swing traders use ta. Do you know what a swing trader is? or the swing trader's timeline. There are some greatly respected "stock market investors" out there who are really just swing traders. And, they appear on tv and tell you when to get in but not when to get out. You only hear about when they got out after it's too late for you.Originally posted by: gevorg
technical analysis = day trading = gambling
...
Index funds are for grannies. Might as well keep your money in a savings account.
The compounded annual growth rate for the S&P500 (or was it the total market index, which includes small and midcaps?) over the past several decades has been ~11%. I'd love to find a savings account that pays 11%.
Obviously there's no way to know whether that rate of return will continue, but it will most certainly be better than a savings account, if for no other reason than the risk premium.
Until someone comes up with a foolproof method for beating the market, I'll stick with my index funds based on the fact that ~80% of professional money managers fail to outperform their benchmark index after expenses in the long run.
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: seemingly random
Seems there might be some bad history with you and ta. Have you ever tried it? Do you care how you make money?
I've never said that ta is superior to anything. What's superior is considering all that is available. If you want to ignore ta, then that's fine.
Buy the rumor and sell the news has been profitable. Is this ta or fa or something else?
How many companies with great fundamentals do you know of whose stock price is glacial? They may be safe but so is a savings account.
I'm not sure about the zealot comment. Are suggesting that I am? It would be a very weak argument if you are.
LOL. Now it's obviously ME that has the problem with TA. You sit around and bandy about wordplay and psychobabble bullshit (to a psych BS no less) yet you STILL have yet to show ONE study that has proven that TA works. NOT ONE.
Then you start in with platatudes and more BS. Data please.
Finally, your only true rebuttal is to make some polarizing argument of "do this or pick a savings account". Please, plenty of people have become massively wealthy without adhering to your gospel of TA. Name which person in the top 3 richest people in the world utilizes TA.
Go ahead. Keep trying.
Still don't got it?
Ohhh. I'll give you the answer anyway. NONE.
This is what is funny about TA zealots. They sit around claiming that it's such a great tool, yet NONE of the wealthiest people, top investment managers, or greatest investors use it. Not ONE study has shown it works. There is not one fucking shred of data to prove your theory works. Nothing. Yet the only thing you can come up with is "savings account".
You can go on Marketocracy and see my performance. The only chart I look at is what the relative value of something is compared to the fundamentals of the company and my own analysis of said fundamentals. The performance of my Marketocracy account mirrors my personal account. You do the math.
Yes, the zealous comment was aimed directly at you. All you are doing is coming up with vaporous arguments for faith, instead of concrete arguments for fact. That is *exactly* what a zealot does.
Originally posted by: jjsole
Screaming for "data" isn't going to get you any justification for your ignorance about the markets. TA isn't a 'tool', its an approach, from which people have created tools for (some better than others, lol). And its not an indicator that says 'this gives a statistical advantage therefore its justified'. TA is a very general term that simply refers to a way of looking at movement in the markets to identify opportunities.
For that matter, even fundamental analysis uses 'TA' because any sensible person is going to take the rate of change of a PE over time and take that into consideration. Rate of change is a 'TA' term, and rate of change of the price is 1/2 the equation, so technically that is a form of TA afaic.
Aside from that, you can't suggest that analysis of price over time has no relevance and that the markets are 100% efficient. Buying begets buyers, and selling begets sellers...that's human nature and a great example of how opportunities are formed.
And its the analysis of movement over time that's going to identify this, not PE's (altho PE's can do it too since price is part of the equation). For myself, I've done about 40k trades since I started and it would be bizarre for anyone to call my returns "luck" (which have always been waaay beyond the s&p, except 1 year). If you're into "data", you know that luck wouldn't be a coherent conclusion for consistent results.
And afaic, all it takes is one person making money consistently over time with one or more quantifiable TA 'tools' to prove it works, because it's not the unsuccessful people that use TA which prove it doesn't work, its the ones (no matter how few) who have learned ways to use the approach that prove it can work.
/edit: Another note, all of the professional and institutional trading firms use a form of TA when quantifying their bids and offers within their program trading algorithms. Their supercomputers aren't coded to look at changes in PE's every millisencond, they're doing a sophisticated analysis of price movement over time, down to each tick and each millisecond and so on etc. to generate bazillion trades every day. There are a lot of different objectives in these programs, but if you take the major market makers, they are all electronic driven and based on price movement over time to make their markets. Their algorithms might be rocket science, but the technical approach to it isn't.
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: jjsole
Screaming for "data" isn't going to get you any justification for your ignorance about the markets. TA isn't a 'tool', its an approach, from which people have created tools for (some better than others, lol). And its not an indicator that says 'this gives a statistical advantage therefore its justified'. TA is a very general term that simply refers to a way of looking at movement in the markets to identify opportunities.
For that matter, even fundamental analysis uses 'TA' because any sensible person is going to take the rate of change of a PE over time and take that into consideration. Rate of change is a 'TA' term, and rate of change of the price is 1/2 the equation, so technically that is a form of TA afaic.
Aside from that, you can't suggest that analysis of price over time has no relevance and that the markets are 100% efficient. Buying begets buyers, and selling begets sellers...that's human nature and a great example of how opportunities are formed.
And its the analysis of movement over time that's going to identify this, not PE's (altho PE's can do it too since price is part of the equation). For myself, I've done about 40k trades since I started and it would be bizarre for anyone to call my returns "luck" (which have always been waaay beyond the s&p, except 1 year). If you're into "data", you know that luck wouldn't be a coherent conclusion for consistent results.
And afaic, all it takes is one person making money consistently over time with one or more quantifiable TA 'tools' to prove it works, because it's not the unsuccessful people that use TA which prove it doesn't work, its the ones (no matter how few) who have learned ways to use the approach that prove it can work.
/edit: Another note, all of the professional and institutional trading firms use a form of TA when quantifying their bids and offers within their program trading algorithms. Their supercomputers aren't coded to look at changes in PE's every millisencond, they're doing a sophisticated analysis of price movement over time, down to each tick and each millisecond and so on etc. to generate bazillion trades every day. There are a lot of different objectives in these programs, but if you take the major market makers, they are all electronic driven and based on price movement over time to make their markets. Their algorithms might be rocket science, but the technical approach to it isn't.
lol @ my "ignorance" of TA, sorry chucklehead, but I've read dozens of studies on TA. You and foolio up there STILL have not provided ONE study that has shown TA works.
Then you compare it to the trading strategies the desks at banks use? Even better. They don't sit there looking at resistance points or other bullshit. They take advantage of much more sophisticated analysis on a micro scale. Comparing the two only highlights your inability to understand why TA, in the forms that you guys can practice, is a joke.
Sure, they can take advantage of micro movements in the market, relative price differentials, different types of trading strategies, by instantly analyzing hundreds of equities in a second to find the inefficiencies in the market (it is not a long-term outlook on prices, but a shorter term one, since they buy and sell often within minutes). Sure, that is "technical analysis", but it is a far higher level of it and one that you'll never be able to touch.
TA is a tool, just like different types of scientific tests are tools. They are tools for determining what actions to take next. However, the way you guys use TA is a joke.
At the end of the day, as mentioned before, you STILL have not shown a single piece of information to back up your assertion. All assertions are meaningless without the data, they are anecdotal and statistically insignificant.
Originally posted by: Juked07
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: jjsole
Screaming for "data" isn't going to get you any justification for your ignorance about the markets. TA isn't a 'tool', its an approach, from which people have created tools for (some better than others, lol). And its not an indicator that says 'this gives a statistical advantage therefore its justified'. TA is a very general term that simply refers to a way of looking at movement in the markets to identify opportunities.
For that matter, even fundamental analysis uses 'TA' because any sensible person is going to take the rate of change of a PE over time and take that into consideration. Rate of change is a 'TA' term, and rate of change of the price is 1/2 the equation, so technically that is a form of TA afaic.
Aside from that, you can't suggest that analysis of price over time has no relevance and that the markets are 100% efficient. Buying begets buyers, and selling begets sellers...that's human nature and a great example of how opportunities are formed.
And its the analysis of movement over time that's going to identify this, not PE's (altho PE's can do it too since price is part of the equation). For myself, I've done about 40k trades since I started and it would be bizarre for anyone to call my returns "luck" (which have always been waaay beyond the s&p, except 1 year). If you're into "data", you know that luck wouldn't be a coherent conclusion for consistent results.
And afaic, all it takes is one person making money consistently over time with one or more quantifiable TA 'tools' to prove it works, because it's not the unsuccessful people that use TA which prove it doesn't work, its the ones (no matter how few) who have learned ways to use the approach that prove it can work.
/edit: Another note, all of the professional and institutional trading firms use a form of TA when quantifying their bids and offers within their program trading algorithms. Their supercomputers aren't coded to look at changes in PE's every millisencond, they're doing a sophisticated analysis of price movement over time, down to each tick and each millisecond and so on etc. to generate bazillion trades every day. There are a lot of different objectives in these programs, but if you take the major market makers, they are all electronic driven and based on price movement over time to make their markets. Their algorithms might be rocket science, but the technical approach to it isn't.
lol @ my "ignorance" of TA, sorry chucklehead, but I've read dozens of studies on TA. You and foolio up there STILL have not provided ONE study that has shown TA works.
Then you compare it to the trading strategies the desks at banks use? Even better. They don't sit there looking at resistance points or other bullshit. They take advantage of much more sophisticated analysis on a micro scale. Comparing the two only highlights your inability to understand why TA, in the forms that you guys can practice, is a joke.
Sure, they can take advantage of micro movements in the market, relative price differentials, different types of trading strategies, by instantly analyzing hundreds of equities in a second to find the inefficiencies in the market (it is not a long-term outlook on prices, but a shorter term one, since they buy and sell often within minutes). Sure, that is "technical analysis", but it is a far higher level of it and one that you'll never be able to touch.
TA is a tool, just like different types of scientific tests are tools. They are tools for determining what actions to take next. However, the way you guys use TA is a joke.
At the end of the day, as mentioned before, you STILL have not shown a single piece of information to back up your assertion. All assertions are meaningless without the data, they are anecdotal and statistically insignificant.
Heh. I'm inclined to agree with your viewpoint but not your presentation, which is unnecessarily assish.
I'm curious about whether people trying to day trade at home have ever worked at trading firms. I'm interning at a medium sized prop trading firm at the moment, and it's terribly hard for me to imagine any individual having sufficient edge when the biggest counterparties are SO much better equipped than individuals.
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: jjsole
Screaming for "data" isn't going to get you any justification for your ignorance about the markets. TA isn't a 'tool', its an approach, from which people have created tools for (some better than others, lol). And its not an indicator that says 'this gives a statistical advantage therefore its justified'. TA is a very general term that simply refers to a way of looking at movement in the markets to identify opportunities.
For that matter, even fundamental analysis uses 'TA' because any sensible person is going to take the rate of change of a PE over time and take that into consideration. Rate of change is a 'TA' term, and rate of change of the price is 1/2 the equation, so technically that is a form of TA afaic.
Aside from that, you can't suggest that analysis of price over time has no relevance and that the markets are 100% efficient. Buying begets buyers, and selling begets sellers...that's human nature and a great example of how opportunities are formed.
And its the analysis of movement over time that's going to identify this, not PE's (altho PE's can do it too since price is part of the equation). For myself, I've done about 40k trades since I started and it would be bizarre for anyone to call my returns "luck" (which have always been waaay beyond the s&p, except 1 year). If you're into "data", you know that luck wouldn't be a coherent conclusion for consistent results.
And afaic, all it takes is one person making money consistently over time with one or more quantifiable TA 'tools' to prove it works, because it's not the unsuccessful people that use TA which prove it doesn't work, its the ones (no matter how few) who have learned ways to use the approach that prove it can work.
/edit: Another note, all of the professional and institutional trading firms use a form of TA when quantifying their bids and offers within their program trading algorithms. Their supercomputers aren't coded to look at changes in PE's every millisencond, they're doing a sophisticated analysis of price movement over time, down to each tick and each millisecond and so on etc. to generate bazillion trades every day. There are a lot of different objectives in these programs, but if you take the major market makers, they are all electronic driven and based on price movement over time to make their markets. Their algorithms might be rocket science, but the technical approach to it isn't.
lol @ my "ignorance" of TA, sorry chucklehead, but I've read dozens of studies on TA. You and foolio up there STILL have not provided ONE study that has shown TA works.
Then you compare it to the trading strategies the desks at banks use? Even better. They don't sit there looking at resistance points or other bullshit. They take advantage of much more sophisticated analysis on a micro scale. Comparing the two only highlights your inability to understand why TA, in the forms that you guys can practice, is a joke.
Sure, they can take advantage of micro movements in the market, relative price differentials, different types of trading strategies, by instantly analyzing hundreds of equities in a second to find the inefficiencies in the market (it is not a long-term outlook on prices, but a shorter term one, since they buy and sell often within minutes). Sure, that is "technical analysis", but it is a far higher level of it and one that you'll never be able to touch.
TA is a tool, just like different types of scientific tests are tools. They are tools for determining what actions to take next. However, the way you guys use TA is a joke.
At the end of the day, as mentioned before, you STILL have not shown a single piece of information to back up your assertion. All assertions are meaningless without the data, they are anecdotal and statistically insignificant.
Originally posted by: Special K
Originally posted by: jjsole
Originally posted by: Crusty
Originally posted by: jjsole
Originally posted by: Special K
There is absolutely zero academic evidence supporting technical analysis.
Then that would suggest movement is 100% unpredictable, which absolutely just isn't true.
Guessing and being right doesn't mean you can predict it
That's true, altho no one said anything about guessing, but thanks for interjecting your creativity.
Warren Buffett said: "I realized technical analysis didn't work when I turned the charts upside down and didn't get a different answer."
Originally posted by: Juked07
Originally posted by: LegendKiller
Originally posted by: jjsole
Screaming for "data" isn't going to get you any justification for your ignorance about the markets. TA isn't a 'tool', its an approach, from which people have created tools for (some better than others, lol). And its not an indicator that says 'this gives a statistical advantage therefore its justified'. TA is a very general term that simply refers to a way of looking at movement in the markets to identify opportunities.
For that matter, even fundamental analysis uses 'TA' because any sensible person is going to take the rate of change of a PE over time and take that into consideration. Rate of change is a 'TA' term, and rate of change of the price is 1/2 the equation, so technically that is a form of TA afaic.
Aside from that, you can't suggest that analysis of price over time has no relevance and that the markets are 100% efficient. Buying begets buyers, and selling begets sellers...that's human nature and a great example of how opportunities are formed.
And its the analysis of movement over time that's going to identify this, not PE's (altho PE's can do it too since price is part of the equation). For myself, I've done about 40k trades since I started and it would be bizarre for anyone to call my returns "luck" (which have always been waaay beyond the s&p, except 1 year). If you're into "data", you know that luck wouldn't be a coherent conclusion for consistent results.
And afaic, all it takes is one person making money consistently over time with one or more quantifiable TA 'tools' to prove it works, because it's not the unsuccessful people that use TA which prove it doesn't work, its the ones (no matter how few) who have learned ways to use the approach that prove it can work.
/edit: Another note, all of the professional and institutional trading firms use a form of TA when quantifying their bids and offers within their program trading algorithms. Their supercomputers aren't coded to look at changes in PE's every millisencond, they're doing a sophisticated analysis of price movement over time, down to each tick and each millisecond and so on etc. to generate bazillion trades every day. There are a lot of different objectives in these programs, but if you take the major market makers, they are all electronic driven and based on price movement over time to make their markets. Their algorithms might be rocket science, but the technical approach to it isn't.
lol @ my "ignorance" of TA, sorry chucklehead, but I've read dozens of studies on TA. You and foolio up there STILL have not provided ONE study that has shown TA works.
Then you compare it to the trading strategies the desks at banks use? Even better. They don't sit there looking at resistance points or other bullshit. They take advantage of much more sophisticated analysis on a micro scale. Comparing the two only highlights your inability to understand why TA, in the forms that you guys can practice, is a joke.
Sure, they can take advantage of micro movements in the market, relative price differentials, different types of trading strategies, by instantly analyzing hundreds of equities in a second to find the inefficiencies in the market (it is not a long-term outlook on prices, but a shorter term one, since they buy and sell often within minutes). Sure, that is "technical analysis", but it is a far higher level of it and one that you'll never be able to touch.
TA is a tool, just like different types of scientific tests are tools. They are tools for determining what actions to take next. However, the way you guys use TA is a joke.
At the end of the day, as mentioned before, you STILL have not shown a single piece of information to back up your assertion. All assertions are meaningless without the data, they are anecdotal and statistically insignificant.
Heh. I'm inclined to agree with your viewpoint but not your presentation, which is unnecessarily assish.
I'm curious about whether people trying to day trade at home have ever worked at trading firms. I'm interning at a medium sized prop trading firm at the moment, and it's terribly hard for me to imagine any individual having sufficient edge when the biggest counterparties are SO much better equipped than individuals.