|
|
#41
08-18-2005, 04:48 PM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: If Technical Analysis works, why isn\'t there a mutual fund for it?
[ QUOTE ]
JWH is very successful over a very long period of time. There is really no debate about the validity of his approach, which is systematic, long-term trend following based on TA. [/ QUOTE ] Most of his funds trail the S&P 500, it looks like what he is most successful at is keeping his investor's money despite his poor performance. Trend following also worked great during the internet bubble, momentum guys bought what was going up and it kept going up. The problem is when it stopped, they were out of business. Oh, and Henry had a 40%+ loss at one point last year. When the trend turns, it can really hurt, esp. if you are leveraged up. Victor Neiderhoffer was one of the most successful traders, worked for Soros for many years with a strategy that produced consistant results year after year, until it blew up and he went broke (twice!). Some of these strategies are like picking up nickels in front of bulldozers, easy money until the inevitable rolls over you. Stop losses don't work in a panicked market. [ QUOTE ] Go Red Sox ! [/ QUOTE ] Well I can agree with that! 
|
|
#42
08-19-2005, 01:41 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If Technical Analysis works, why isn\'t there a mutual fund for it?
[ QUOTE ]
Victor Neiderhoffer was one of the most successful traders, worked for Soros for many years with a strategy that produced consistant results year after year, until it blew up and he went broke (twice!). [/ QUOTE ] He was also stupid [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img] Soros told him a couple of times that he will eventually go broke, Victor didn't believe him and went broke. HIs strategy was to sell huge amounts of deep OTM-option --> you make money like 99 % of the time but you still have negative expectancy because when you are wrong, you are [censored]. I love those fat tail distributions [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] BTW, Nassim Taleb has a opposite view. He likes to buy those. Usually you are wrong but when you are right, you win big time. The markets has to move greatly for you to make a profit with this system BUT they usually move further than everybody seems to believe --> you have positive expectancy because of this.
|
|
#43
08-19-2005, 03:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If Technical Analysis works, why isn\'t there a mutual fund for it?
google search paul tudor jones.
Alot of mutual fund managers use a combo of technical and fundamental analysis...
|
|
#44
08-19-2005, 02:25 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If Technical Analysis works, why isn\'t there a mutual fund for it?
How do you define "work"? I don't think it works, but even if it did work that doesn't mean it is worth doing if there something else that works better.
Also, the fact that Hedge funds use TA is not proof that it works.
|
|
#45
08-22-2005, 12:09 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If Technical Analysis works, why isn\'t there a mutual fund for it?
There are tons and they do very well, check out here www.iasg.com www.autumngold.com
|
|
#46
08-22-2005, 12:19 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If Technical Analysis works, why isn\'t there a mutual fund for it?
I make my living trading and base about 90% of my trades based soley on TA, perfect example of it in work [image]http://ichart.finance.yahoo.com/b?s=WHAI.OB[/image] got a partial fill of 7k shares on the turn @ .29 and sold out .40 on the ma touch(+770) bought small 5k on double bottom for another .04(+200) then 20k on breakout @.42 and out again @ .51 avg (+1800)
I sure hope technical analysis keeps on being wrong cause if it actually works i might not make anything LOL
|
|
#47
08-22-2005, 01:53 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Meaningless Assertion
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] So why aren't there dozens or hundreds of funds which exploit technical analysis to beat the market? [/ QUOTE ] There are thousands of them. They're called hedge funds. eastbay [/ QUOTE ] The term "hedge fund" is so debased... As to be meaningless... Since perhaps only 10-20% of "hedge funds"... Actually employ a legitimate arbitrage strategy. 80-90% of "hedge funds" are purely "skimming operations"... Meaning they take your 4 quarters... Do some fancy dancing to turn it into $1.00... And then charge you a fat fee for the priviledge. Technical analysis is a scam... Except in the sense that it's often "self-fulfilling" by the herd... And is actually just a brokerage industry trick... To make their salesman sound like market gurus... And facilitate the transfer of wealth from your pocket to theirs. Of the roughly 10-20% of hedge funds that are legit... Most of these employ some form of quantitative analysis... To engage in some form of bona fide arbitrage... Or practice some form of "insider trading". Most successful hedge funds... Like the one run by Edward Thorpe... Are invitation only or have a long waiting list. rm+ [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
|
|
#48
08-22-2005, 03:14 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If Technical Analysis works, why isn\'t there a mutual fund for it?
This could be the dumbest thread post/thread yet. I don't know even know where to begin with you, so I won't.
|
|
#49
08-23-2005, 12:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If Technical Analysis works, why isn\'t there a mutual fund for it?
There are tons of mutual funds that use technical analysis. They re as good as the ones that fundamental analysis, on average. That is, they suck when compared to passive portfolios.
|
|
#50
08-23-2005, 12:22 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: If Technical Analysis works, why isn\'t there a mutual fund for it?
[ QUOTE ]
John W. Henry, owner of the Boston Red Sox, is a long term trend follower. He traded a $16,000 account to over one billion dollars in a twenty year period. He does not use fundamental analysis. There is more than one way to make money in the market. [/ QUOTE ] LOL, OPM helps a lot too... Other People's Money JWH is such a bad CTA in a world of bad CTAs
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
