Home   |         NEW: (hypothetically starring) VIC REEVES as LUKE SKYWALKER .. in "Waiting for Godot, the hollywood version".

Having captured both the devil and the deep blue sea. (click HERE for previous point in thread)   Share:  
Thrust of argument: On the 'infamous' George Soros, as well as abundant pseudo-intellectual financial sector verbal garbage, investopedia also tells us << He refers to the philosophy behind his trading strategy as reflexivity. The theory eschews traditional ideas of an equilibrium-based market environment where all information is known to all market participants and thereby factored into prices. Instead, Soros believes that market participants themselves directly influence market fundamentals and that their irrational behavior leads to booms and busts that present investment opportunities. >> Direction of resistance / implied resistance: Ignoring the specifics of the examples Investopedia gives of how many people trade 'the way Soros does' I want to focus only on what it is which I have been wondering with reference to the algorithms I have tested extensively and forensically with 11 to 15 years of minute tick-by-tick data.

 

 

Enter your DOMAIN NAME to
collect this point:

 

Removal of resistance: I have two 'working algorithms' and my main question about them both is whether or not they would continue the unbroken upward (profit) trend each of them displays, one across 11 years of testing, the other across 15 years of testing.

The passage about Soros indicates to me that yes these two algorithms are fine for the longer term and indeed for 'translation' into other algorithms across umpteen currency crosses, stocks and shares and indices, at the very least, although that will require a tonne of data acquisition and programming and testing, same as the first two algorithms.

You see the trigger in both cases was driven by something I wasn't entirely sure really is something which can impact the movements on the market - what I was wondering was whether or not the velocity of the price, itself directly impacted by the traders/investors and the trades they make, whether that velocity can at any point change the probability of winning - and Soros appears to support that notion fully, and make money out of it. If this is really true it seems to me to explain why those two algorithms have performed 'victoriously' throughout their testing periods. I wanted to be sure that it wasn't 'coincidence' (15 years of it, and 11 years of it!). What Soros apparently believes does seem also to explain why these two algorithms work.
Unification: To be clear the first of the two is an 'event-driven' one much like a kind of generic algorithmic interpretation of just the sort of trades 'by Soros' and others 'like him' Investopedia describes in the link the passage is taken from (see references below). You pick certain moments on the economic calendar, marked by the 'industry' itself as 'high volatility' events, and then you go in and precisely trade 2 hours and 2 minutes before each one of those events with very specific parameters IF a further condition is met, ie the velocity of the price (how fast it is moving per unit of time, to be clear) has reached a particular level. This event-driven algorithm pales into insignificance, for me, next to the derivation of it which operates without any event record - ie it is triggered 100% by the velocity - whenever that particular high velocity is reached, a kind of 'gravity' pulls sufficient trades towards profit out of every trade made to create essentially a one way treasury size movement, albeit punctuated with 'costs' - ie it is still probable that you will continue to lose trades, but your wins will eclipse your losses or at least cancel them out - that appears to be a characteristic of the situation caused by the probability, itself driven by the choice to trade at those moments when the human trading population and robot trading population has hit a particular speed of activity and are pumping that money through like billy ho.

What I have to remember, what is important to take away from this, is not the pomp and circumstance people like Soros, the big firms (eg Goldman Sachs), the 'trendy' 'experts', from Tyler Durden and Max Keiser to the slave-like easily-controlled 'elites' writing at places like Moneyweek or the Financial Times or whoever all revel in and use to inflate their ridiculous egos, but in fact the bottom line - which is something one can even discern easily from Feynman, and perhaps to some extent from apparently entirely unrelated (to anything mentioned here so far) philosophers like Noam Chomsky or Idries Shah: it is this. It is that the universe is probablistic as we know even from the way light reflects. In other words it is rules regarding probability, in the end, which allow 'markets' to be 'beaten' - and underneath Soros' mountain of trivial complexity and analysis of ephemeral meaningless nonsense is nothing more than a mechanism for trying to measure and cash in on the probability of price changes. In the end it will appear tragic to future humans that a man with Soros' mind wasted his life doing such inane and stupid shit and focusing on such a gigantic pile of total fucking shite, a black hole sized world of bullshit - from interest rate announcements, uptake of particular products and services by 'consumer' semi-automatons, the 'announcements' about 'job statistics' - employment, payroll, all sorts of 'technical' jargon - and all sorts of trivial entropic behaviour, all of it measured and used to 'make a profit' to buy more crap and live more crap and stupidly operated days of bullshit, days of unenlightenment. I for one do not intend to follow George Soros or any of the others down such an utterly stupid road.

Anyway, I will no doubt continue my research and development for a while yet, and engage with the financial battlefield, but for as few years as possible and with specific post-money utopian aims in mind. I do not relish or prize this world of shit which all those stuck up and pompous and utterly mindless fuckers you can hear and read talking all day long on all the big channels are products and victims of. It's a waste of your life and people who live in this pompous western and western-derived way across the globe are basically throwing away a great gift, life which can be lived and experienced, instead they have drone-like farm-animal like existences. We can talk more about that - my theory about how the human race has gone very wrong since the 'birth' of 'agriculture' is something I think needs considering deeply. The impact of 'human farming' - aka 'religious marriage' (or any kind of 'marriage' which is itself just a religious phenomenon and agricultural phenomenon) on survival - ie that the things 'people' do in order to follow the rituals of human farming which emerged as a way people imagined would help them survive (but it turns out it is anti-survivalistic and destroys them, over the longterm, a very basic something-for-nothing-you-cannot-get deal from 'nature') - is something no one married even considers as it would undermine their self-esteem to even consider whether or not being married whether or not organised endorsed public sex (well it's organised and endorsed in a public way, in a collective way) is actually 'unnatural' and one of the biggest forks in the road which led an otherwise evolving species back to the caves of regression. Enough for now. This post is really here to shed light on the reason why my 'algorithms' seem to work - using Soros' discoveries as a credible source of reference for insisting that it is true that the velocity alone determines the price.

One of the many games I've played also confirms it - the least like trading - the trades are a side part of the game. Little icons appear and the price moves up or down on them, scattered around a screen. Any which move REALLY fast you leap on, and leap off quickly, with a tasty profit. I knew, when I played it, that the author was definitely conveying something actually very much at the core of modern trading, particularly at big firms. That method of leaping onto a burst, that's clearly something which is 'never going to fail' you as long as these markets exist, if you do it the right way.

Soros takes it much further as do, clearly, so many hedge funds and other event traders, ie spending a lot of time anally mapping and plotting the event landscape, so that every trivial report on mis-interpreted badly written information pertaining to firms which produce goods which not only do we not really need but which destroy and kill our society and chances of survival - is another 'tool' of the trade for these mindless money-worshipping modern day apes, as we 'humans' like to forget we are. They are trapped, rich and poor alike, all these fools, in the deep blue sea or the lair of the devil. Teach your children to reject conformity as early as possible. I see effectively zero survivors in the face of tolitarian obedience mongering, I see very little probability that any of your kids will have minds of their own for even 1% of their lives. But then how many of you are fit to deliver them from it rather than into its hands?!!!!

Coming next: those promised Alex Cockburn passages. Any day now. The next writing scheduled. Insha allah, as the Palestinians say.
Rebut this point   Support this point   Edit this point

(TVhobo's estimated size of readership since 2013, mainly in the UK and USA, with Germany in third place:
over 200,000 readers across approximately 200 cities/towns

 

Copy/paste point into your work:

Type: Open supporting statement


Supporting: 1.48.3

17 versions:

1. Server time: 20:52:16 on 16/10/2019
2. Server time: 21:1:30 on 16/10/2019
3. Server time: 21:5:41 on 16/10/2019
4. Server time: 21:9:20 on 16/10/2019
5. Server time: 21:25:56 on 16/10/2019
6. Server time: 13:2:51 on 17/10/2019
7. Server time: 9:54:39 on 19/10/2019
8. Server time: 21:11:3 on 22/11/2019
9. Server time: 21:12:50 on 22/11/2019
10. Server time: 21:15:32 on 22/11/2019
11. Server time: 21:23:24 on 22/11/2019
12. Server time: 21:24:44 on 22/11/2019
13. Server time: 21:38:45 on 22/11/2019
14. Server time: 21:39:34 on 22/11/2019
15. Server time: 1:47:14 on 23/11/2019
16. Server time: 15:35:18 on 23/11/2019
17. Server time: 15:36:5 on 23/11/2019

Related points:

References:

https://www.investopedia.com/articles/financial-theory/09/how-soros-does-it.asp

The graph shows the profit you would make between 2008 and 2018 inclusive, on a theoretical budget of 50 to 100 pounds, using the algorithm precisely described down to the last detail on this page. This is the one I've made public. On the eurodollar when there is a high volatility event (3 bulls heads on my economic calendar) (use dosh.tvhobo.com to see where the calendar is hosted on this site (we are not the source)), check the price 2 hours and 2 minutes before the scheduled minute of the event (the high volatility, '3 bull' event) and if there has been a movement of 140 pips (1400 points, using the smallest possible units at the company I trade with) in 10 hours up to when you check, ie up to the moment 2 hours and 2 mins before the scheduled event, trade with the direction of that movement, right then, 2 hours and 2 mins before the event, with a stop of 50 pips and a limit of 70 pips. The graph shows what happens. This info is provided to show you you can check and see what happens. If you use any such algorithm the risk and responsibility of not making mistakes is on your head, and as all 'spread betting' sites tell you, figures like 70%, 80% and so on of their 'retail users' lose money from using the sites, overall, ie they don't profit, they fail. Reasons for this vary, and there's no reason to suppose that just having an algorithm which works will give you, personally, profit - you need to use it correctly and not make any stupid mistakes or do stupid things. This is here so you can see on paper that this method works, evidence of my 'claims' in the document above. Evidence of the demonstration of what Soros, perhaps, may be talking about. Velocity, after all, is driven by the actions Soros 'credits' with impacting prices (at various points, not universally or fluidly, let us also remember). (A price may also rise because of actual value, potentially, or not rise in accordance with actual value due to entirely misleading information, or whatever. That also happens. But so does movement driven by velocity, I have discerned, and Soros apparently makes big money from movement driven by irrational choices of humans (which do things like push velocity one or other way). Theoretically if one used my algorithm one would, if one did it the way I do, protect as much as possible against one-off insane fat-tailed events - this would be done by using a guaranteed stop, a little past the desired stop, and then orders linked to each other for the 'real stop' and limit, at the designated spot. The orders which I placed would also have a stop and limit on all of them, wide enough to not be overridden with a sudden spread change, in fact about 10 pips (100 of those points) each. I would watch such open trades like a hawk while they were open, and respond quickly to adverse occurrence, once in a century insane behaviour on the markets which is just about the only thing which could possibly break through such tough anti-risk measures - and even then I'd stop the problem, the risk would be beaten. After all, the number of times you need to watch like a hawk is very few per year and the amount of time you need to watch is also small. A few hours, a day maybe. Perhaps a tad longer, not much more, ever. And you can go to sleep, put your mobile phone alert on and be ready if anything does go bump in the night. To be sensible one might also have a profit limit attached to the main trade (and the guaranteed stop) in case it rockets one way and then dives back. Don't want to miss it. If it leaps past your limit you don't want to leave it to chance.
So what's the best thing to do with this information? Easy. Download for free, or buy, large large large amounts of data by the 'tick' - ie the 'tick data' going back as many decades as possible, for any and every given 'instrument' you can, indices, currency crosses, commodities, even stocks, particularly the big ones, and write software, eg using perl, my favourite language, or apparently python may be a good one too, although I don't know anything about it at all. And with that software, which you write, you can test out all that tick data in umpteen ways, with the basic understanding relayed in this document to help you with one (out of no doubt many, perhaps innumerable) way to establish the trading trigger. Test any and every algorithm idea out on a vast tract of data so that you can find those which deliver profit consistently across many decades. Below is another example (instructions not revealed, only the outcome), showing an algorithm theoretically at work from 2004 to 2018 inclusive, 15 consecutive years. This is the sort of outcome you want to achieve, this is what you should be looking for in an algorithm (not going to be possible with merely an 'investment', only an algorithm can enable a result like this).


Some more evidence of the maths involved in the algorithms above. This first example with instructions shown also, testing the maths on the DAX (Germany's main index):


And these ones with instructions concealed:




These examples on the ftse index, s & p 500 index and the Dax index only use about 6 years of data, however, and I would test them much more before considering them viable. As they stand they seem to strongly support the mathematical principles involved.

 

 

previous point on the grid   |   next point on the grid

 

Click here to read about Shams Pirani, the editor and chief author on this grid - note, if you can actually prove anything written above wrong, I would gladly, if the proof is sufficient, correct what I've written and what I think - if I could, however, prove your attempted proof wrong, then I would accordingly say so and maintain whatever point of view is completely based on fact and proof.

Simple text version.

Having captured both the devil and the deep blue sea.

On the 'infamous' George Soros, as well as abundant pseudo-intellectual financial sector verbal garbage, investopedia also tells us << He refers to the philosophy behind his trading strategy as reflexivity. The theory eschews traditional ideas of an equilibrium-based market environment where all information is known to all market participants and thereby factored into prices. Instead, Soros believes that market participants themselves directly influence market fundamentals and that their irrational behavior leads to booms and busts that present investment opportunities. >>

Ignoring the specifics of the examples Investopedia gives of how many people trade 'the way Soros does' I want to focus only on what it is which I have been wondering with reference to the algorithms I have tested extensively and forensically with 11 to 15 years of minute tick-by-tick data.

I have two 'working algorithms' and my main question about them both is whether or not they would continue the unbroken upward (profit) trend each of them displays, one across 11 years of testing, the other across 15 years of testing.

The passage about Soros indicates to me that yes these two algorithms are fine for the longer term and indeed for 'translation' into other algorithms across umpteen currency crosses, stocks and shares and indices, at the very least, although that will require a tonne of data acquisition and programming and testing, same as the first two algorithms.

You see the trigger in both cases was driven by something I wasn't entirely sure really is something which can impact the movements on the market - what I was wondering was whether or not the velocity of the price, itself directly impacted by the traders/investors and the trades they make, whether that velocity can at any point change the probability of winning - and Soros appears to support that notion fully, and make money out of it. If this is really true it seems to me to explain why those two algorithms have performed 'victoriously' throughout their testing periods. I wanted to be sure that it wasn't 'coincidence' (15 years of it, and 11 years of it!). What Soros apparently believes does seem also to explain why these two algorithms work.

To be clear the first of the two is an 'event-driven' one much like a kind of generic algorithmic interpretation of just the sort of trades 'by Soros' and others 'like him' Investopedia describes in the link the passage is taken from (see references below). You pick certain moments on the economic calendar, marked by the 'industry' itself as 'high volatility' events, and then you go in and precisely trade 2 hours and 2 minutes before each one of those events with very specific parameters IF a further condition is met, ie the velocity of the price (how fast it is moving per unit of time, to be clear) has reached a particular level. This event-driven algorithm pales into insignificance, for me, next to the derivation of it which operates without any event record - ie it is triggered 100% by the velocity - whenever that particular high velocity is reached, a kind of 'gravity' pulls sufficient trades towards profit out of every trade made to create essentially a one way treasury size movement, albeit punctuated with 'costs' - ie it is still probable that you will continue to lose trades, but your wins will eclipse your losses or at least cancel them out - that appears to be a characteristic of the situation caused by the probability, itself driven by the choice to trade at those moments when the human trading population and robot trading population has hit a particular speed of activity and are pumping that money through like billy ho.

What I have to remember, what is important to take away from this, is not the pomp and circumstance people like Soros, the big firms (eg Goldman Sachs), the 'trendy' 'experts', from Tyler Durden and Max Keiser to the slave-like easily-controlled 'elites' writing at places like Moneyweek or the Financial Times or whoever all revel in and use to inflate their ridiculous egos, but in fact the bottom line - which is something one can even discern easily from Feynman, and perhaps to some extent from apparently entirely unrelated (to anything mentioned here so far) philosophers like Noam Chomsky or Idries Shah: it is this. It is that the universe is probablistic as we know even from the way light reflects. In other words it is rules regarding probability, in the end, which allow 'markets' to be 'beaten' - and underneath Soros' mountain of trivial complexity and analysis of ephemeral meaningless nonsense is nothing more than a mechanism for trying to measure and cash in on the probability of price changes. In the end it will appear tragic to future humans that a man with Soros' mind wasted his life doing such inane and stupid shit and focusing on such a gigantic pile of total fucking shite, a black hole sized world of bullshit - from interest rate announcements, uptake of particular products and services by 'consumer' semi-automatons, the 'announcements' about 'job statistics' - employment, payroll, all sorts of 'technical' jargon - and all sorts of trivial entropic behaviour, all of it measured and used to 'make a profit' to buy more crap and live more crap and stupidly operated days of bullshit, days of unenlightenment. I for one do not intend to follow George Soros or any of the others down such an utterly stupid road.

Anyway, I will no doubt continue my research and development for a while yet, and engage with the financial battlefield, but for as few years as possible and with specific post-money utopian aims in mind. I do not relish or prize this world of shit which all those stuck up and pompous and utterly mindless fuckers you can hear and read talking all day long on all the big channels are products and victims of. It's a waste of your life and people who live in this pompous western and western-derived way across the globe are basically throwing away a great gift, life which can be lived and experienced, instead they have drone-like farm-animal like existences. We can talk more about that - my theory about how the human race has gone very wrong since the 'birth' of 'agriculture' is something I think needs considering deeply. The impact of 'human farming' - aka 'religious marriage' (or any kind of 'marriage' which is itself just a religious phenomenon and agricultural phenomenon) on survival - ie that the things 'people' do in order to follow the rituals of human farming which emerged as a way people imagined would help them survive (but it turns out it is anti-survivalistic and destroys them, over the longterm, a very basic something-for-nothing-you-cannot-get deal from 'nature') - is something no one married even considers as it would undermine their self-esteem to even consider whether or not being married whether or not organised endorsed public sex (well it's organised and endorsed in a public way, in a collective way) is actually 'unnatural' and one of the biggest forks in the road which led an otherwise evolving species back to the caves of regression. Enough for now. This post is really here to shed light on the reason why my 'algorithms' seem to work - using Soros' discoveries as a credible source of reference for insisting that it is true that the velocity alone determines the price.

One of the many games I've played also confirms it - the least like trading - the trades are a side part of the game. Little icons appear and the price moves up or down on them, scattered around a screen. Any which move REALLY fast you leap on, and leap off quickly, with a tasty profit. I knew, when I played it, that the author was definitely conveying something actually very much at the core of modern trading, particularly at big firms. That method of leaping onto a burst, that's clearly something which is 'never going to fail' you as long as these markets exist, if you do it the right way.

Soros takes it much further as do, clearly, so many hedge funds and other event traders, ie spending a lot of time anally mapping and plotting the event landscape, so that every trivial report on mis-interpreted badly written information pertaining to firms which produce goods which not only do we not really need but which destroy and kill our society and chances of survival - is another 'tool' of the trade for these mindless money-worshipping modern day apes, as we 'humans' like to forget we are. They are trapped, rich and poor alike, all these fools, in the deep blue sea or the lair of the devil. Teach your children to reject conformity as early as possible. I see effectively zero survivors in the face of tolitarian obedience mongering, I see very little probability that any of your kids will have minds of their own for even 1% of their lives. But then how many of you are fit to deliver them from it rather than into its hands?!!!!

Coming next: those promised Alex Cockburn passages. Any day now. The next writing scheduled. Insha allah, as the Palestinians say.



https://www.investopedia.com/articles/financial-theory/09/how-soros-does-it.asp

The graph shows the profit you would make between 2008 and 2018 inclusive, on a theoretical budget of 50 to 100 pounds, using the algorithm precisely described down to the last detail on this page. This is the one I've made public. On the eurodollar when there is a high volatility event (3 bulls heads on my economic calendar) (use dosh.tvhobo.com to see where the calendar is hosted on this site (we are not the source)), check the price 2 hours and 2 minutes before the scheduled minute of the event (the high volatility, '3 bull' event) and if there has been a movement of 140 pips (1400 points, using the smallest possible units at the company I trade with) in 10 hours up to when you check, ie up to the moment 2 hours and 2 mins before the scheduled event, trade with the direction of that movement, right then, 2 hours and 2 mins before the event, with a stop of 50 pips and a limit of 70 pips. The graph shows what happens. This info is provided to show you you can check and see what happens. If you use any such algorithm the risk and responsibility of not making mistakes is on your head, and as all 'spread betting' sites tell you, figures like 70%, 80% and so on of their 'retail users' lose money from using the sites, overall, ie they don't profit, they fail. Reasons for this vary, and there's no reason to suppose that just having an algorithm which works will give you, personally, profit - you need to use it correctly and not make any stupid mistakes or do stupid things. This is here so you can see on paper that this method works, evidence of my 'claims' in the document above. Evidence of the demonstration of what Soros, perhaps, may be talking about. Velocity, after all, is driven by the actions Soros 'credits' with impacting prices (at various points, not universally or fluidly, let us also remember). (A price may also rise because of actual value, potentially, or not rise in accordance with actual value due to entirely misleading information, or whatever. That also happens. But so does movement driven by velocity, I have discerned, and Soros apparently makes big money from movement driven by irrational choices of humans (which do things like push velocity one or other way). Theoretically if one used my algorithm one would, if one did it the way I do, protect as much as possible against one-off insane fat-tailed events - this would be done by using a guaranteed stop, a little past the desired stop, and then orders linked to each other for the 'real stop' and limit, at the designated spot. The orders which I placed would also have a stop and limit on all of them, wide enough to not be overridden with a sudden spread change, in fact about 10 pips (100 of those points) each. I would watch such open trades like a hawk while they were open, and respond quickly to adverse occurrence, once in a century insane behaviour on the markets which is just about the only thing which could possibly break through such tough anti-risk measures - and even then I'd stop the problem, the risk would be beaten. After all, the number of times you need to watch like a hawk is very few per year and the amount of time you need to watch is also small. A few hours, a day maybe. Perhaps a tad longer, not much more, ever. And you can go to sleep, put your mobile phone alert on and be ready if anything does go bump in the night. To be sensible one might also have a profit limit attached to the main trade (and the guaranteed stop) in case it rockets one way and then dives back. Don't want to miss it. If it leaps past your limit you don't want to leave it to chance.
So what's the best thing to do with this information? Easy. Download for free, or buy, large large large amounts of data by the 'tick' - ie the 'tick data' going back as many decades as possible, for any and every given 'instrument' you can, indices, currency crosses, commodities, even stocks, particularly the big ones, and write software, eg using perl, my favourite language, or apparently python may be a good one too, although I don't know anything about it at all. And with that software, which you write, you can test out all that tick data in umpteen ways, with the basic understanding relayed in this document to help you with one (out of no doubt many, perhaps innumerable) way to establish the trading trigger. Test any and every algorithm idea out on a vast tract of data so that you can find those which deliver profit consistently across many decades. Below is another example (instructions not revealed, only the outcome), showing an algorithm theoretically at work from 2004 to 2018 inclusive, 15 consecutive years. This is the sort of outcome you want to achieve, this is what you should be looking for in an algorithm (not going to be possible with merely an 'investment', only an algorithm can enable a result like this).


Some more evidence of the maths involved in the algorithms above. This first example with instructions shown also, testing the maths on the DAX (Germany's main index):


And these ones with instructions concealed:




These examples on the ftse index, s & p 500 index and the Dax index only use about 6 years of data, however, and I would test them much more before considering them viable. As they stand they seem to strongly support the mathematical principles involved.