{quote} Thanks for your suggestion, very helpful. And for luck too, that is very important to us all, so my wishes backI believe that any logic rule, of course not an emotional one, can be automated with an EA. And then tested with historical data to see if it works or not. What would you suggest instead of using 3 day DIR + ACT + VA variation+ compression? Yesterday my EA entered long with CADJPY (at 83.638), so far so good . What do you think about it?
What would you suggest instead of using 3 day DIR + ACT + VA variation+ compression?
Yesterday my EA entered long with CADJPY (at 83.638), so far so good . What do you think about it?
For all I know you could of threw a dart……in that case very impressive!
I don't know why? Was there a change in condition? Was the market bracketing ? If so how long has the market been bracketing? 1 day? 2 days, 7 days? If it has been bracketing are you sure it isn't a test for trend end, rather than a test for new trend? Or does your info/data tell you it's a minor pause in a longer term trend? What info did you used to form an opinion?
Without data/info, you give me nothing to form an opinion with……..
Auction markets are complex with many variables (reference points) and there is feedback between reference points.
"Each of the 30 or so reference points in the Value Analytics table have the potential for contributing information about the market's intent. Each reference/variable, by itself, rarely dominates. It is the collective that counts.
Not all reference points are important in any one case. You must learn about each of them and how to discriminate. In some profile teaching the operative word is 'holism', looking into the pot with some 30 or so elements and somehow divining which control the taste today. Value Analytics goes the other way, separating the elements, measuring them and their flow individually andeliminating those that do not apply to the case at hand. Feedback is involved: if your understanding of a particular item (say trade facilitation) is in error and you continually make that error in your market strategy; your error will become apparent to you rather quickly. This illustrates the value of isolating the reference points and examining them individually...."
https://web.archive.org/web/20130902164723/http://cisco-futures.com/amva_background.html
There are 30 or so reference points, each one is a descriptor which carries it's own information. All tools use a set of references. Which references depends on the tool and the trader.
Pasted from <https://www.forexfactory.com/showthr...ck#post9383819>
there is feedback/crosstalk and "non-linear" interactions between the reference points, this is the info I use for trading decisions. AMVT isn't a "trading strategy" or a "trading system". It's analysis, the ability to "read market generated info"
Pasted from <https://www.forexfactory.com/showthr...e#post10700633>
in a competitive situation, all decision-making indicators are small and subtle
Pasted from <https://www.forexfactory.com/showthr...e#post10645813>
It's those small & subtle changes in the references (decision-making indicators ) that make AMVA discretionary.
I am not a baseball fan but if I was comparing two pitchers in a competitive situation. You compare stats, it's those small subtle changes/differences in their stats, you use in your decision making process to decide who's the better pitcher
The complex nature of the market is a strong argument for a phenomenological approach to market theory. A market has many facets, elements that are functional parts, but still with a large degree of independence in their behavior. As one of these elements changes, that changed behavior is returned to the market via the feedback mechanism. While elements such as volume, volatility, range, time behavior and the like are individually measureable, they all combine to form the market one studies or trades. Each element must be discovered and studied on its own before there is any thought of considering how it affects the whole. The vital question of extreme market behavior such as large, fast changes in value, must be understood. It is the thesis of Auction Market Value Theory that each of the market elements can be isolated and must be understood prior to forming a coherent description of a market. The experienced trader collects all the market information available,assesses each piece, ending with an understanding of the market situation. Not all pieces are necessarily needed to find the market's condition. Different sets will be used at different times.
Pasted from <https://www.forexfactory.com/showthr...=482744&page=4>
There are a number of Reference Points, maybe 30, that measure market parameters These reference points have feedback and cross talk because of their complex interactions. For instance, an increase in volatility might be thought to presage continuation (of a trend up, or a trend down). But what of an increase of volatility accompanied by a decrease in volume?
Depending on the "cross-talk" between those 2 references changes the context. And "cross-talk" may or may not be supported by an i.e……..increasing or decreasing "TFF"………..
What does it "MEAN"…….. For there to be net dir = 1
if one has 12 directional references net dir = 1 that tells me that 6 of the references agree and 5 do not. Its not a buy signal , it tells you something about the market. The net +/- values by it's self, have little or no value, you need to read the "cross talk" between references
6 of the references agree and 5 do not agree……..that's hardly a valid to reason to buy or sell. This is where the "analysis" part of "auction market analysis" comes in……..6 of the references agree and 5 do not agree, maybe you should first start by asking "WHICH ONES?" and "are they the ones applicable to the situation at hand". And again the knowledge of references and the "cross talk" between them is used/needed.
Net +12 all directional references , however, i.e.………. If RI is decreasing and QC shows a flip in values, the "cross talk between those refs may imply your dir & act have no relevance at all to the situation at hand.
I believe that any logic rule, of course not an emotional one, can be automated with an EA. And then tested with historical data to see if it works or not.
We have a difference in opinion, and that's ok. Maybe I'll learn something from "YOUR" endeavor, just as long "YOUR" endeavor doesn't involve an investment of "MY" time……… answering questions and giving opinions on how to use data other than for it's intended use.
If I do that that would mean the time & effort I have invested to the topic of the thread was/is an absolute waste of my time……….maybe it is……..
It is that in "my" experience (real money and thousands of man hours later), that a one size fit all "hard logic" approach to a discretionary trading model doesn't work (it's kind of the point of the thread),
you disagree, no harm there, you believe a "hard logic" approach to a "discretionary" trading model works……That's "YOUR" endeavor which should involve an investment of "YOUR" time, not mine ………..
To be honest I don't even use it (net, dir ,act), it's just a summary of data, a small piece , of many. It tells me something at a glance. To put the data into "context" I have to look at the individual references and the cross talk between them………..
Good Luck with your Endeavor!
Markets are not efficient, rather they are effective - Jones
but your approach a bit too radical for my taste.
