Trading by the Light of the Moon | Page 2 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

To the moon! 20 replies

"Once in a Blue Moon" (R2R spinoff) 64 replies

Trading Green Light 13 replies

Time Zones, Day Light Savings, and Major Markets 3 replies

Attachments: Trading by the Light of the Moon
Exit Attachments

Trading by the Light of the Moon

  • #21
  • Sep 9, 2011 5:54am Sep 9, 2011 5:54am
OMG, I just put this on the forum because it was funny and put me in a good mood that someone even write about such method of trading. I created this thread in the member lounge, don't take it to serious.

Quote
let Josef have his thread man. Maybe go and find a corner you can be productive in/ Just a suggestion

Thank you CindyXXXX.

Regards

Josef
  • #22
  • Sep 9, 2011 6:34am Sep 9, 2011 6:34am
hi pah,
ill take alook at hursts work on stocks ect,my entries and exits are machanical,i use the cycles to determine were to place my trades,depending apon were the cycle is,ie,spot,or futers and which expiry,ive mentioned the 3 main cycles that i need to be aware of,but having said that i also use the cycle within the cycles to increase lot sizes when they are all reaching the apex,
  • #23
  • Sep 10, 2011 10:25am Sep 10, 2011 10:25am
Quoting CrucialPoint
@ Nubcake - Fair enough, circadian rhythm is about sleeping cycles which has nothing to do with trading.

... How about Schumman's resonance? I mean, an aspect of trading is human behavior and human behavior is linked with the human brain... which is all about brainwaves (electromagnetic fields). Lunar affects the earth's electromagnetic fields and electromagnetic stimulation affects brainwaves... and thus affecting behavior.

(http://www.sandrelli.net/Schumann - haarp.pdf)...
i wonder how far into this you have gone, and if you have done a bit of research have you come across anything that suggests that it's definitely not that our brainwaves influence the schumann resonance, since it is suggested that the resonance potentially influences us? i didn't notice it considered anywhere, but there are probably a range of reasons why it's unlikely to be a consideration... hence my question to you as you might have already covered all of these types of questions and know the answer.
Congratulations ScalaFX for coming out of the closet!
  • #24
  • Edited 4:05pm Sep 10, 2011 3:35pm | Edited 4:05pm
Quoting josef
OMG, I just put this on the forum because it was funny and put me in a good mood that someone even write about such method of trading. I created this thread in the member lounge, don't take it to serious.
Aw, darn, I was hoping people'd love my Nostril Breathing System, based on this fact.

Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: nostril breathing system 1.gif Size: 35 KB
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: nostril breathing system 2.gif Size: 28 KB
  • #25
  • Sep 10, 2011 7:59pm Sep 10, 2011 7:59pm
Quoting nubcake
i wonder how far into this you have gone, and if you have done a bit of research have you come across anything that suggests that it's definitely not that our brainwaves influence the schumann resonance, since it is suggested that the resonance potentially influences us? i didn't notice it considered anywhere, but there are probably a range of reasons why it's unlikely to be a consideration... hence my question to you as you might have already covered all of these types of questions and know the answer.
I didn't go far into it (was busy on other things). But as I mention in this thread's earlier post "a trader is still left of what he is going to do at a certain point".

I've simplified my trading. For whatever divination or scientific explanations what the market is going to do, I simply don't care. I don't need to know if war is about to break loose anywhere. I don't need to know about the planetary alignment. I don't need to know SR, etc...

Hey Nubcake, I got a present for your brain... Since it was a pleasure to read some of your mental reasoning (and you liking to stretch your way of thinking), here is one just for you from CrucialPoint :

You mentioned in your previous post along the lines; "MA follows Price and NOT the other way around. Price does not follow MA." You are totally correct . Such mundane thinking and reasoning was overlooked, but it is priceless information that can open floodgates in trading. Simple yet powerful, like the invention of the wheel.

Now this will be hard to chew for a lot of people; "Fundamental analysis and Technical analysis follows Price and NOT the other way around. Price does NOT follow FA and TA." This mundane and somewhat of an oxymoron statement is one of the floodgates in trading that never been discussed nor understood by many.
  • #26
  • Sep 10, 2011 11:08pm Sep 10, 2011 11:08pm
Quoting CrucialPoint
I didn't go far into it (was busy on other things). But as I mention in this thread's earlier post "a trader is still left of what he is going to do at a certain point".

I've simplified my trading. For whatever divination or scientific explanations what the market is going to do, I simply don't care. I don't need to know if war is about to break loose anywhere. I don't need to know about the planetary alignment. I don't need to know SR, etc...

Hey Nubcake, I got a present for your brain... Since it was a pleasure to read some of your mental...
fair enough. it was just a thought... looking at things from the other direction.

yar... because once in you have to get out, and no amount of FA or TA is going to make a bad trade seem good when you are sweating bullets, and on the flipside no amount of 'good' FA or TA is going to extend a winning position forever. you gotta get in, and you gotta get out. what happens in the meantime is a mystery. yesterday is history, tomorrow's a myster (from '21').

but, i guess i'm maybe standing outside looking at the sign advertising what's showing on the cinema screen without realizing the show is actually further within. you don't know what you don't know until you know it.
Congratulations ScalaFX for coming out of the closet!
  • #27
  • Sep 11, 2011 4:49pm Sep 11, 2011 4:49pm
Quoting CrucialPoint
Now this will be hard to chew for a lot of people; "Fundamental analysis and Technical analysis follows Price and NOT the other way around. Price does NOT follow FA and TA." This mundane and somewhat of an oxymoron statement is one of the floodgates in trading that never been discussed nor understood by many.
Sorry if this sounds condescending, but aren't you merely stating the obvious? (well, FWIW, my IQ is a lot lower than yours, but it seems obvious to me)

All TA and FA can only ever be based on the past history, and is therefore 'lagging'.

However, if there are some traders who use TA/FA and are profitable (and for a sufficiently long time to suggest that their success is not merely fortuitous), then that suggests that there is some causal link between the past and the future, and one that can be exploited. Any trader who uses charts or reads economic reports implicitly subscribes to that theory.


Quoting nubcake
you don't know what you don't know until you know it.
That is very true.

If more folk understood this, perhaps there would be less posting along the lines of "if I can't get a certain technique to work for me, then nobody else can, either."
  • #28
  • Sep 11, 2011 8:38pm Sep 11, 2011 8:38pm
Quoting hanover
Sorry if this sounds condescending, but aren't you merely stating the obvious? (well, FWIW, my IQ is a lot lower than yours, but it seems obvious to me)

All TA and FA can only ever be based on the past history, and is therefore 'lagging'.

However, if there are some traders who use TA/FA and are profitable (and for a sufficiently long time to suggest that their success is not merely fortuitous), then that suggests that there is some causal link between the past and the future, and one that can be exploited. Any trader who uses charts or reads...
Wow... it is the first time Hanover is making conversation with me (someone who I really think who can hold an intelligent conversation). LOL you know a lot of people gets mixed messages about my signature, they should focus on the emoticon instead... OK, lets get to it...

Am I really stating the obvious? hehehe... because the response you added afterwards missed the target .

Let me explain... firstly, the response you added was correct. I agree that TA & FA are lagging and that there are profitable traders using both with success. The link between past and future is a deep conversation for another day.

You see people would do as follow:

 

  1. TA/FA >>> enter trade

If you follow this model, then most likely you believe that price follow TA/FA. (Which I stated that Price does NOT follow TA/FA). A trader would believe that whatever the TA/FA suggest then price should follow accordingly. But, what I stated was the opposite. (I hope this part is clear)

If you understood my statement: "TA/FA follows Price and not the other way around. Price does not follow TA/FA." Basically, then you should be able to trade without the use of TA/FA.

Let me try to give some example of this theory at work...
1. Say that all the FA forecast says that price will go up. What if I liquidated my massive position and price dropped. What if all the TA forecast says price will go down because it is a double top. What if I massively bought it and then price go up the double top became a 123 formation instead? (this is a very simple illustration, I hope you won't try to philosophize this illustration to a negative)

2. You can go and open any chart, TA or FA and see the convergence and divergence of price. Meaning if FA/TA is showing a buy, somehow price is falling. At this stage, it is a fallacy to think that price should go back up because TA/FA is saying so... which lead to my third point.

3. Here is a real life example, which not a lot of traders may have experience in their life of trading (depending their circumstance). According to TA/FA price should go up... Russia REFUSED to pay their world debt and price continued to plummet.

I may sound like to be stating the obvious... but after giving it an example (not too elaborate one because of limited time), I hope that I conveyed the message that Price does not follow TA/FA. If it is still not loud and clear, the hidden message is that you don't need TA/FA to be successful. You don't have to follow this model: TA/FA >>> enter trade. Which this model has limiting potential due to black swans.

I still haven't explained it fully, but I hope I've shifted your perception according to the previous quote that it wasn't as obvious

I must admit, I do it purposely not explain to it. There are some who will get it and some don't (I don't intend handing it out fully). I might say something like "hot air rises". To some, it is obviously mundane. But to a limited few, it will come as "hot air rises"... "if I can capture it, maybe it can lift me off the ground".

If I state something in bold red... one should ask, what can I get out of it? what can I do with it? You'll love my thread, full of mundane and obvious statements... as Marv and other haters put it "CrucialPoint's Mental Diarrhea"

  • #29
  • Sep 12, 2011 2:05am Sep 12, 2011 2:05am
Quoting CrucialPoint
Wow... it is the first time Hanover is making conversation with me (someone who I really think who can hold an intelligent conversation). LOL you know a lot of people gets mixed messages about my signature, they should focus on the emoticon instead... OK, lets get to it........
CP,

Fair enough; perhaps we have misunderstood each other?

It's my view that both TA and FA can only ever be based on past history, but must nonetheless be useful because they are used, by some, to trade profitably.

IMO analysis is largely subjective. For example, one trader's buy signal (e.g. buying into a strong upmove) might be another's sell signal (price is now overbought, and will likely fall). In other words, price simply moves however the orders drive it; it can't really "follow" TA or FA because TA/FA is ultimately nothing more than a single trader's interpretation: for example, I might draw my trendlines differently to you, while a third trader might not even use them. Or I might place different weight on certain aspects of a Bernanke speech.

My view is this: analysis creates (bullish or bearish) sentiment; sentiment leads to placement of orders; order volumes drive price movement; and then the new prices lend themselves to fresh analysis....... all of which repeats itself in a continuous, perpetual cycle.

Not sure what you mean by "the hidden message is that you don't need TA/FA to be successful. You don't have to follow this model: TA/FA >>> enter trade." But what other (entry) model is there? The way I see it, if a trader is not performing some type of analysis, then he might as well toss a coin; and for the analysis to have any purpose, it must be performed before entering a trade. So perhaps you're right: I've completely missed your point.

David
  • #30
  • Sep 12, 2011 4:26am Sep 12, 2011 4:26am
Hope you all don't mind, the exchange inspired me also to think.


some figuring to play with --
There's the past, which is infinite and known;
the future, which is infinite and unknown;
and the current, which is exactly one and known.
If the current weighs over everything in the past, that's a 1/infinity chance of success;
if the current merely contradicts the past, that's an infinity - 1 chance of success;
and if the current weighs less than the past and/or agrees with the past, that's an infinite chance of success.

market behavior --
Price is nothing more than the cumulated opinion of a near infinite number of (# traders (and thus FA/TA interpretations) * amount of money invested per trader).
Thus, it's a crowd, the market is. Thus, if a trader trades, then the market is the one absorbing and responding to that unpredictable event and so ultimately still decides where price goes over time.
Such market behavior can be studied through reading the price-time line, with TA, or discrete events' precision and a qualitative understanding among and between those events, with FA.

both --
TA and FA each compensate for the figuring they each use.
In a sense, FA uses the current directly, while TA uses the past directly; all else is approximated. Limits to the approximations:
In FA, a current event (rogue trader, "Russian event", Swiss intervention) may have no apparent connection with the past. Often, though, the list of such events can be reduced with leading events that are unnoticed because of little reaction from the market.
So too, TA, in a sense, deals with the current, in that it predicts the market's crowd behavior to some degree with a precise string of reasoning through the past.
  • #31
  • Sep 12, 2011 5:03am Sep 12, 2011 5:03am
Crucialpoint makes a great point. price cannot be predicted, it is the prevalence of orders that appear to give direction to the charts. The expert economist are either wrong, or report on why the market acted the way it did, on hindsight.
price cannot be predicted, but there is a unpredictable predictability to the way it moves.

a trader needs to have a game plan according to each market probability, but must act with flexibility.

if every newbie would just stare at the quotes bid/ask and attempt to find a strategy to trade them using the tools available, they would understand.
the chart reflects the movement of the quote, not the other way around.

but Hanover's astute assumption is not wrong either. TA and FA can measure the information needed in order to understand the PROBABILITIES, and make a discretionary trading decision. however if one imposes rigidity into the charts either by holding on to a bias or using Technical tools wrong, it creates a dangerous mindset as one EXPECTS the price to act in a certain way.

expectations are dangerous, Measurement of probabilities and having a flexible plan to addapt and attempt to follow price would be a better approach
AVT INVENIAM VIAM AVT FACIAM
  • #32
  • Sep 12, 2011 5:05am Sep 12, 2011 5:05am
as to the moon conversation, i cannot contribute to the debate as i do not understand nor have researched the matter.

so whether a trader can trade on moon cycles, my rational brain says no, however, many rational brains have been wrong in history due to short sightedness, just because i do not know does not mean it is not possible
AVT INVENIAM VIAM AVT FACIAM
  • #33
  • Sep 12, 2011 6:44am Sep 12, 2011 6:44am
Quoting hanover
My view is this: analysis creates (bullish or bearish) sentiment; sentiment leads to placement of orders; order volumes drive price movement; and then the new prices lend themselves to fresh analysis....... all of which repeats itself in a continuous, perpetual cycle.
Why complicate it? My view is this: Money coming in and money coming out. Do you really need to know the sentiment? What if sentiment is up and nobody dropped any money on the table? What if sentiment is up and a plane crashes into skyscrapers? What is sentiment is up and insider trading to sell occurred? What if sentiment is up and a country refuses to abide by international laws?

It is a continues cycle of money coming in and money coming out.
Anything before this occurrence is just really irrelevant.



Quoting hanover
Not sure what you mean by "the hidden message is that you don't need TA/FA to be successful. You don't have to follow this model: TA/FA >>> enter trade." But what other (entry) model is there? The way I see it, if a trader is not performing some type of analysis, then he might as well toss a coin; and for the analysis to have any purpose, it must be performed before entering a trade. So perhaps you're right: I've completely missed your point.
Let's stretch the imagination for a bit. If you can see all the incoming orders and you are trading based on that, would that fall into TA or FA? My own personal definition is NO (and this is where we might disagree and can see the crossroads of our conversation).

If one is not trading according to some news/economic forecasts, then according to my personal definition they are not using FA. If one is not trading according to drawing lines (SR, trendlines), then according to my personal definition they are not using TA.

I don't have a definition to it, but metaphorically speaking, if I see a billionaire dropped large amounts of money on the table and I traded accordingly... I've never used any FA or TA (according to my personal definition).
  • #34
  • Sep 12, 2011 7:17am Sep 12, 2011 7:17am
Quoting CrucialPoint
Let's stretch the imagination for a bit. If you can see all the incoming orders and you are trading based on that, would that fall into TA or FA? My own personal definition is NO (and this is where we might disagree and can see the crossroads of our conversation).
I would agree with you that order flow doesn't fit into FA or TA, and from what Hanover stated, I believe that he too believes order flow is a main determinant of price. If I remember correctly, the correlation between order flow and price movements may be as high as .8.

However, I think that insight into the orderbook is not necessary us for to exploit order flow, and from your post, I think that this is where you and I may differ in opinion. If TA generates order flow - and it does, as probably 90% of the people here at FF draw lines - then knowledge of TA allows sophisticated traders to exploit the order flow produced by other technical traders. Of course, there is still a lot of randomness involved, as the market is occupied by a heterogeneous population.

Taking advantage of such an edge requires sophisticated statistical techniques or a well developed sense of the market. However, taking advantage of the information that appears in the orderbook requires the same. In the end, there's no free lunch.
The nail that sticks out gets hammered back in
  • #35
  • Sep 12, 2011 7:22am Sep 12, 2011 7:22am
Concerning the moon conversation. Welles Wilder approached wealthy individuals, and sold them a method that exploits moon cycles. I believe his method initially sold for tens of thousands of dollars. If you're interested, google "Delta Phenomenon". I apologize if this has already been mentioned.
The nail that sticks out gets hammered back in
  • #36
  • Sep 12, 2011 10:58am Sep 12, 2011 10:58am
Quoting CrucialPoint
Let's stretch the imagination for a bit. If you can see all the incoming orders and you are trading based on that, would that fall into TA or FA? My own personal definition is NO (and this is where we might disagree and can see the crossroads of our conversation).
Ah, you've nailed it; I think I see now how we differ. For me, the question becomes: what tool(s) do you use to "see all the incoming orders"?

If you're using price charts, I would say that's TA: anything that involves an interpretation of price, volume, time, or derivatives of these. Other folk might call this "price action" or "orderflow".

Hence our misunderstanding simply comes down to terminology. Semantics.
  • #37
  • Sep 27, 2011 10:20pm Sep 27, 2011 10:20pm
Quote
Hence our misunderstanding simply comes down to terminology. Semantics.

If I interpret well both points of view, I would argue that it is not a matter of terminology, but of time.

TA and FA or whatever method is out there tend to anticipate movements and to create a correlation between past and future, a logical link.

According to this approach, past would have effects on future; you study patterns (or accounting variables) of the past and are 'able' to "predict" the future.

If I understood Crucial Point's approach: it is an a posteriori approach (CP, please tell me if I am right); therefore it is not a matter of terminology.

From a TA point of view the link is cause-effect, where cause is past which generates the future as effect; from what I have read about CP's approach, past has zero value. The capability to react "on-line", if you wish and to follow the 'hot air to be lift with' is the ... mmhh "Crucial Point" I would say.

The hot air parallelism I think it is appropriate: it is stochastic in nature (brownian motion and the like), but deterministic in macroscopic behaviour. So your balloon will go up (and hopefully you with it); at a certain point you will experience a loss of lift. Maximum Altitude? The air became cold; the external air is not dense enough. Who really cares? Whatever the reason, the point is you are not capable to find it a priori, but -for sure- you can react to the loss of lift.

Bottom line: I do not think it is just a matter of terminology, but I think you have a significantly different approach. Probably one could argue that you both use the so-called 'price action', but I would say that you are referring to two very different actions (disregarding patterns): the action which has been and the action which will be.
  • #38
  • Jul 7, 2013 4:48am Jul 7, 2013 4:48am
Vincent Troncone says if you are willing to go beyond what you think you know and apply yourself all things are possible.
I would not dismiss what he has said unless there is proof on the table that proves otherwise.

His river analogy alone along with the moon gives a way to trade profitably if you open your mind to it.
Remember all things are possible.
  • #39
  • Jul 8, 2013 8:20pm Jul 8, 2013 8:20pm
Works for me not exactly on new or full moon dates sometimes its plus or minus 1-3 days from sighting of moon.
Find your Favourite Pattern
  • #40
  • Jul 8, 2013 11:52pm Jul 8, 2013 11:52pm
Gravity isn't constant, it's in waves. Gravity isn't constant on Earth, as the Earth isn't round, at all. (the water makes it look round, take out the water and you get an odd shaped rock) The higher up on a mountain you are, the different gravity you'll experience then being in a valley. So, if we were to use the moon, for instance, we'd need to know how it's affecting which part of the world. I mean, there's just way too much to think about for a human to put in an algo that wouldn't cost more in memory/power usage than profit.
Play the players, not the cards.
0 traders viewing now