7 ms·
Why lulz? Bad indicators, too few?
by yeahwhatever10 5y ago
Why lulz? Bad indicators, too few?
- ploika 5y agoTechnical analysis (Bollinger bands and the like) would be treated similarly to horoscopes by many people who know how to work a Bloomberg terminal.
- saeranv 5y agoI've never understood how someone had the nerve to trademark "Bollinger bands", when all they are is just a measure of 2 standard deviations from a rolling mean of share price. It's like renaming 1+1=2 after yourself and and trademarking it's use.
- mellavora 5y agoSo then why does Bloomberg build in so many technical indicators into its product? Look, I share your skepticism of technical analysis, but there are many traders who do not. And when managing traders, you might want to let them trade on TA because it can give them a reason to take action. Otherwise they can suffer from analysis paralysis.
- Galanwe 5y agoThese are naive and unrefined technical indicators. - there's only price/volume, it's very poor in terms of information. Smells like an academic with only access to a free database. - it's really the classical technical analysis 101 indicators, studied 10000 times in research articles. - you would need wayyyy more indicators to get a meaningful model.