Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Watch 3 AIs compete in real-time stock trading

trading.snagra.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 212 posts

Re: Show HN: Watch 3 AIs compete in real-time stock trading

#181

Post by WalterBright »

chronic73940581 wrote: post #178
WalterBright wrote: post #113

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why it's worth paying attention in math class.

> Why it’s worth paying attention in math class. Math class does not teach practical knowledge such as personal finance or health. Citadel returns since 1990 is 38% annual returns before fees to outside investors. They have a 5:50 fee structure. There are hundreds of more firms, staying out of the public eye. https://www.barrons.com/articles/multistrategy-hedge-funds-p... Minimum investment $5M. Sorry but the middle…

You don't need to know anything about finance or health to know how percentages and compounding work.

Besides, I knew nothing about construction when I discovered that the contractor I hired to pour a patio was overcharging me by 30%. All it took was a bit of geometry I learned in grade school.

Pay no attention to math in school and you'll be prey to every scammer who did, and you'll never realize it.

Re: Show HN: Watch 3 AIs compete in real-time stock trading

#182

Post by WalterBright »

chronic73940581 wrote: post #177
WalterBright wrote: post #112

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Past performance is no predictor of future returns.

> Past performance is no predictor of future returns False. Why do people invest in real estate and S&P500 passive index funds? Because historically they go up.

That's of no predictive value for a day, a month, or even years.

Re: Show HN: Watch 3 AIs compete in real-time stock trading

#183

Post by WalterBright »

justinsaccount wrote: post #166
WalterBright wrote: post #109

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> fees, latency, slippage Whenever I trade, I somehow always get an adverse price. I figure it's the "no fee" brokerage chiseling a bit off for themselves. I compensate by being a buy and hold hold hold investor, so paying very little in aggregate for that. What I don't understand is how day traders avoid being eaten alive by this.

Do you know the difference between a limit order and a market order?

Yes, and it's irrelevant to my point.

Re: Show HN: Watch 3 AIs compete in real-time stock trading

#184

Post by internet101010 »

SnorkelTan wrote: post #158
nilamo wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"Free" transactions are free because they're not immediate. The broker buys the share themselves and sells it to you at markup... ie: there is still a transaction fee, you just have no idea what it is. Day traders use platforms that are optimized for speed and minimal fees, and that don't charge fees based on lot size.

What your suggestions is front running. This is illegal for stocks and most assets (not FX!). This will get a broker in hot water. The more nuanced practice that brokers use to monetize is payment for order flow. They sell your security order flow to algorithmic trading shops that buy and sell the securities you want to trade. You’re correct in that most retail orders never make it to a regulated exchange, but that m…

Right. They sell the order flow to the dark pool who then front runs the order. I haven't looked at this since like 2018 but last I checked the only major brokerage that didn't sell order flow was Interactive Brokers.

Re: Show HN: Watch 3 AIs compete in real-time stock trading

#186

Post by WalterBright »

WalterBright wrote: post #182
chronic73940581 wrote: post #177

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Past performance is no predictor of future returns False. Why do people invest in real estate and S&P500 passive index funds? Because historically they go up.

That's of no predictive value for a day, a month, or even years.

BTW, with the birth rates dropping well below replacement, a decline in the population is inevitable, and property values will drop.

Re: Show HN: Watch 3 AIs compete in real-time stock trading

#187

Post by WalterBright »

karmakaze wrote: post #143
WalterBright wrote: post #135

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On a more long term basis, the stock market reflects the business reality. But in the short term, it's chaos.

The former is a belief. It always reflects the imagined realities of those investing--we assume that business reality catches up with them, and it mostly does but not always within a predictable time frame.

> The former is a belief

It's based on the Law of Supply & Demand, which is always in play.

Re: Show HN: Watch 3 AIs compete in real-time stock trading

#188

Post by pakitan »

miohtama wrote: post #138
pakitan wrote: post #87

ChatGPT has one trade that is guaranteed to be bad. I'm not saying unprofitable, just bad. GBTC is the bitcoin ETF with biggest expense ratio - 1.5%. If you want to bet on bitcoin, a better choice would be BITB (0.20%) or BTC (0.15%). Also, the reasoning is partially a hallucination - "The holding period of 9 months aligns with the expected completion of Grayscale's pivotal Phase 3 Bitcoin ETF trial, a major catalyst…

Because of Bitcoin volatility, fees are very insignificant compared to daily price movement and irrelevant in day trading.

1% is 1%. Giving it away for no reason is plain stupid, even if the trade makes you 1000% return.

Re: Show HN: Watch 3 AIs compete in real-time stock trading

#189

Post by attentionmech »

JohnMakin wrote: post #155
attentionmech wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This made me chuckle. You made a very interesting point that if LLMs are copying hallucinations those hallucinations are not infact hallucinations.

This is a great insight and fascinating to me as well. What even is the solution though? It does seem like it follows logically though, since the earliest days of the internet huge swaths of wrong, fraudulent, or misleading info has plagued it and you’d usually have been wise to check your sources when trusting anything you read online. Then we had these models ingest the entire web, so we shouldn’t be surprised at h…

I guess reasoning and healthy self-doubt to be built in system. Already the reasoning thing seems like 2025's candidate for what large labs will be zeroing down on.
Post reply on HN