Live data from Hacker News

Show HN: Quantblocks - Backtest your trading strategies

quantblocks.com

61–70 of 87 posts

Re: Show HN: Quantblocks - Backtest your trading strategies

#61

It is really too bad folks keep pushing technical trading platforms to the public. The promise of quick money to be made in a sea of billions of dollars might seem innocuous, but it's (a) bad for the market and (b) bad for society. It's bad for the market because collectively, the buying and selling of shares based on anything other than company fundamentals (earnings, cash flow, projected growth, etc) distorts the p…

It's interesting that you would quote Warren Buffett who is only one of the largest derivative traders on the PLANET.

Re: Show HN: Quantblocks - Backtest your trading strategies

#62
If you really want quant stuff, then use R, Octave||Matlab or even Excel. MA, RSI test are available on Internet and works with all browser. By the way - it does work well with my Chrome and you should move a message about supported browsers on the first page or before I fill registration form, not after.

Re: Show HN: Quantblocks - Backtest your trading strategies

#63

It is really too bad folks keep pushing technical trading platforms to the public. The promise of quick money to be made in a sea of billions of dollars might seem innocuous, but it's (a) bad for the market and (b) bad for society. It's bad for the market because collectively, the buying and selling of shares based on anything other than company fundamentals (earnings, cash flow, projected growth, etc) distorts the p…

>Management is pressured to take extraordinary actions just to mitigate the market situation (stock splits/reverse-splits, stock buy-backs, accounting tricks, etc), employees freak out and quit, long-term investors get nervous, potentially fruitful M&As fail to happen, etc.

Oh please, if anything accounting tricks are more likely to be prevalent in a fundamentally traded market. When your company is traded solely upon earnings, you don't think you'd have more motivation to toy with those earnings numbers?

>As for the societal cost, technical trading educates and perpetuates the myth that the stock market is a big gambling house, and not a means to become an owner of a company. To paraphrase Warren Buffett, every time you think about buying stock you should think of it the same way as if you were buying a mom-and-pop shop, like a pizza place. Is the price you're paying roughly equivalent to - or better than - how much you'd expect to make by pocketing the profits of the shop over the lifetime of the business?

What is this? Some kind of argument from the moral high ground? The people who treat the stock market as a gambling opportunity will quickly be liquidated, and I can't imagine why one should feel sorry for them.

Re: Show HN: Quantblocks - Backtest your trading strategies

#64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Liquidity is the reason you can click a button on E-Trade and get your trades almost instantly, for between zero and a few more pennies than what traders would pay, plus a $9.99 commission. This was absolutely not the case before computer trading and electronic markets. The "good old days" of human traders where when you'd pay fifty bucks plus one percent to a broker who would almost certainly front-run your trades,…

> Liquidity is the reason you can click a button on E-Trade and get your trades almost instantly I personally don't care that my trade happens in a second or a minute because I'm a long-term investor - someone who wants to become a company owner, as I explained above, and not yet another hacker who couldn't care less about the long-term health of the company I'm buying. My point is that if folks care about liquidity…

Look, I'm talking about $50 and 1/8 spreads in 70s and 80s dollars. A low income investor from that time period might only have 3 or 4 digits to sock away in the market per year, Wall Street taking a huge bite every time. Then there are index funds and ETFs which need to get their costs as low as possible to benefit lay investors.

If you think big commissions and spreads are inconsequential, you are factually incorrect. If you think trading doesn't narrow spreads or lower costs, you are also incorrect. Finally, if you think trading qua trading distorts prices, there's almost no data that supports this and huge bodies of economic literature to the contrary. This isn't a matter of opinion.

Re: Show HN: Quantblocks - Backtest your trading strategies

#65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Liquidity is the reason you can click a button on E-Trade and get your trades almost instantly, for between zero and a few more pennies than what traders would pay, plus a $9.99 commission. This was absolutely not the case before computer trading and electronic markets. The "good old days" of human traders where when you'd pay fifty bucks plus one percent to a broker who would almost certainly front-run your trades,…

> Liquidity is the reason you can click a button on E-Trade and get your trades almost instantly I personally don't care that my trade happens in a second or a minute because I'm a long-term investor - someone who wants to become a company owner, as I explained above, and not yet another hacker who couldn't care less about the long-term health of the company I'm buying. My point is that if folks care about liquidity…

>"I personally don't care that my trade happens in a second or a minute because I'm a long-term investor"

Long-term investor or not, you want liquidity to ensure you are getting in and getting out at the price you want. That's the big difference between investing in a liquid stock versus, say, your house.

The reason you can get in and out as a long-term investor is because of the liquidity provided by traders.

Re: Show HN: Quantblocks - Backtest your trading strategies

#66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Liquidity is the reason you can click a button on E-Trade and get your trades almost instantly, for between zero and a few more pennies than what traders would pay, plus a $9.99 commission. This was absolutely not the case before computer trading and electronic markets. The "good old days" of human traders where when you'd pay fifty bucks plus one percent to a broker who would almost certainly front-run your trades,…

> Liquidity is the reason you can click a button on E-Trade and get your trades almost instantly I personally don't care that my trade happens in a second or a minute because I'm a long-term investor - someone who wants to become a company owner, as I explained above, and not yet another hacker who couldn't care less about the long-term health of the company I'm buying. My point is that if folks care about liquidity…

Mark Cuban bemoans the good old days like any technical trader before they were beaten out by computers. He doesn't advocate trading on fundamentals. The battle cry against high frequency tradings seems to come primarily from individuals who were previously successful in specialist trading.

Here he talks about how he bought a stock, watched it climb then shorted it and celebrated its bankruptcy: http://blogmaverick.com/2008/09/08/talking-stocks-and-money/

But yes, speak to us from the moral high ground. Cuban simply rode what essentially amounted to a pump-n-dump. He wasn't doing the promotion, but he sure as hell wasn't in it for the long term growth of the underlying company.

Here's a fantastic quote from Mr. Cuban: "What about fundamentals? Fundamentals is a word invented by sellers to find buyers.

Price-earnings ratios, price-sales, the present value of future cash flows, pick one. Fundamentals are merely metrics created to help stockbrokers sell stocks, and to give buyers reassurance when buying stocks. Even how profits are calculated is manipulated to give confidence to buyers."

Re: Show HN: Quantblocks - Backtest your trading strategies

#67

So judging from the the screenshots... Buy Apple? Yea that would of totally worked. Now for any other stocks, probably not. Also you can see it's less than the simple buy and hold. Seriously I don't know why people even try trading in their free time. Now, that being said, I'll take a bet against anyone who thinks they can find a profitable trading strategy using this product :D

>"Seriously I don't know why people even try trading in their free time."

Because I can easily get returns in excess of the negative real rates my bank pays me?

Re: Show HN: Quantblocks - Backtest your trading strategies

#68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Liquidity is the reason you can click a button on E-Trade and get your trades almost instantly, for between zero and a few more pennies than what traders would pay, plus a $9.99 commission. This was absolutely not the case before computer trading and electronic markets. The "good old days" of human traders where when you'd pay fifty bucks plus one percent to a broker who would almost certainly front-run your trades,…

> Liquidity is the reason you can click a button on E-Trade and get your trades almost instantly I personally don't care that my trade happens in a second or a minute because I'm a long-term investor - someone who wants to become a company owner, as I explained above, and not yet another hacker who couldn't care less about the long-term health of the company I'm buying. My point is that if folks care about liquidity…

> I personally don't care that my trade happens in a second or a minute because I'm a long-term investor

The difference between a second and a minute could cost even the small investor many $thousands in the long term. I prefer milliseconds. If you're a buyer at $30 and a second is allowed, you're likely paying $30.30 or more due to front-running. Immediately after you buy it will be $30 again, so you lost 1+% in the delay.

Post reply on HN