Live data from Hacker News

Building AI Trading Systems

dennybritz.com

31–40 of 109 posts

Re: Building AI Trading Systems

#31
post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You need more data to input besides just the price time-series. Successful human traders balance and synthesize a myriad of data sources to make decisions. I depend on an in-depth understanding of human psychology as one of my data sources. You can't turn something like that into data and input to a model. It is something learned through life experience and study.

+1 Any trading strategy based only on price is fool’s errand. The information that impacts price need to be included in the trading strategy. A lot of short term price movement is news driven, thus unstructured text processing of news, social media, relevant documents will be a key component of such trading strategies. I am not that familiar with forex market compared to equity market. But I expect forex to be impact…

Price based arbitrage was very successful for Edward Thorpe http://www.edwardothorp.com/books/a-man-for-all-markets/

Re: Building AI Trading Systems

#32
post #28
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1 for indexes. This is the route most successful traders seem to take - alternating between indexes and bonds. You won't see Warren Buffet buying stocks on Robinhood.

You don't see Warren Buffet buying indices either.. If you aren't willing to put in the work, sure just hold an all weather portfolio or whatever. But I don't think it's super hard to beat the market on a risk-adjusted basis, especially as a retail investor. Most of all, it takes a passion for it (trading is a hobby) and also a reasonable amount of time dedication. For example, there are a number of persistent factor…

Friend, if you are up on Hackernews making comments like this, I can guarantee with near 100% certainty that you are not capable of sustained outperformance in the markets. Whether you realise it now, later or never is no skin off my nose, but sooner would be cheaper.

Comments like this are why these "beat-the-market" threads are evergreen on HN. They do a disservice to the community.

Re: Building AI Trading Systems

#33
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't see Warren Buffet buying indices either.. If you aren't willing to put in the work, sure just hold an all weather portfolio or whatever. But I don't think it's super hard to beat the market on a risk-adjusted basis, especially as a retail investor. Most of all, it takes a passion for it (trading is a hobby) and also a reasonable amount of time dedication. For example, there are a number of persistent factor…

Friend, if you are up on Hackernews making comments like this, I can guarantee with near 100% certainty that you are not capable of sustained outperformance in the markets. Whether you realise it now, later or never is no skin off my nose, but sooner would be cheaper. Comments like this are why these "beat-the-market" threads are evergreen on HN. They do a disservice to the community.

I'm really glad these sort of comments were made around 2013 on this community and I started trading cryptocurrency. His comments make sense to me, and I can guarantee you with near 100% certainty there is another millionaire trader reading this thread.

Re: Building AI Trading Systems

#34
post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You don't see Warren Buffet buying indices either.. If you aren't willing to put in the work, sure just hold an all weather portfolio or whatever. But I don't think it's super hard to beat the market on a risk-adjusted basis, especially as a retail investor. Most of all, it takes a passion for it (trading is a hobby) and also a reasonable amount of time dedication. For example, there are a number of persistent factor…

Friend, if you are up on Hackernews making comments like this, I can guarantee with near 100% certainty that you are not capable of sustained outperformance in the markets. Whether you realise it now, later or never is no skin off my nose, but sooner would be cheaper. Comments like this are why these "beat-the-market" threads are evergreen on HN. They do a disservice to the community.

The low beta anomaly has persisted for since we have data. If you consider the S&P 500 the market, then yes, it's not difficult to beat it by investing in low beta stocks and leveraging up so your beta is 1. This is a classic and time-tested strategy that will probably always outperform, on a risk-adjusted basis.

Re: Building AI Trading Systems

#35
post #9

I tried doing some forecasting with various neural network models after assembling what I thought was a good amount of forex data. The neural net (I tried various architectures) couldn't do any better than chance. After playing around with it and trying to double-check everything, that was as far as I could get. This puts me ahead of most traders, since most of them lose money, then quit. This makes me wonder what ki…

There are lots of ways to produce an edge. Forex is slightly different because you are trading a currency (this actually makes things easier in some ways) but, a few years ago, a lot of the cutting edge was news releases.

So inflation comes out at X% and then you try to jump ahead of other people reacting to the news.

Speaking very generally, you are looking for data that has information about future returns. So this may include past values of the time series (this is kind of complex though because a stock price does trend, that company is investing capital to earn a return which compounds in the price so stationarity is...complex) but may include other time series/their past values i.e. price of other stocks, economic data, etc.

So this could be responding to changes in liquidity, it could be seeing some repeatable behaviour by investors and jumping ahead of it, etc.

Quant is not about adding to the efficiency of markets though. They aren't using these models to determine the value of something, they are more about looking at the value of other things to determine the value of a given asset. So these strategies end up being correlated to liquidity in a lot of instances (but not all). This is a generalisation but...it is a very odd thing to have occurring in society...would this exist if investors didn't have an irrational demand for microsecond liquidity? Probably not.

Also, determining whether something is a real signal is just part of statistics, isn't it? This has definitely been an area where there has been quite a lot of innovation as increases in computational power has made non-parametric stuff more feasible (I am not an expert on this, it is just my understanding).

Btw, I should add I used to work in finance and I have some experience with this kind of thing as I do quite a bit of "quant investing" but in gambling (it is far easier to just copy what people do in finance and apply it to gambling then come up with it yourself). And just based on my experience, it makes most sense to employ a mixed approach. So learn about the business valuation, and then build a five-factor model...watch what it does, and then filter its picks with your knowledge. A lot of quant strategies are vaguely ludicrous if you have an understanding of the fundamentals of investing, like you are trying to use a computer to replicate a human...and people wonder why it doesn't work? It is an overcomplicated shortcut (to give you a concrete example, the blowup of value and funds like AQR was very obvious...you just had to look at the utter garbage stocks they owned). So I think a combination of human and computer beats either separately (one fund that does is Marshall Wace).

Re: Building AI Trading Systems

#36
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most people seem to think indexing is a boring cop-out, but imo it’s the place of humility you get to after you’ve dashed yourself against the rocks of trying to outperform for a few years - or decades - and then realising the whole endeavour is insanity. It’s accepting that you’ll receive what the market gives you and not a dollar more, and that that’s the best you’re ever going to get.

+1 for indexes. This is the route most successful traders seem to take - alternating between indexes and bonds. You won't see Warren Buffet buying stocks on Robinhood.

Warren Buffett doesn't buy stocks on Robinhood because they couldn't handle his volume. I saw him quoted somewhere not long ago saying that if he was working with a "small portfolio", a few hundred thousand dollars or maybe it was even a few million, that he was quite certain he could return in excess of 100% annually.

But yes, picking stocks is probably not as effective for most people as buying an index fund.

Re: Building AI Trading Systems

#37
Just a reminder: nobody ever wrote about their super successful trading strategy. Its just never happened. If you have the wherewithal to research and build a trading system that works, then you're smart enough to know that the moment you reveal your edge to the world - it disappears. Even if you dont discuss the innards of your strategy, but you talk about your process or the system youre strategy is built on, you've revealed too much.

Re: Building AI Trading Systems

#39
post #28
post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

+1 for indexes. This is the route most successful traders seem to take - alternating between indexes and bonds. You won't see Warren Buffet buying stocks on Robinhood.

You don't see Warren Buffet buying indices either.. If you aren't willing to put in the work, sure just hold an all weather portfolio or whatever. But I don't think it's super hard to beat the market on a risk-adjusted basis, especially as a retail investor. Most of all, it takes a passion for it (trading is a hobby) and also a reasonable amount of time dedication. For example, there are a number of persistent factor…

Warren buys presidents.

Re: Building AI Trading Systems

#40
post #37

Just a reminder: nobody ever wrote about their super successful trading strategy. Its just never happened. If you have the wherewithal to research and build a trading system that works, then you're smart enough to know that the moment you reveal your edge to the world - it disappears. Even if you dont discuss the innards of your strategy, but you talk about your process or the system youre strategy is built on, you'v…

I agree except if your strategy is something everyone uses then it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy of winning.
Post reply on HN