tzaranext said:
To Jack:
Your post was the only interesting one in the thread. All the members did were to insult us, which is not very constructive. They could have at least taken the time to test the software, since it is free. As you saw, we did not push the software, we just told people to look at it, thinking that this tool could be of interest to them. Our approach is not at all marketing oriented. We want people to judge the tool for what it is.
Not for nothing but you're gonna face a lot more than just the lite jabs you see here elsewhere online about your product. There's a learning opportunity here and if you can't see it or just want to downplay people's actions to "insults" then the opportunity is lost.
You're entering a market where 98% of the tools aimed at retail traders (indicators, etc..) are horseshit and most are peddled by fly-by-night shops. You would do very well to cater to the skeptical traders out there and be as transparent as possible.
tzaranext said:
If you look at the charts we posted, they were not cherry picked. We posted the lastest EURUSD, HKDJPY, and the effect of the Brexit on the EURGBP, not some cherry-picked obscure pairs. Again, we offered to post any chart. If you take the time to test the software, you will see that it works for all the instruments at any time and for any resolution. This not a claim, it is a fact, just try the software. If you do not have time to test it yourself, just ask people you know to test it. There is no risk trying, it is free. We are not asking for anything else except that people try the software.
"""You will see that it works for all the instruments"""
See, this is what sets off the red flags with others. Quantify "works". "Works" suggests it's profitable. Otherwise the only thing I see 'working' is that it makes pretty images.
How does one "test" it? By what measure but profit? By what measure but accuracy? Of what good is the indicator if it only looks like it "works" in hindsight? If it works on the hard right edge of the screen, then how? Show us. That's what people are interested in.
Generalizations don't go over well. People want something they can chew on.
tzaranext said:
It is not possible to automate this tool and talk about signals. This tool does not work like that. The price is driven by characteristic figures. You have to understand that no one has ever imaged that the price could be driven. Understand that other indicators or tools are driven by the price (this is why we call them “lagging indicators”), here it is the opposite. There are no signals. It is up to the user to predict what the price will do. Then, he can decide how he wants to do his trade, using stops or not, etc.
Of course, if people do not bother trying the software, there is no point discussing the tool.
Regarding the 'not possible to automate' thing: That's not quite true though. Your tool generates these bands via code.. you could, or your developers could, create some sort of threshold of line proximity to generate a signal... then measure the outcome... maybe measure the likelihood of price moving away from clusters of lines, thus proving alpha can be found around these prices. For example: Even if you only prove that price trading into a cluster (of a defined thickness) on your chart has a 52.5% likelihood of bouncing off without breaking through (as opposed to a purely random 50/50 chance,) then that gives us something to work with in terms of hard evidence that your tool is useful.
I'm not saying you have to do it for this specific request, but I don't think it's fair to say something based on numbers generated by a computer can't be automated or measured in a way that takes the human element out of the picture.
Telling us to just look at pictures alone creates the chance we'll be tricked by hindsight bias, confirmation bias, pattern recognition issues, and other very human faults that plague manual back-testing efforts. It would simply fool the same type of people who might be easily tricked thinking they can look at RSI or another arbitrary indicator and make predictions. . . or heck, maybe someone who'd otherwise not fall for traditional indicator soup, might still get caught up in the novelty of your tool and let human biases cloud their judgement.
So yeah. Work with us here. You want your tool to take off in popularity, and as practical people, we traders want something tangible or else we'll just call it bullshit in a nice package.
Take that as you will. I'm just telling you my perspective.