TA is just a meme right?

Please keep believing this, I've made so much money buying breakouts and I feel if everyone did the same it wouldn't work as we'll.

Honest question: what about the time axis? I can easily see how this is all true for fast trades. And yes: these people can react much earlier to the market than you ever will. Yes, they all have their own dedicated lines (internet, top kek), etc.
But what about mid-/longterm swing-trades?

Shhhh, don't tell them user

TA just teaches pattern recognition, it is up to you to decide where and when it applies and if there are external factors at play. It is a measure of fear or the absence thereof so it really is pseudoscience, but useful nonetheless. You can probably do better just day-trading and developing gut instincts though.

Absolutely just a meme there's no chance people who make the effort to learn TA might be richer than those who just randomly take punts whenever and wherever.

This, + it gives you a better understanding of what is currently happening on the market, and where you might want to buy or sell.

>Long term value investors looking at fundamentals and the big picture always win in the end.
LMAO

>nokia was one of the best phone company, they did everything right but in the end they still lost.

Fuck graphs. My $15,000 loan cleared 3 days ago and I went all-in to buy ETH when it was at $415. Going to sell at $460, pay it back, and walk away with a free $1500. Confirmed that I'm eligible for up to $100,000 now too. Wish I had done this sooner.

Type "latest nokia phone" in google images and say again that they did everything right.

Boys, it's really not this hard. In fact trading is absolutely trivial: just follow a few rules and that’s it, you’ll beat the market. Stock falls below its 200-day moving average? Sell. RSI is too low? Buy. A triangle is forming? If it breaks out of it on the upper side, buy, down side, sell!

Sorry!

I just bought a new nokia dumbphone. That thing supposedly imitating that old classic brick (3310). ..am I going to make it, Veeky Forums?

I'd like to understand this view point. So, this person has made no effort to learn how to analyze charts, but has a strong opinion against doing so. Would anyone like to see examples of how I've used TA to make money?

No, the basic argument is that TA isn't the real mojo, but often sold as that (because even morons "understand" TA). It's rather a form of communication that never actually tells you what's really going on. And in retrospective it always works (with this or that indicator). In practice, however, not so much.

Eh, depends on what you're trying to achieve. Reversal patterns in combination with support and resistance will tell you a lot about the upcoming moves in the nearest future. But it's impossible to tell very near future and very far future from it. That's why if anything people are using breakouts, they're pretty much faultless unless you get caught in a fake breakout.

>So, this person has made no effort to learn how to analyze charts, but has a strong opinion against doing so.
No. Of course anyone trading had a look at TA. It is intriguing afterall. See article posted by that other user:
>Confession: when I first started trading, I read everything about Technical Analysis I could put my hands onto. I went ahead and bought all those funny fancies book that they tell you to buy and that you can find on Amazon when you type “Technical Analysis.” Most of them had 4.5 and more stars, wow!
>I studied graphing, charting, pivot points, candlesticks, you name it, I save it. Thankfully, I never actually did trade using them. I would have been humiliated if I had actually followed through that bullshit, I mean, I consider myself smarter than that. Still, I wasted a ton of very precious time actually learning about this crap.
>I think it was around the middle of the fourth book when I realized, “Wow, this is some pure bullshit.”
some notice it sooner, some later... and a few outliers fall right into the denial/cognitive dissonance trap, and some know very well that they're selling snakeoil. As long as it makes them money...

>they're pretty much faultless
>unless you get caught in a fake breakout.

That's why you need to learn how to recognize those, and it's not really that hard, most people are using divergences to see if there's something fishy going on, abnormal price movement, or something that just fundamentally doesn't make sense.

Technical analysis is computationally impossible, and one day I really believe there will be a Nobel-winning proof of this. Accept that you're just a tiny part of the equilibrium, a peon, and you'll be a happier person for it.

"TA" is neutral. It's just an approach to seeing repeatable patterns. If you trade on it, that's on you. Saying "TA doesn't work" is retarded because people have different uses for "TA" which isn't even a monolithic field.

There is no such thing as future telling. Google "apophenia" if you are interested in the psychology behind ta.

Look even gamblers can create a pattern to "predict the next win" and out of luck be right.

With ta it's literally 50% of being right or wrong

Thanks for the responses. I consistently make money by charting. I think people confuse adding tons of indicators to a chart as being "TA", and this is where the negativity comes from.

lol 19 year olds on Veeky Forums telling professional traders that technical analysis doesn't work

TA only works when the market is small and all the participants are also using it. In this way it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.

Although I don’t see how you could really do any kind of fundamental analysis on a currency since it does not produce anything or have financials.

This guy gets it.

The reason it works in regular stocks is because traders actually know
how to do TA and so it becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.
Meanwhile crypto is moved by FOMO, FUD and pump and dumps
organized through social media.

I feel like this thread may need to see this. The part in yellow happened after the chat was created.

TA is a big meme in crypto
in actual stock it can work since stocks aren't nearly as volatile

lol ive earned 50k in last 2 months from ta

Survivor bias, faggot.

I actually tried to help biz with it a while ago, but then I realized that these are the people who buy when I sell. I'm not even sure why I got in this "discussion", but I'm out. Uh...everyone's right....TA doesn't work...Please buy my CFI and RCN in a few days. Thanks for buying my GUP at 2541 today. I'll sell it to you again after the support bounce.

I made 110k without ta by only following the news and comparing the market cap

>I didn't try it therefore it's bullshit

The main (not the only) problem with technical analysis, chart reading and similar shit is the way it is applied by traders doing ta. Its purely subjective, there's no rigorous treatment of the subject, no understanding why something could or should behave the way you are trying to model it. Its literally just slap on some oscillators, draw some lines, start trading. No backtests, no nothing. There are real, exploitable inefficiencies in the market, TA is just one of the worst tools to do it with.

I did a x6 on my investment, did I use TA? no, I keep telling them TA is bullshit but they never listen. What can I say?

There are papers that show that TA has the ability to beat markets. In fact there are a lot of papers about it, even very rigorous ones that test for certain claims that were made previously that higher rate of returns based on rules of trade (as contrasted with hodling) were because of increased risk, which is to say it is a lottery that rewards certain investors randomly over others.

But I'd also suggest that most TA is bullshit because it's just meme lines and patterns with little actual conceptual analysis or theory for why they should work at all. People just see a cheat sheet or watch some videos that say "head and shoulders! price going this way!" and internalize it.

buying low and selling high beats markets

Just as a sample, classic journal article from the 80s
sci-hub.bz/10.2307/2328350

A return and review of its claims in 2016

sci-hub.bz/10.1016/j.jinteco.2016.03.012

Another paper by Mark P. Taylor, Dean of Washington Uni business school and highly cited in Economics and Finance.

econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/22464/1/dp-352.pdf

Of course, that is almost tautological since that is the definition of a profit on the market. But plenty of random walk theorists would claim you literally can't forecast the market at all. So entering anywhere has no guarantee, not even a known probability that you will go up or down.

all that means is that some people are luckier than others

>survivor bias
>survivor
If it works then it fucking works are you stupid?

Sure, I guess, but the point is that there is evidence you can make systematic, rational forecasts about market behavior, and that over decades there has been data that supports this thesis.

stockchartguru.com lets you practice TA if you believe in that sort of voodoo but the charts use the S and P 500 so I don't know if the results will translate to crypto, would they?

There are many layers to it.

Firstly it can be a self fulfilling prophecy as SOME people believe in it so it is bound to have some success, e.g. if TA predicts it is a good time to buy then all the TA fags will buy and pump the price.

Secondly there is some real psychology behind why some of the patterns form and knowing this you can work out if the price movement is organic and/or sustainable.

Thirdly there are some basic forms of TA that everyone uses but they don't consider it TA, e.g. people look at the long term gain of bitcoin and think it will keep rising in general, that is a type of TA.

tl;dr no ofcourse it is not a meme, it is literally just about learning more information than the average person and acting upon that information. It will never be perfect but it's always best to use all the info you have.

It's also the case that success and failure can test the efficiency of a market. In the article I cited by Mark P. Taylor here, for instance:
goes over the fact that data on TA profitability in Forex shows profitability of certain basic moving average rules has declined over time. Given that the objection to TA is based on hypothesis about efficient markets, rates of profitability of rule based trading might be a measure of market efficiency at a point in time. It is also the case that futures markets and currency markets seem more profitable with TA than stocks.

But on the topic of self-fulfilling prophecy, it is the case that most professional Forex traders self-report to use TA, though they also use fundamentals and the importance they place on TA varies by time scale. Usually shorter time scales indicate higher usage of TA.

what data? citations pls

sci-hub.bz/10.1016/j.jinteco.2016.03.012

The name of the article is based on this older one:

sci-hub.bz/10.2307/2328350

But it also cites other articles about the excess profitability of TA and investigations into why that may be.