Here's my "algo": take a ruler, print out the chart of BTC price vs time for 2014, line up one end of the ruler at the high peak of the chart and the other end at today's price, and notice how well the intermediate points fall in between (except for the volatile month of October).
Prediction: Bitcoin will continue to decay. The 'resistance' seems to be early 2013 or 2012 prices. That's < 10% of today's price.
Advice: get out.
You are welcome.
Topic: Wouldn't it be nice... (the LazyWhale algorithm) - page 10. (Read 24717 times)
Looking forward to the green line 
I don't think it's junk, but it's probably less useful than some expected. And I doubt it will turn green soon, if it works correctly.
Quick update, more of a non-update actually...
Nothing changed, recommended position still USD. But, like I said over and over again in here, the method is slow and purely reactive, so I'd argue it's a good thing there's no 'buy' signal yet, considering we're not really going decisively up, for the time being.
Then again, maybe NotLambchop is right when he says:
Whether you agree or not is for you to decide. I just publish the signal (or lack thereof), like I said I would.
Nothing changed, recommended position still USD. But, like I said over and over again in here, the method is slow and purely reactive, so I'd argue it's a good thing there's no 'buy' signal yet, considering we're not really going decisively up, for the time being.
Then again, maybe NotLambchop is right when he says:
It's junk because it failed to yield any results. The utility of your algorithm appears to be exactly zero--neither positive nor negative. Without knowing the actual ruleset (which you chose not to share), I can only assume that it's junk 
Whether you agree or not is for you to decide. I just publish the signal (or lack thereof), like I said I would.
400 is a resistance level not a buy signal loll
Saw this and made me think of this thread...
Chosen on purpose. I only pretend to know what I'm doing. However, for most practical purposes (fucking hot female unicorns, technical trading), pretending to know and really knowing are virtually indistinguishable, or so I like to tell myself
EDIT: http://pbfcomics.com/253/
Indeed. Here is a PBF comic more indicative of your ability with mathematics:
http://pbfcomics.com/237/
A very nice avatar from the Perry Bible Fellowship. That's all I need to be convinced this is a great algorithm and the set of rules applied is solid. May you profit big time from this :)
Chosen on purpose. I only pretend to know what I'm doing. However, for most practical purposes (fucking hot female unicorns, technical trading), pretending to know and really knowing are virtually indistinguishable, or so I like to tell myself :P
EDIT: http://pbfcomics.com/253/
A very nice avatar from the Perry Bible Fellowship. That's all I need to be convinced this is a great algorithm and the set of rules applied is solid. May you profit big time from this 
It's a nice method, it actually menages to keep the huge advantages of trading but without the constant attention at the market required in trading.
It's a nice method in backtesting so far
There is one thing though that I don't get. You seem to be using a different strategy now in order to decide if it's time to buy or sell.
Look at the picture below, it seems that currently saying that if we go in the $330-$340 the current USD position must be kept.
But how's that, those targets would represent just a natural correction to the bounce after the last $275 flash crash...
The same kinda scenario happened in April-May when we bounced off the $340 flash crash, it seems that the bounce corrented itself and you actually bought in the LazyWhale algo.
It looks to me that you used the opposite strategy that you are using it now...
http://i60.tinypic.com/2l9jn0w.png
Look at the picture below, it seems that currently saying that if we go in the $330-$340 the current USD position must be kept.
But how's that, those targets would represent just a natural correction to the bounce after the last $275 flash crash...
The same kinda scenario happened in April-May when we bounced off the $340 flash crash, it seems that the bounce corrented itself and you actually bought in the LazyWhale algo.
It looks to me that you used the opposite strategy that you are using it now...
http://i60.tinypic.com/2l9jn0w.png
I can see the confusion, but no, I (or rather, the algorithm) doesn't use a different strategy now than for the April/May signal. There's more than one variable at play in the signal, so, while the two situations look similar superficially perhaps, they are not identical for purposes of a signal.
That said, as I said above, the method isn't static. For example, some parameters are updated as new historic data is available. However, it's a relatively minor difference, and not the reason for the difference you noted. Think of it as different context producing different output for the same input (EDIT: or, if you want to think of the context as input as well, simply a different input)
It's a nice method, it actually menages to keep the huge advantages of trading but without the constant attention at the market required in trading.
There is one thing though that I don't get. You seem to be using a different strategy now in order to decide if it's time to buy or sell.
Look at the picture below, it seems that currently saying that if we go in the $330-$340 the current USD position must be kept.
But how's that, those targets would represent just a natural correction to the bounce after the last $275 flash crash...
The same kinda scenario happened in April-May when we bounced off the $340 flash crash, it seems that the bounce corrented itself and you actually bought in the LazyWhale algo.
It looks to me that you used the opposite strategy that you are using it now...
There is one thing though that I don't get. You seem to be using a different strategy now in order to decide if it's time to buy or sell.
Look at the picture below, it seems that currently saying that if we go in the $330-$340 the current USD position must be kept.
But how's that, those targets would represent just a natural correction to the bounce after the last $275 flash crash...
The same kinda scenario happened in April-May when we bounced off the $340 flash crash, it seems that the bounce corrented itself and you actually bought in the LazyWhale algo.
It looks to me that you used the opposite strategy that you are using it now...
Man, since you posted this BTC has been as flat as I've ever seen it, well since the 16th anyway, with a slight trend downwards, does your algo predict a bottom at all, or does it just wait for the shift?
I think we all see the coming UP, just a question of when...
The bottom has been called many times, have we already seen it?
I think so but just my 0.02 bits...
I think we all see the coming UP, just a question of when...
The bottom has been called many times, have we already seen it?
I think so but just my 0.02 bits...
It's 90% momentum. It's about as unpredictive as it gets
(not completely true of couse, after all, even a momentum driven signal makes /some/ prediction. But it's not predictive in the sense that EW is, for example, saying that from observation 1, 2 together with rules A, B, we are likely to have seen the bottom or not)
Even if you guys are not whales (let's call you dolphins
), or even for people with even less - don't banks get suspicious when you receive/send a couple thousand back and forth?Sorry for my innocence, I really want to understand, and to be prepared to use the "lazy kitteh" algorithm once the next bubble comes
I'll answer as a dolphin - no, they don't get suspicious, they call me if it's a large amount (not a couple of thousand, anything below 10k is off the radar in any bank that I know) and I explain what that money is. They don't have a problem with me selling/buying commodities. If you are unsure, talk to them - with banks, being transparent is the way to go.
Man, since you posted this BTC has been as flat as I've ever seen it, well since the 16th anyway, with a slight trend downwards, does your algo predict a bottom at all, or does it just wait for the shift?
I think we all see the coming UP, just a question of when...
The bottom has been called many times, have we already seen it?
I think so but just my 0.02 bits...
I think we all see the coming UP, just a question of when...
The bottom has been called many times, have we already seen it?
I think so but just my 0.02 bits...
Sorry, nothing going on yet. Still the same price regions I mentioned earlier: rise to ~400 will most likely trigger a BUY, a fall to ~340 (without finding support there) will push the next buy signal further into the future. As long as price doesn't move, nothing changes.
And re: the buy/sell button... Only next to an equally big button saying "Method very much experimental still. Follow at your own risk."
EDIT: Added a 'Signal Updates' section to the beginning of the first post
And re: the buy/sell button... Only next to an equally big button saying "Method very much experimental still. Follow at your own risk."
EDIT: Added a 'Signal Updates' section to the beginning of the first post
Any action to be taken yet?
oda.krell, I think you should add a big button in the first post shouting 'SELL SELL' or 'BUY NOW OR SUFFER'
oda.krell, I think you should add a big button in the first post shouting 'SELL SELL' or 'BUY NOW OR SUFFER'
my "lazy-whale" signal flipped 2 days ago.
the signals from my system are: (edit, i added the price around the dates)
- sell: 2012-02-20 - $5.75
- buy: 2012-04-16 - $4.75
- sell: 2012-09-24 - $11.85
- buy: 2012-10-23 - $11.35
- sell: 2013-05-13 - $122
- buy: 2013-08-05 - $92
- sell: 2013-12-30 - $850
- buy: 2014-05-13 - $450
- sell: 2014-07-21 - $600
- buy: 2014-10-20 - $385
the signals from my system are: (edit, i added the price around the dates)
- sell: 2012-02-20 - $5.75
- buy: 2012-04-16 - $4.75
- sell: 2012-09-24 - $11.85
- buy: 2012-10-23 - $11.35
- sell: 2013-05-13 - $122
- buy: 2013-08-05 - $92
- sell: 2013-12-30 - $850
- buy: 2014-05-13 - $450
- sell: 2014-07-21 - $600
- buy: 2014-10-20 - $385
If it turns out I really have something useful on my hands (and I am absolutely not sure about that myself yet), I will just stop posting the signals if I note they fuck up my own trading. Right now, that's not a danger (no tradeable signals yet), so why not make it public and talk about it? Guess you're not an academic, otherwise you'd get that there can be "selfish" motivation besides financial means
No I'm not an academic and yes I do code. As you say, try it and see, and if it's really valuable there's no need to sell it: why would you sell something to 1000s of people that's a gold mine for you? Just use it and get rich. However, if you do get rich, don't forget your cyber-friends that got you there.... my Bitcoin address is in my profile. You're welcome. ;-)
But I did notice a bit of a red flag going through this thread: something about a version number, as if you are going to sell this program of yours. Surely You're Joking, Mr. Feynman?
Version numbers are standard practice even for personal coding projects simply because version control is important when adding to or debugging existing code. Your projections are odd and unwarranted.
We'll let the author comment? If he says he intends to sell this program, will you eat crow publicly?
For someone who seems to be program himself (you do, I guess?) you sure a paranoid about my version numbers. Parts of this algo are 'fixed', some parts are readjusted over time without my doing, and then there are some manual adjustments (like the conditional stops I put in in the last version) that require keeping track of those changes. That's why version numbers.
And no, this isn't a "pay for signals" deal, even though there's nothing wrong with that either (I've subscribed to more than one TA newsletter in the past, and gladly paid for the service.)
If it turns out I really have something useful on my hands (and I am absolutely not sure about that myself yet), I will just stop posting the signals if I note they fuck up my own trading. Right now, that's not a danger (no tradeable signals yet), so why not make it public and talk about it? Guess you're not an academic, otherwise you'd get that there can be "selfish" motivation besides financial means
I would say this is simple EMA10/21 crossover strategy on 3d graph. Can't be wrong if you do that way. Too bad I realised it too late...
Nah, not really, take a look at the actual targets. Pretty far off. 3d EMA21/10 ACO would have sold right into the post-consolidation breakdown, while my signal came during the late consolidation itself (example: EMA ACO sell in February 2014 at <700, my signal January 2014 ~800)
Actually, guy in here who said earlier the signals look a lot like 1d Ichimoku cloud was closer, but that's still not how it works under the hood.
I've said all I'm willing to say right now about the mechanics: a) it's momentum based (so in that sense, it does resemble your EMA ACO method), b) there's some notion of "trend confluence" captured, I believe. Now, I'm curious myself to find out how it performs on new data.
Jump to: