(untitled)

what do u guys think about algorithmic trading? is this sth that I should to start to learn more about it or all this just don't worth it?

hell no you will get eaten alive by professionals with better hardware who have decades of experience and teams of geniuses on their payroll. better to learn to do deep dives into specific industries and find the undervalued companies, learn about them, read their reports and find the hidden gold. but even better to learn actual valuable skills like carpentry and not be a parasite making money off financial markets.

>>62727 As a career (get a job in this field)? Maybe. As a hobby/something you do on your own? No! This lain >>62728 is right. I did work for a company that was partial involved in this. To be successful you need you need good hardware (do you have a multi processor server that only do one thing)and good Internet connection (are you able to process a few Gbits of data per second?). Companies pay a lot of money for that. To give you a picture on how fast you need to react to the market changes some companies when they receive a message from the exchange that some stock change price will start sending buy/sell order (on a hardware level) for that stock before they processed the whole message. If they decied they don't want that stock then they will mess up the checksum on the end of the message so it won't take effect.

>>62734 >If they decied they don't want that stock then they will mess up the checksum on the end of the message so it won't take effect. Wow, really? I'm not even mad. That's genius. OP, this thread is right. Fighting the auto-traders is a cliff if an uphill battle. If you're looking for money, just learn how and why to buy (NOT SELL) options. If you're looking for just the challenge, consider writing the code, but just simulating the portfolio on your own machine. You'll learn a bit, and see why the stock market is actually really hard.

>>62728 How many times have I heard this. My parents were the greatest cynics. >"If that was such a smart idea then someone would think of it already" Would be their go-to line to shut my hopes up. And every time I was proved correct. Either next year or next couple of years someone would come up with same invention or business idea and make boatload of cash. So sincerely, to you and every cynic out there that wants to stiffle any hope and desire in others peoples hearts, TO EVEN TRY. Please go fuarrrk yourself.

I've done so in an MMO (GW2) and it's easy. Good luck with real money though.

It's certainly interesting as a hobby. I've always wanted to delve more into quantitative trading strategies relatively accessible to retail traders. Volatility modeling to price options has particularly captured my interest, but I haven't had the time and/or energy to follow up on it much.

>Restate my assumptions: One, "Mathematics is the language of nature". Two, "Everything around us can be represented and understood through numbers". Three, "If you graph these numbers, patterns emerge". Therefore: there are patterns everywhere in nature.“What about the stock market? The universe of numbers that represents the global economy. Millions of hands at work, billions of minds. A vast network, screaming with life. An organism. A natural organism. My hypothesis: Within the stock market, there is a pattern as well... Right in front of me... Hiding behind the numbers. Always has been.”

I removed the flaming nonsense here and the poorly-done argument about ethics VS pragmatism. The discussion itself is fine and I would love to read everyone's point of view on the matter, but not when it becomes a soykafflinging contest rather than an actual discussion with support for one's view. All I'm asking for here is quality posts, lads. There are other places where you can scream at each other until you climax.

>>62909 >Restate my assumptions: One, "Mathematics is the language of nature" It's not. Mathematics is language of humans. It evolved from basic descriptions of changes in quantity and became a separate field of research and exploration revolving around logical consistency of wide scope of abstract operations and their properties. These operations might have analogs in real physical word but they don't have to.

>>64742 There are two meanings of "mathematics". One is the language, which was indeed constructed by humans. The other is the stuff this language is used to talk about, which naturally is mostly things that exist, except that often mathematicians are interested in abstract things, not mere stimuli, and they are interested in talking about them as unambiguously as possible. The vast majority of mathematical theories are not just language games, they are based on observation and description of abstract objects which manifest in the real world.

>>64748 Nope. That's physics. Which is application of mathematics to describe observed physical reality and pursuit of "laws" that "rule" physical processes.

>>64750 With a few notable exceptions, you cannot do math that is unrelated to physics and you cannot do physics that is unrelated to math. Even if that weren't the case, I would argue that physics and math are still two sides of the same coin. Physicists tend to be more interested in empirical observation while mathematicians tend to be more interested in deduction, but the object of study remains real things that can be sensed, either concretely or abstractly.