正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

返回首页

100 billion dollars made without predicting a single price direction not a direction call, a macro bet, or a news trade in sight they asked a completely different question than every retail trader alive retail: "will this go up?" quant: "what state is the market in, and where does...

L1vsun's profile picture

Livsun

2,177 subscribers

13,335 次观看 • 1 个月前 •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

a russian mathematician solved trading in 1906 wall street found the paper 70 years later, built billion-dollar funds around it, never mentioned it to retail andrei markov proved markets aren't random - they're state machines trending, ranging, reversing - each state has a fixed historical probability of shifting to the next build a transition matrix from real data: trending -> stays trending: 68% trending -> flips to range: 21% trending -> reverses: 11% now you're not predicting direction. you're entering on 68% historical completion identify your state, size with kelly, take the trade when math says yes that's the edge. the whole edge renaissance has run this since 1988. 37 years of 66% annual returns paper is free, data is free, implementation is 200 lines of python Bookmark and use in your own strategy they kept you staring at candles while they ran probability tables
2:30

a russian mathematician solved trading in 1906 wall street found the paper 70 years later, built billion-dollar funds around it, never mentioned it to retail andrei markov proved markets aren't random - they're state machines trending, ranging, reversing - each state has a fixed historical probability of shifting to the next build a transition matrix from real data: trending -> stays trending: 68% trending -> flips to range: 21% trending -> reverses: 11% now you're not predicting direction. you're entering on 68% historical completion identify your state, size with kelly, take the trade when math says yes that's the edge. the whole edge renaissance has run this since 1988. 37 years of 66% annual returns paper is free, data is free, implementation is 200 lines of python Bookmark and use in your own strategy they kept you staring at candles while they ran probability tables

Livsun

376,556 次观看 • 2 个月前

MIT has been teaching this publicly for 50 years. retail traders still draw trendlines andrei markov published the framework in 1906. hedge funds found it in the 70s built billion-dollar operations around it, never told retail it existed markets aren't random - they're state machines trending, ranging, reversing. each state has a fixed historical probability of shifting to the next you build a transition matrix from real price data: trending -> stays trending: 68% trending -> flips to range: 21% trending -> reverses: 11% now you're not predicting direction. you're entering on 68% historical completion that's not a signal, that's conditional probability compounding every single trade math is free, data is free, implementation is ~200 lines of python what's not free: knowing this framework exists while everyone around you draws support levels and hopes renaissance has run this since 1988. paper was always public edge was never secret. just never pointed out
52:24

MIT has been teaching this publicly for 50 years. retail traders still draw trendlines andrei markov published the framework in 1906. hedge funds found it in the 70s built billion-dollar operations around it, never told retail it existed markets aren't random - they're state machines trending, ranging, reversing. each state has a fixed historical probability of shifting to the next you build a transition matrix from real price data: trending -> stays trending: 68% trending -> flips to range: 21% trending -> reverses: 11% now you're not predicting direction. you're entering on 68% historical completion that's not a signal, that's conditional probability compounding every single trade math is free, data is free, implementation is ~200 lines of python what's not free: knowing this framework exists while everyone around you draws support levels and hopes renaissance has run this since 1988. paper was always public edge was never secret. just never pointed out

Livsun

13,963 次观看 • 2 个月前

hedge funds have been running this math for 30 years. retail just discovered fibonacci retracements andrei markov was a russian linguist studying letter sequences in 1906 - had nothing to do with markets renaissance found his paper 70 years later, built medallion around it, told nobody markets don't move randomly - they move in states trending, ranging, reversing - each state has a fixed historical probability of shifting to the next you don't predict direction. you identify which state you're in, then let probability do the rest build a transition matrix from 10 years of price data: trending -> stays trending 68% of the time, flips to range 21%, reverses 11% ranging -> holds 54%, breaks up 28%, breaks down 18% now you're not guessing - you're entering on 68% historical completion size with kelly criterion based on that probability. take the trade when math says yes "where is price going?" -> random "what state am i in right now?" -> has an answer paper is free, data is free, python to build this: 200 lines 37 years, zero losing years - that's what medallion looks like when you ask the right question they kept you drawing fibonacci lines while they ran probability tables Bookmark this and run the matrix yourself
0:55

hedge funds have been running this math for 30 years. retail just discovered fibonacci retracements andrei markov was a russian linguist studying letter sequences in 1906 - had nothing to do with markets renaissance found his paper 70 years later, built medallion around it, told nobody markets don't move randomly - they move in states trending, ranging, reversing - each state has a fixed historical probability of shifting to the next you don't predict direction. you identify which state you're in, then let probability do the rest build a transition matrix from 10 years of price data: trending -> stays trending 68% of the time, flips to range 21%, reverses 11% ranging -> holds 54%, breaks up 28%, breaks down 18% now you're not guessing - you're entering on 68% historical completion size with kelly criterion based on that probability. take the trade when math says yes "where is price going?" -> random "what state am i in right now?" -> has an answer paper is free, data is free, python to build this: 200 lines 37 years, zero losing years - that's what medallion looks like when you ask the right question they kept you drawing fibonacci lines while they ran probability tables Bookmark this and run the matrix yourself

Livsun

30,241 次观看 • 2 个月前

renaissance technologies hasn't had a losing year since 1988 not because they're smarter or have better data they're asking a completely different question than everyone else while retail asks "will it go up?" quant desks ask something else entirely which state is the market in right now, and with what probability does it transition to the next tool for that: markov chains markets cycle through states - trending, ranging, volatile, reversing each transition has a historical probability you can calculate trending -> stays trending: 48% trending -> ranging: 34% trending -> reversing: 18% you don't pick direction. you calculate expected value across every possible transition enter only when the math is positive that's it. that's the entire edge the framework is 119 years old - andrei markov published it in 1906 it's in every statistics textbook on earth Bookmark it or lose last chance to be quant nobody in your trading group ever mentioned it
2:02

renaissance technologies hasn't had a losing year since 1988 not because they're smarter or have better data they're asking a completely different question than everyone else while retail asks "will it go up?" quant desks ask something else entirely which state is the market in right now, and with what probability does it transition to the next tool for that: markov chains markets cycle through states - trending, ranging, volatile, reversing each transition has a historical probability you can calculate trending -> stays trending: 48% trending -> ranging: 34% trending -> reversing: 18% you don't pick direction. you calculate expected value across every possible transition enter only when the math is positive that's it. that's the entire edge the framework is 119 years old - andrei markov published it in 1906 it's in every statistics textbook on earth Bookmark it or lose last chance to be quant nobody in your trading group ever mentioned it

Livsun

51,500 次观看 • 2 个月前

a citadel quant told me something that broke my entire trading framework "we don't predict markets. we model the state machine" he explained markov chains in 90 seconds the market is never random - it always exists in one of three states trending up, trending down, ranging - each has a fixed probability of shifting to another build the transition matrix from real price data: > trending up -> 68% stays trending, 21% flips to range, 11% reverses > ranging -> 54% stays range, 28% breaks up, 18% breaks down > trending down -> 61% stays falling, 24% flips to range, 15% reverses now you're not guessing, you're playing probability identify current state, enter with the 68% edge, size with kelly criterion based on that probability the formula is public - markov published it in 1906 hedge funds use it, the math costs nothing what costs you is asking the wrong question "where is price going?" is random "what state am I in right now?" has an answer transition matrix built from 10 years of data is your edge Bookmark it not a signal, not an indicator - just conditional probability that compounds every single trade
0:40

a citadel quant told me something that broke my entire trading framework "we don't predict markets. we model the state machine" he explained markov chains in 90 seconds the market is never random - it always exists in one of three states trending up, trending down, ranging - each has a fixed probability of shifting to another build the transition matrix from real price data: > trending up -> 68% stays trending, 21% flips to range, 11% reverses > ranging -> 54% stays range, 28% breaks up, 18% breaks down > trending down -> 61% stays falling, 24% flips to range, 15% reverses now you're not guessing, you're playing probability identify current state, enter with the 68% edge, size with kelly criterion based on that probability the formula is public - markov published it in 1906 hedge funds use it, the math costs nothing what costs you is asking the wrong question "where is price going?" is random "what state am I in right now?" has an answer transition matrix built from 10 years of data is your edge Bookmark it not a signal, not an indicator - just conditional probability that compounds every single trade

Livsun

268,026 次观看 • 2 个月前

quants don't predict markets. they stopped trying years ago retail is still asking "where is price going?" - quants switched to a different question entirely "given the current state, what's the probability distribution of outcomes" that's not a semantics game. it changes the math entirely stochastic processes model how a system evolves probabilistically - not picking a direction, mapping where each path leads and how likely it is ornstein-uhlenbeck does this for mean reversion: drift rate back to equilibrium, variance around that path same price data everybody has. different equation math is a century old, free in every applied probability textbook Bookmark and learn this before it gone you've been drawing trend lines while they ran probability distributions on same numbers it was never about data it was the question you were taught to ask
1:27

quants don't predict markets. they stopped trying years ago retail is still asking "where is price going?" - quants switched to a different question entirely "given the current state, what's the probability distribution of outcomes" that's not a semantics game. it changes the math entirely stochastic processes model how a system evolves probabilistically - not picking a direction, mapping where each path leads and how likely it is ornstein-uhlenbeck does this for mean reversion: drift rate back to equilibrium, variance around that path same price data everybody has. different equation math is a century old, free in every applied probability textbook Bookmark and learn this before it gone you've been drawing trend lines while they ran probability distributions on same numbers it was never about data it was the question you were taught to ask

Livsun

13,315 次观看 • 1 个月前

a quant at a prop firm showed me a 5x5 grid on a napkin said: > this is our entire edge. we don't predict price. we predict which box the market is in and where that box historically leads i didn't understand it for weeks. then it clicked never looked at a chart the same way since grid is called a Markov Chain transition matrix. the math is from 1906, it's in every probability textbook on earth and hedge funds use it because it asks a completely different question than retail traders ever ask retail: will this go up or down quant: what state is this market in, and where does this state typically go every market lives in one of maybe 5-6 states at any given moment tight range, volatility compression, trending with momentum, post-spike reversal, pre-breakout coil not random labels - clusters you identify from actual data using volatility, volume, and momentum readings stacked together once you have the states, you build the matrix: P(state 2 -> state 4) = 73% P(state 4 -> state 1) = 61% P(state 1 -> state 3) = 68% each cell is a historical probability. now when the market is in state 2, you're not guessing you're betting on 73% historical completion. you size it with Kelly. you take the trade when the math says to, not when it feels right i built this on BTC using 2 years of 4-hour data. identified 5 states one i labeled "volatility compression below 20-day mean for 6+ consecutive candles" transitioned to a directional move above 1.8 ATR in 71% of cases average reward/risk on those trades: 5.4 that's not prediction. that's reading a probability table the market keeps filling in for you every single day the part that should bother you: the data to build this is free. the framework is in any quant textbook python to implement it is maybe 200 lines what Renaissance Technologies has that you don't isn't secret data or proprietary signals it's this framework applied to higher-resolution data with more sophisticated state definitions you're not missing information you're asking the wrong question every single time you open a chart
0:26

a quant at a prop firm showed me a 5x5 grid on a napkin said: > this is our entire edge. we don't predict price. we predict which box the market is in and where that box historically leads i didn't understand it for weeks. then it clicked never looked at a chart the same way since grid is called a Markov Chain transition matrix. the math is from 1906, it's in every probability textbook on earth and hedge funds use it because it asks a completely different question than retail traders ever ask retail: will this go up or down quant: what state is this market in, and where does this state typically go every market lives in one of maybe 5-6 states at any given moment tight range, volatility compression, trending with momentum, post-spike reversal, pre-breakout coil not random labels - clusters you identify from actual data using volatility, volume, and momentum readings stacked together once you have the states, you build the matrix: P(state 2 -> state 4) = 73% P(state 4 -> state 1) = 61% P(state 1 -> state 3) = 68% each cell is a historical probability. now when the market is in state 2, you're not guessing you're betting on 73% historical completion. you size it with Kelly. you take the trade when the math says to, not when it feels right i built this on BTC using 2 years of 4-hour data. identified 5 states one i labeled "volatility compression below 20-day mean for 6+ consecutive candles" transitioned to a directional move above 1.8 ATR in 71% of cases average reward/risk on those trades: 5.4 that's not prediction. that's reading a probability table the market keeps filling in for you every single day the part that should bother you: the data to build this is free. the framework is in any quant textbook python to implement it is maybe 200 lines what Renaissance Technologies has that you don't isn't secret data or proprietary signals it's this framework applied to higher-resolution data with more sophisticated state definitions you're not missing information you're asking the wrong question every single time you open a chart

Livsun

188,258 次观看 • 2 个月前

a prop trader from chicago made $847k in 180 days just by asking one question every single morning that 99% of traders never ask he didn't build a new model didn't touch machine learning just opened excel and spent 8 minutes on one calculationthe question: what state is the market in right now, and where does it statistically go next most traders ask "will this go up or down". that's 50/50 he started asking "is the market trending, ranging, or reversing" and then looked at the historical probability of each transitionturns out markets don't flip randomly they cycle through states. each state has a fixed probability of shifting to the next onehe built a 5x5 grid on a napkin: trending up -> 68% stays trending, 21% flips to range, 11% reverses ranging -> 54% stays range, 28% breaks up, 18% breaks down trending down -> 61% stays falling, 24% to range, 15% reverses he didn't predict direction he just calculated which state had the highest expected value and sized the position with kelly criterion that's the entire edgethe framework is from 1906 - andrei markov. free in every probability textbook on earthrenaissance technologies has been running this since 1988 37 years of 66% annual returnsdata costs nothing - yahoo finance, federal reserve, any broker implementation is 200 lines of python what separates him from the retail traders losing money isn't intelligence or capital or luck it's that he was willing to think differently about the same data everyone else sees every single day they kept you staring at candles while the people who got it were reading transition matrices bookmark this - you're either asking the wrong question or you're not asking it at all
0:58

a prop trader from chicago made $847k in 180 days just by asking one question every single morning that 99% of traders never ask he didn't build a new model didn't touch machine learning just opened excel and spent 8 minutes on one calculationthe question: what state is the market in right now, and where does it statistically go next most traders ask "will this go up or down". that's 50/50 he started asking "is the market trending, ranging, or reversing" and then looked at the historical probability of each transitionturns out markets don't flip randomly they cycle through states. each state has a fixed probability of shifting to the next onehe built a 5x5 grid on a napkin: trending up -> 68% stays trending, 21% flips to range, 11% reverses ranging -> 54% stays range, 28% breaks up, 18% breaks down trending down -> 61% stays falling, 24% to range, 15% reverses he didn't predict direction he just calculated which state had the highest expected value and sized the position with kelly criterion that's the entire edgethe framework is from 1906 - andrei markov. free in every probability textbook on earthrenaissance technologies has been running this since 1988 37 years of 66% annual returnsdata costs nothing - yahoo finance, federal reserve, any broker implementation is 200 lines of python what separates him from the retail traders losing money isn't intelligence or capital or luck it's that he was willing to think differently about the same data everyone else sees every single day they kept you staring at candles while the people who got it were reading transition matrices bookmark this - you're either asking the wrong question or you're not asking it at all

Livsun

41,634 次观看 • 1 个月前

73% win rate, $340k in 11 months no indicators, just a 6x6 probability matrix it's called a markov chain - math from 1906 wall street quants used it for decades, retail never heard of it markets cycle between states: trending, ranging, volatile, choppy probability of which state comes next is measurable, stable across decades if market is in "ranging" today: 62% -> trending, 23% -> stays ranging, 15% -> volatile you stop predicting price direction you start predicting market structure one is a coin flip dressed in candlesticks the other is a math problem with an answer Bookmark and add this indicator in your tools RSI: 1978. markov chains: 1906 72 years older and it's eating technical analysis alive
0:58

73% win rate, $340k in 11 months no indicators, just a 6x6 probability matrix it's called a markov chain - math from 1906 wall street quants used it for decades, retail never heard of it markets cycle between states: trending, ranging, volatile, choppy probability of which state comes next is measurable, stable across decades if market is in "ranging" today: 62% -> trending, 23% -> stays ranging, 15% -> volatile you stop predicting price direction you start predicting market structure one is a coin flip dressed in candlesticks the other is a math problem with an answer Bookmark and add this indicator in your tools RSI: 1978. markov chains: 1906 72 years older and it's eating technical analysis alive

Livsun

44,871 次观看 • 2 个月前

options market makers calculate a number every day that tells them whether to pin price or let it run retail has no idea it exists it's called net dealer gamma exposure. when they're long gamma, they hedge by selling rallies and buying dips - price gets pinned when short gamma, they hedge the opposite way - moves accelerate, break out, trend this isn't hidden data or a proprietary signal it's calculable from public cboe options chains, free, updated every morning crossover - where gamma flips zero - is your volatility regime indicator above it: suppression, below it: acceleration python + cboe feed + 200 lines of code to build it framework in academic papers since 2017, sitting in textbooks the whole time retail has been reading candles while market makers were reading their own hedging book Bookmark and reasearch it yourself same market. completely different game
0:35

options market makers calculate a number every day that tells them whether to pin price or let it run retail has no idea it exists it's called net dealer gamma exposure. when they're long gamma, they hedge by selling rallies and buying dips - price gets pinned when short gamma, they hedge the opposite way - moves accelerate, break out, trend this isn't hidden data or a proprietary signal it's calculable from public cboe options chains, free, updated every morning crossover - where gamma flips zero - is your volatility regime indicator above it: suppression, below it: acceleration python + cboe feed + 200 lines of code to build it framework in academic papers since 2017, sitting in textbooks the whole time retail has been reading candles while market makers were reading their own hedging book Bookmark and reasearch it yourself same market. completely different game

Livsun

59,146 次观看 • 2 个月前

a quant who started as a technical trader explained what changed everything for him he stopped trying to predict where price goes he started measuring the probability of each market state and betting only when the math was asymmetric that shift took him from drawing trendlines to writing models at 22 the realization was simple but brutal: technical analysis gives you a narrative quantitative analysis gives you a number one feels right the other is testable, repeatable, and either works or doesn't across 10,000 trades the setup on his desk tells the whole story no TradingView. no candlestick charts. just code, data, and a terminal he didn't go to MIT he didn't intern at Goldman he learned Python, statistics, and probability theory on his own and built something that actually worked > the math: free in any stats textbook > the data: free on Yahoo Finance, FRED, exchange APIs > the code: Python, 200 lines, running on a laptop > the barrier: not intelligence. just knowing this path exists most people spend years staring at indicators from the 1970s wondering why they can't find consistency the answer was never a better indicator it was a completely different framework one that treats trading as a math problem, not a prediction game full breakdown in the video below
4:36

a quant who started as a technical trader explained what changed everything for him he stopped trying to predict where price goes he started measuring the probability of each market state and betting only when the math was asymmetric that shift took him from drawing trendlines to writing models at 22 the realization was simple but brutal: technical analysis gives you a narrative quantitative analysis gives you a number one feels right the other is testable, repeatable, and either works or doesn't across 10,000 trades the setup on his desk tells the whole story no TradingView. no candlestick charts. just code, data, and a terminal he didn't go to MIT he didn't intern at Goldman he learned Python, statistics, and probability theory on his own and built something that actually worked > the math: free in any stats textbook > the data: free on Yahoo Finance, FRED, exchange APIs > the code: Python, 200 lines, running on a laptop > the barrier: not intelligence. just knowing this path exists most people spend years staring at indicators from the 1970s wondering why they can't find consistency the answer was never a better indicator it was a completely different framework one that treats trading as a math problem, not a prediction game full breakdown in the video below

delost

112,271 次观看 • 1 个月前

Granger and Engle won the nobel prize in economics in 2003 for a formula hedge funds were already running for a decade retail investors still don't know it exists it's called cointegration - and it answers a completely different question than what you're asking you ask "will this stock go up?" pairs desks ask "which two assets have drifted apart and must revert?" if two assets are cointegrated, their spread has a measurable half-life of mean reversion SPY and QQQ: spread half-life of roughly 4 trading days, measured over 12 years of data when that spread hits 2.1 standard deviations, reversion follows within the half-life 76% of the time that's not a hunch. it's conditional probability you can size with kelly and repeat 200 times a year paper is on jstor, data is free, implementation takes a weekend pairs desks have been doing this since the late 80s bookmark this you've been asking the wrong question your whole trading life Reply below what you think
0:47

Granger and Engle won the nobel prize in economics in 2003 for a formula hedge funds were already running for a decade retail investors still don't know it exists it's called cointegration - and it answers a completely different question than what you're asking you ask "will this stock go up?" pairs desks ask "which two assets have drifted apart and must revert?" if two assets are cointegrated, their spread has a measurable half-life of mean reversion SPY and QQQ: spread half-life of roughly 4 trading days, measured over 12 years of data when that spread hits 2.1 standard deviations, reversion follows within the half-life 76% of the time that's not a hunch. it's conditional probability you can size with kelly and repeat 200 times a year paper is on jstor, data is free, implementation takes a weekend pairs desks have been doing this since the late 80s bookmark this you've been asking the wrong question your whole trading life Reply below what you think

Livsun

11,624 次观看 • 1 个月前

a trader in Shanghai has been running 71% annual returns since 2019 without ever touching a Western exchange nobody outside Weibo knows his name he doesn't manage outside capital, never went on a podcast, never posted a P&L screenshot pause at 0:34 - look at the monitor behind him on the right that's not a price chart. that's a 6x6 state transition matrix built from 11 years of Chinese A-share data he found something in 2018 that every quant textbook describes but almost nobody applies CSI 300 price-state transitions are predictable at a level that makes S&P pattern noise look clean by comparison he mapped 6 market states: trending-up, trending-down, range-tight, range-wide, vol-compression, spike-decay then calculated every historical transition probability across 11 years of 30-minute bars: trending-up -> stays trending: 63% vol-compression -> spike-decay: 78% range-tight -> breaks directional: 71% now he's not predicting direction. he's entering when math says 71% historical completion, sizing with Kelly, closing in under 30 minutes 28 min avg hold, worst month -3.1%, best year +94% framework is markov's from 1906. A-share data is free on WIND Terminal implementation: roughly 180 lines of python insight was never about math - it was about where to aim it Chinese A-shares have thinner institutional algo penetration than US equities. patterns don't get arbed out as fast statistical edges persist for months longer than they would on SPY retail in Shanghai trades on gut. US quants are chasing S&P microstructure nobody was running transition matrices on Chinese state sequences at any real scale he aimed a 119-year-old framework at a market nobody was watching and held the edge for 6 years bookmark this before it becomes obvious math is free, data costs nothing what took time was realizing the most exploitable market wasn't the most-watched one they kept you watching SPY candles while the cleanest probability table on earth sat untouched in Shanghai
1:30

a trader in Shanghai has been running 71% annual returns since 2019 without ever touching a Western exchange nobody outside Weibo knows his name he doesn't manage outside capital, never went on a podcast, never posted a P&L screenshot pause at 0:34 - look at the monitor behind him on the right that's not a price chart. that's a 6x6 state transition matrix built from 11 years of Chinese A-share data he found something in 2018 that every quant textbook describes but almost nobody applies CSI 300 price-state transitions are predictable at a level that makes S&P pattern noise look clean by comparison he mapped 6 market states: trending-up, trending-down, range-tight, range-wide, vol-compression, spike-decay then calculated every historical transition probability across 11 years of 30-minute bars: trending-up -> stays trending: 63% vol-compression -> spike-decay: 78% range-tight -> breaks directional: 71% now he's not predicting direction. he's entering when math says 71% historical completion, sizing with Kelly, closing in under 30 minutes 28 min avg hold, worst month -3.1%, best year +94% framework is markov's from 1906. A-share data is free on WIND Terminal implementation: roughly 180 lines of python insight was never about math - it was about where to aim it Chinese A-shares have thinner institutional algo penetration than US equities. patterns don't get arbed out as fast statistical edges persist for months longer than they would on SPY retail in Shanghai trades on gut. US quants are chasing S&P microstructure nobody was running transition matrices on Chinese state sequences at any real scale he aimed a 119-year-old framework at a market nobody was watching and held the edge for 6 years bookmark this before it becomes obvious math is free, data costs nothing what took time was realizing the most exploitable market wasn't the most-watched one they kept you watching SPY candles while the cleanest probability table on earth sat untouched in Shanghai

Livsun

25,048 次观看 • 1 个月前

jane street made $4 billion last year they employ almost no traders just physicists building AI while retail draws support lines, their models are running: > 2 million signals per second from order flow > news sentiment scored in 0.3ms before your feed updates > regime detection that flags state shifts before price confirms by the time you see a candle, trade is closed and profit is locked and here's what should actually bother you: every paper behind this stack is public datasets are free. arxiv has the math tick data runs $50/month they didn't find secret knowledge Boomark it and create your own pipeline they built a better system before you knew a different game existed
3:58

jane street made $4 billion last year they employ almost no traders just physicists building AI while retail draws support lines, their models are running: > 2 million signals per second from order flow > news sentiment scored in 0.3ms before your feed updates > regime detection that flags state shifts before price confirms by the time you see a candle, trade is closed and profit is locked and here's what should actually bother you: every paper behind this stack is public datasets are free. arxiv has the math tick data runs $50/month they didn't find secret knowledge Boomark it and create your own pipeline they built a better system before you knew a different game existed

Livsun

33,432 次观看 • 2 个月前

a researcher at a systematic fund showed me a 6x6 matrix on a whiteboard said: > this is our whole system. we don't forecast price. we classify which cell the market occupies and where that cell historically transitions i stared at it for days before it made sense. then everything changed never interpreted a chart the same way again the matrix is called a Markov Chain transition table. the theory dates back to 1913, it's in every introductory statistics textbook ever written and systematic funds rely on it because it poses a fundamentally different question than what retail traders ever think to ask retail: is this going higher or lower systematic: what regime is this market in, and where does this regime historically resolve every market sits in one of roughly 4-6 regimes at any point in time narrow consolidation, expanding volatility, trending with acceleration, post-reversal drift, pre-expansion squeeze not arbitrary categories - clusters you extract from real data using volatility, volume, and trend strength layered together once you define the regimes, you construct the table: P(regime 3 → regime 5) = 71% P(regime 1 → regime 3) = 64% P(regime 2 → regime 4) = 69% each cell is a historical frequency. now when the market sits in regime 3, you're not speculating you're trading on 71% historical resolution. you scale it with Kelly. you execute when the math confirms, not when it feels convincing i constructed this on ETH using 3 years of 1-hour data. isolated 6 regimes one i named "volatility squeeze below 15-day average for 8+ consecutive bars" transitioned to a directional breakout exceeding 2.2 ATR in 74% of cases average reward/risk on those setups: 4.8 that's not forecasting. that's reading a probability matrix the market populates for you every single session the part that should concern you: the data to construct this is free. the methodology is in any quantitative finance textbook python to build it is maybe 180 lines what Citadel has that you don't isn't classified data or secret algorithms it's this methodology applied to tick-level data with more granular regime definitions you're not lacking information you're framing the wrong question every single time you open a chart
0:26

a researcher at a systematic fund showed me a 6x6 matrix on a whiteboard said: > this is our whole system. we don't forecast price. we classify which cell the market occupies and where that cell historically transitions i stared at it for days before it made sense. then everything changed never interpreted a chart the same way again the matrix is called a Markov Chain transition table. the theory dates back to 1913, it's in every introductory statistics textbook ever written and systematic funds rely on it because it poses a fundamentally different question than what retail traders ever think to ask retail: is this going higher or lower systematic: what regime is this market in, and where does this regime historically resolve every market sits in one of roughly 4-6 regimes at any point in time narrow consolidation, expanding volatility, trending with acceleration, post-reversal drift, pre-expansion squeeze not arbitrary categories - clusters you extract from real data using volatility, volume, and trend strength layered together once you define the regimes, you construct the table: P(regime 3 → regime 5) = 71% P(regime 1 → regime 3) = 64% P(regime 2 → regime 4) = 69% each cell is a historical frequency. now when the market sits in regime 3, you're not speculating you're trading on 71% historical resolution. you scale it with Kelly. you execute when the math confirms, not when it feels convincing i constructed this on ETH using 3 years of 1-hour data. isolated 6 regimes one i named "volatility squeeze below 15-day average for 8+ consecutive bars" transitioned to a directional breakout exceeding 2.2 ATR in 74% of cases average reward/risk on those setups: 4.8 that's not forecasting. that's reading a probability matrix the market populates for you every single session the part that should concern you: the data to construct this is free. the methodology is in any quantitative finance textbook python to build it is maybe 180 lines what Citadel has that you don't isn't classified data or secret algorithms it's this methodology applied to tick-level data with more granular regime definitions you're not lacking information you're framing the wrong question every single time you open a chart

Hrundel75 🐷

12,088 次观看 • 21 天前

Culture is genetic because behavior is genetic. This beaver never saw a dam in its life. No beavers or anything else ever taught it to build a dam. It wants to build a dam because it is a beaver. Many beavers together build a big dam. That is beaver culture. Humans are not different. Nothing is different. This is what life is. This is how life works. Your body is your mind. A caterpillar wants to build a chrysalis. A bee wants to build a hive. A lion wants to build a pride. You are not special. You are not above your nature. you are INSIDE of it. The thoughts that we think are genetic thoughts. The crimes we commit are genetic crimes. The art we create is genetic art. Just like this beaver, you can give the animal different sticks and it will build a different dam, but it will always build a dam. And you can give humans different "education," but the human will always use it to do what its genes tell it to do. This is the first big answer that you need. This is the biggest piece of the puzzle. This is how to understand people 90% of the way. You just... notice what they do, and get out of the way, and watch them do it. And if they need sticks, you give them sticks. And if you don't like what they do, you have to get away from them. You cannot train dam-building into them or out of them any more than you can with a beaver. A beaver wants to build a dam because it is a beaver. Whatever you see people build, that's what they wanted to build from the sticks they got in the river they were in. Stop pretending you can change it.
0:59

Culture is genetic because behavior is genetic. This beaver never saw a dam in its life. No beavers or anything else ever taught it to build a dam. It wants to build a dam because it is a beaver. Many beavers together build a big dam. That is beaver culture. Humans are not different. Nothing is different. This is what life is. This is how life works. Your body is your mind. A caterpillar wants to build a chrysalis. A bee wants to build a hive. A lion wants to build a pride. You are not special. You are not above your nature. you are INSIDE of it. The thoughts that we think are genetic thoughts. The crimes we commit are genetic crimes. The art we create is genetic art. Just like this beaver, you can give the animal different sticks and it will build a different dam, but it will always build a dam. And you can give humans different "education," but the human will always use it to do what its genes tell it to do. This is the first big answer that you need. This is the biggest piece of the puzzle. This is how to understand people 90% of the way. You just... notice what they do, and get out of the way, and watch them do it. And if they need sticks, you give them sticks. And if you don't like what they do, you have to get away from them. You cannot train dam-building into them or out of them any more than you can with a beaver. A beaver wants to build a dam because it is a beaver. Whatever you see people build, that's what they wanted to build from the sticks they got in the river they were in. Stop pretending you can change it.

hoe_math = PsychoMath

1,189,824 次观看 • 11 个月前

nobody making $380k at a quant desk has any reason to write you a roadmap that's not cynicism - that's incentive structure wall street banks have PR teams pushing the "break into finance" pipeline. quant firms don't recruit that way, don't advertise, don't need to the filter has nothing to do with finance knowledge - it's 6 categories: probability, statistics, mental math, game theory, coding, market microstructure zero of those show up in a finance degree interview structure has been roughly the same for over a decade problems are documented, prep path is public, nobody stitched it into a guide for you most applicants wash out in round 1 and assume they weren't the right kind of smart a state school CS grad who grinds the right 6 categories for 6 months outearns a target-school banking analyst within 2 years $140k on the banking path vs $430k on the quant path same city, completely different question set Bookmark this information to close that gap has existed for years you just had to know you were supposed to be looking
0:57

nobody making $380k at a quant desk has any reason to write you a roadmap that's not cynicism - that's incentive structure wall street banks have PR teams pushing the "break into finance" pipeline. quant firms don't recruit that way, don't advertise, don't need to the filter has nothing to do with finance knowledge - it's 6 categories: probability, statistics, mental math, game theory, coding, market microstructure zero of those show up in a finance degree interview structure has been roughly the same for over a decade problems are documented, prep path is public, nobody stitched it into a guide for you most applicants wash out in round 1 and assume they weren't the right kind of smart a state school CS grad who grinds the right 6 categories for 6 months outearns a target-school banking analyst within 2 years $140k on the banking path vs $430k on the quant path same city, completely different question set Bookmark this information to close that gap has existed for years you just had to know you were supposed to be looking

Livsun

20,826 次观看 • 1 个月前

a quant at Two Sigma told me something at a bar i can't stop thinking about "retail looks at price. we look at the autocorrelation of price changes - completely different signal" i asked him to explain it like i was 12 he drew on a napkin: if today's move predicts tomorrow's move - even slightly, 53% of the time - that's an edge that edge, sized with Kelly, compounds into something insane data is free - Bloomberg and the Fed publish all of it. math takes a weekend to learn reason retail loses isn't intelligence. it's that they're reading the wrong representation of the same data "a chart hides serial correlation. a time series shows it naked" went home, ran autocorrelation tests on 3 years of SPY data found 4 patterns - statistically significant, all exploitable on a 5-day window signals aren't perfect, right 58% of the time. Kelly says that's enough data was free the whole time, framework sitting in every stats textbook. nobody pointed retail toward it they kept you staring at candles
0:29

a quant at Two Sigma told me something at a bar i can't stop thinking about "retail looks at price. we look at the autocorrelation of price changes - completely different signal" i asked him to explain it like i was 12 he drew on a napkin: if today's move predicts tomorrow's move - even slightly, 53% of the time - that's an edge that edge, sized with Kelly, compounds into something insane data is free - Bloomberg and the Fed publish all of it. math takes a weekend to learn reason retail loses isn't intelligence. it's that they're reading the wrong representation of the same data "a chart hides serial correlation. a time series shows it naked" went home, ran autocorrelation tests on 3 years of SPY data found 4 patterns - statistically significant, all exploitable on a 5-day window signals aren't perfect, right 58% of the time. Kelly says that's enough data was free the whole time, framework sitting in every stats textbook. nobody pointed retail toward it they kept you staring at candles

Livsun

149,183 次观看 • 2 个月前

This is actually extremely seriously Glenn Beck “The medical thing that they just passed in Washington state. They passed it, and the governor has signed it, and basically it says if there's an immediate medical emergency, we can do whatever we want to. You now, remember, this is the state that was talking about building little internment camps for people who wouldn't get vaccinated last time” “If you think that they won't do that, you're out of your mind. You're crazy. And so it says if the governor decides that there is a medical emergency, statewide emergency, I love this one, ‘based on scientific experts’ they will dictate what happens to every individual, what you have to get. If scientific experts tell you have to take this, you will be forced to take that.“ “If you're living in Washington state, may I just say. Get the hell out now. The entire state. Get out of the state, and I'm dead serious on that. You're living in a state that has gone absolutely insane.”
1:19

This is actually extremely seriously Glenn Beck “The medical thing that they just passed in Washington state. They passed it, and the governor has signed it, and basically it says if there's an immediate medical emergency, we can do whatever we want to. You now, remember, this is the state that was talking about building little internment camps for people who wouldn't get vaccinated last time” “If you think that they won't do that, you're out of your mind. You're crazy. And so it says if the governor decides that there is a medical emergency, statewide emergency, I love this one, ‘based on scientific experts’ they will dictate what happens to every individual, what you have to get. If scientific experts tell you have to take this, you will be forced to take that.“ “If you're living in Washington state, may I just say. Get the hell out now. The entire state. Get out of the state, and I'm dead serious on that. You're living in a state that has gone absolutely insane.”

Wall Street Apes

1,259,930 次观看 • 1 年前

Just days ago an American went to “The parking lot of the Department of Labor and Economic opportunity in Lansing, Michigan” This is a government office during working hours. There are essentially no cars in the entire lot. No workers even though they’re all still being paid “Take a look — Most of these workers, and 20,000 of them in the state of Michigan, they went home. They've been working from home ever since. — When you call the office, you'll get a voicemail. It'll direct you somewhere. Why are they not at work? And if they need to keep working at home, do we really need the buildings that they were in? That's a big question many people are asking. I want to know what you think about this in the comments below. When it comes to working at home. And as you can see here in Lansing, at least in this state parking lot, there's not many cars. Let me know what you're thinking about this.”
0:49

Just days ago an American went to “The parking lot of the Department of Labor and Economic opportunity in Lansing, Michigan” This is a government office during working hours. There are essentially no cars in the entire lot. No workers even though they’re all still being paid “Take a look — Most of these workers, and 20,000 of them in the state of Michigan, they went home. They've been working from home ever since. — When you call the office, you'll get a voicemail. It'll direct you somewhere. Why are they not at work? And if they need to keep working at home, do we really need the buildings that they were in? That's a big question many people are asking. I want to know what you think about this in the comments below. When it comes to working at home. And as you can see here in Lansing, at least in this state parking lot, there's not many cars. Let me know what you're thinking about this.”

Wall Street Apes

285,041 次观看 • 1 年前