And this is how insolvency begins.
As well as threadomacy. Though nice find hah. You should give the blog post below a full read. It's in the top of /r/bitcoin right now. This thread was linked inside it. It gives a rational explanation to what happened in Mt.Gox and how. http://willyreport.wordpress.com/Holy thread necro Batman! Anyway, the noose around Karpeles' neck is tightening. What a bloody facetious <redacted> he is. The fraudulent activity at Mt. Gox seems to go much further back than most people even dared to speculate. A classic house of cards. Truly incredible. This will be another annal in the tales of Bitcoin's large heists. |
|
|
|
are there any plans of integrating Ichimoku in v3? Would really love to see that! I bet that would be one of the possible engine modules for V4. That indicator is way too complex to just "bolt in". |
|
|
|
Pablo: Any plan for a HFT bot? That would require a completely different engine. You'd need to take into account volatility, volume, trend, enter and exit positions, stop losses, spread, profit target, scalping... urgh, that would be a pain to set up and still probably would require constant attention. There is a reason the exchange HFT bot algorithms are highly guarded secrets and their inventors make millions in salaries. |
|
|
|
Basically for all you/me/we know the exchange has it's own bot running trades and this bot is given information well before it is broadcast to other bots or the GUI on the exchange, fractions of a second is all it takes. Heh, you basically described how the big stock exchanges work with the large(st) brokerage houses (clients) that do HFT. Someone would call that "an unfair advantage"... but still it is legal. Go figure. |
|
|
|
Anyone traded LTC/BTC with this?
Not yet. Altcoins aren't implemented thus far, but are planned for a near future release. No word on whether we'll be able to trade BTC/LTC though, so far I think it's planned to trade LTC/Fiat instead. If the bot could make quick decisions, the triangle BTC-fiat-LTC could easily be profitable on BTC-e. it is not that smart yet... it only has dual core atom processors... it needs quantum processors to be able to out-smart humans.... Au contraire! It doesn't need to outsmart, it just needs to out-calculate  The bot probably could make the decision which of the 3 pairs to trade way faster than any human. Even small profits are fine if you stack them. |
|
|
|
Anyone traded LTC/BTC with this?
Not yet. Altcoins aren't implemented thus far, but are planned for a near future release. No word on whether we'll be able to trade BTC/LTC though, so far I think it's planned to trade LTC/Fiat instead. If the bot could make quick decisions, the triangle BTC-fiat-LTC could easily be profitable on BTC-e. |
|
|
|
We must asume price will always end up growing to play well this game.
period. That way lie anguish, grief and tears. Those who believe in a continuous bubble will get disabused sooner or later. |
|
|
|
|
Are the graphs working for people atm?
I'm seeing broken image icons, and direct links to bot graphs give "405 not allowed" http errors from bitcoincharts.
|
|
|
|
sorry but no matter what you say, if the bot sells high and buy even higher almost always, then the bot is dumb, its a fact, numbers don't lie.
the profit is misleading based on the marke price rise. I will gladly take 10% profit over buy and hold over 2 months. This extra 10% was just a lucky configuration based on past results, we talk about the way bot operates. Market itself will mutiply by 5x, so you dont need to risk into loses using the bot if you just look at this way. Market does what market does, even if it's crashing to 1/5 of the current size. You can't rely on BTC price increasing all the time. As soon as BTC price starts to tank, buy and hold won't look that hot anymore, no? let's see if with the proposed changes Pablo can backtest as soon as possisble and we can take a real profit using it when a drop takes place, as i can make better decisions manually. That I agree with. There definitely are many possible places one could squeeze additional 1-2% profit in daily fluctuations that don't evolve into full trend reversals. As long as the bot can react quickly enough, that HFT aspect could well be worth the while. However, there must be an option to set a limit to how much fiat/BTC is allowed to be risked in these HFT trades, separately from the current "reserve" setting. I'm pretty sure you wouldn't want the bot accidentally wiping the week's profits in one miscalculated HFT cycle. |
|
|
|
587$ to 650$ = 10% win
quite far from the "593.21%" the bot says due the way its calculating the profit (price rises)
Regardless of the strategy, the numbers are real. You started with $100, and ended with $655. The profit for that indeed is 555%. Now, that is "only" 10% better than buy and hold, but show me any other investment that will return 5x profits in 2 months. For that matter, 10% profit in 2 months is by itself very good, for that translates to 60% profit a year which in stock or forex markets is amazingly high. And that is in addition to whatever profit there is in BTC price rise. |
|
|
|
just a test to see how many times the EMA lines triggers a buy to buy cheaper than you sold at: You still don't understand the idea behind the bot, do you? If it detects it exited at a bad position, it will buy you back with as little loss as possible. Also, the bot isn't affected by emotions, so it will do the right decision even if you couldn't/wouldn't. Even if the bot makes 8/10 "bad" decisions, the bad decisions are small. The profitable good trades will hopefully cover the losses. Besides, no trading strategy is foolproof. If you had one, you'd already be a billionaire. 12 buy trades in 2 month
10 of them it bough higher than it sold.
no sense strategy.
As some smart guys already notice, bot make you lose your bitcoins slowly
thats a 83% fail ratio of trading. You don't even let us see what settings you used. Even so, the bot did better than buy and hold, so it wouldn't have "lost" you anything. 100/122,25 = 0.81799 BTC 0.81799 * $696 = $569 Bot's ending balance = $655. How's that a loss, or fail? I agree, the bot could have done better, but you used a short timeframe. edit: stupid mistake |
|
|
|
the two events that triggers a Sell and a Buy, are always is thoses positions: "point 1 higher in the graph than point 2"
however the situation is not profitable, bot sold "high" then bough back "high" again
its always doing same thing, it just would make money when there are really big and long down trends. That is because your settings are too aggressive. It is not a daytrading bot. The whole idea behind EMA based trading is to smooth over such quick disturbances, and only react on clear up- and downtrends. my friend, you are wrong, is just an illustration, you can see the test by yourself in the bot, 60-70% of the trades return a lower % if the original sell. thats becuase it sell high, and buy high... If your settings make the bot react to such a small and insignificant dip (time wise), your settings are wrong, not me. its easy, it just lack a simple engine to buy low when the chance is there,
needs diversification and buy trigger rules.
its.
so.
easy. Looking forward to your bot (or your suggestions even how to code that feature!). |
|
|
|
the two events that triggers a Sell and a Buy, are always is thoses positions: "point 1 higher in the graph than point 2"
however the situation is not profitable, bot sold "high" then bough back "high" again
its always doing same thing, it just would make money when there are really big and long down trends. That is because your settings are too aggressive. It is not a daytrading bot. The whole idea behind EMA based trading is to smooth over such quick disturbances, and only react on clear up- and downtrends. |
|
|
|
honestly, you find a bot its working if you get in 2 LONG years a profit of 7% ? and thas just becuase you found some configuration that worked in the past,
that means nothing as price rised a lot,
jbssm is quite right in my opinion,
bot just need a trading engine, 7% more than b&h, which this question was all about. I don't refute the argument that the bot could be improved. I'm sure the devs are open to suggestions. Go ahead, I'm sure you have much to share. |
|
|
|
Huh? You want me to prove that selling at a random time isn't better than what the bot does? That doesn't even remotely make sense Done arguing, the math to me is pretty easy. And since I'm up a few hundred bucks over the last few days, I'm good. No, no, that part was a supposition, what I want you to prove is your statement that the BOT actually wields profit like you said. So, yeah, just post an example for MtGox that works in all time frame and I'll send you 1BTC. Pretty simple. Here's one that yields more BTC over 2 years (the max time frame). Buy in was at 2.515 dollars each, so 100/2.515 = 39.76 BTC for $100. Holding that 39.76 BTC for 2 years, then selling for $800 yields $31809. The bot manages $34287 in the same time, which also obviously is more in BTC (42.85 > 39.76). QED. Feel free to send my BTC to the address in my sig. Feel free to read my question that is quite correctly worded. Post some settings that make BTC profit in ALL the backtest timeframes of Gox and you get your 1BTC.If you fiddle with the past numbers you can always find one case where it works, thats easy and... doesn't mean absolutely nothing. I demonstrated a working setting for the longest available timeframe, which yields more in fiat and BTC than buy and hold. This alone demonstrates your argument is on shaky ground. However, the same settings also work for 1 year ($7827 > $6394). Feel free to do the rest yourself, it's clear by now you're gonna just nitpick your way out of paying. Nitpick... please learn how to read: "So, yeah, just post an example for MtGox that works in all time frame and I'll send you 1BTC." There is no shaky ground here, and you know very well the setting you posted doesn't work for the other time frames... you are the one nitpicking what you choose to post in order to avoid the argument I expressed and that you realized can't actually refute it with any numbers. If you expect the same setting to work for both 1 week and 2 year timeframes, you don't understand EMA. Looking at 1 and 2 year time frames, the bot would have made more fiat _and_ BTC than buy and hold. 6 month profit is clearly less (but still profit), and 3 month profit is very close to b&h. Smaller timeframes don't make sense because EMA _is_ a long time strategy, not daytrading. With that background, looks like you were just begging the question with flawed premises to begin with. EMA is a long time strategy, and at 1+ year timeframe beats b&h with a clear margin. How about now you did something constructive? Suggest ways in which to improve the bot (in your opinion) so that this isn't just useless time wasting from your part. |
|
|
|
Huh? You want me to prove that selling at a random time isn't better than what the bot does? That doesn't even remotely make sense Done arguing, the math to me is pretty easy. And since I'm up a few hundred bucks over the last few days, I'm good. No, no, that part was a supposition, what I want you to prove is your statement that the BOT actually wields profit like you said. So, yeah, just post an example for MtGox that works in all time frame and I'll send you 1BTC. Pretty simple. Here's one that yields more BTC over 2 years (the max time frame). Buy in was at 2.515 dollars each, so 100/2.515 = 39.76 BTC for $100. Holding that 39.76 BTC for 2 years, then selling for $800 yields $31809. The bot manages $34287 in the same time, which also obviously is more in BTC (42.85 > 39.76). QED. Feel free to send my BTC to the address in my sig. Feel free to read my question that is quite correctly worded. Post some settings that make BTC profit in ALL the backtest timeframes of Gox and you get your 1BTC.If you fiddle with the past numbers you can always find one case where it works, thats easy and... doesn't mean absolutely nothing. I demonstrated a working setting for the longest available timeframe, which yields more in fiat and BTC than buy and hold. This alone demonstrates your argument is on shaky ground. You also seem to have problems understanding the whole EMA "strategy". However, the same settings also work for 1 year ($7827 > $6394). Feel free to do the rest yourself, it's clear by now you're gonna just nitpick your way out of paying. |
|
|
|
Huh? You want me to prove that selling at a random time isn't better than what the bot does? That doesn't even remotely make sense Done arguing, the math to me is pretty easy. And since I'm up a few hundred bucks over the last few days, I'm good. No, no, that part was a supposition, what I want you to prove is your statement that the BOT actually wields profit like you said. So, yeah, just post an example for MtGox that works in all time frame and I'll send you 1BTC. Pretty simple. Here's one that yields more BTC over 2 years (the max time frame). Buy in was at 2.515 dollars each, so 100/2.515 = 39.76 BTC for $100. Holding that 39.76 BTC for 2 years, then selling for $800 yields $31809. The bot manages $34287 in the same time, which also obviously is more in BTC (42.85 > 39.76). QED. Feel free to send my BTC to the address in my sig.  |
|
|
|
I don't know actually what to make of the "predictions" of the backtesting engine. On both BTC-e and Gox I've managed to cook up the following (per exchange) settings: | 1wk | 1m | 3m | 6m | 1y | | Gox | 67% | 347% | 616% | 435% | 1739% | | BTC-e | 82% | 352% | 636% | 424% | 4063% |
Am I just doing curve fitting? It would seem that the longer the time frame, the less effective curve fitting would be. I'm hesitant to believe the results could be even half this good, so what am I missing? Volatile times of course make for great opportunities... I've traded alongside the bot now for a week, but I still don't trust it since this volatility seems to throw the EMA off, but maybe I'm looking at too small time frames. I guess I'm just looking at input from others so I could skip staring at the charts all day, trying to catch the waves  edit: While the bot turned a $1.1k investment in BTC-e to 1.4k in a week, in the same time on Gox manual trading yielded from 12k to 20k results (which is pretty bad considering how volatile the market's been), but I've not been sitting at the 'puter all day... |
|
|
|
I see. So that's already 28 gigabytes of HD space wasted. This is getting ridiculous.
It is ridiculous, but it's what we had to do to get the new version working. It also maximizes security and leaves open the possibility of having remote bitcoind/bitcoin-qt instances, etc. That I could live with. Remote instance would be most useful so I could just dump the bitcoind (and the blockchain) to my server. Please tell more. |
|
|
|
I recently upgraded from the 0.88 stable to version 0.89.99.14-beta on Windows 7 64-bit.
Looks like the new version created the '%userdir%\AppData\Roaming\Armory\databases\leveldb_blkdata' directory, which now is larger than the original blockchain dir. What's the point in using double the HD space?
So it doesn't have to hold the full blockchain in the ram. This is a "full implementation", intended for full nodes. This path was opted to reduce overhaul time and limit the code base to debug. There are plans for a lighter version of the DB now that this new code is solid. I see. So that's already 28 gigabytes of HD space wasted. This is getting ridiculous. |
|
|
|
|
Show Posts
