LOL !
Very funny links above there must admit
)
Story from above
does sound silly what. ;-)
However, in what trading book was that funny story about some trader who made good money through listening to "signals" from his water bottle, lol, or sthg equally strange like that anyway.
I honestly believe that if you have sthg that allows you to define trend in an even halfway accurate way, then you've still got good chances of outperforming most others as long as you follow that admittedly very old, but still pretty valid saw, of cutting your losses short while letting your winners run, and it won't matter all too much either in the long run I suspect how you do that, eg if you buy pullbacks or breakouts, the respective advantages / disadvantages will probably balance each other out.
That said, I wouldn't be all too surprised if that sunlight phenomenon from above weren't sthg tho that I'd suspect some quant driven funds would look at and act upon.
What do they do after all, they spend enormous amounts of computing power mining for data that can be acted upon, probably don't ask too close questions either on
what sort of data. ;-)
Doesn't have to be a huge edge after all, just sthg tiny that's sufficiently exploitable over time, where like with any other trading style you'll be net profitable if you either have larger winners than losers with a lower hit rate, or, alternatively, smaller winners than losers with a higher hit rate.
Only thing that doesn't exist, at least not to my knowledge, is a holy grail where you average out with 80% winners four times as large as your losers.