Page 1 of 1

Any opinions on Wave59 (a pattern matching software)

Posted: Tue Nov 27, 2007 9:01 am
by christianh
I am currently looking for a software which automatically creates patterns and checks for their profitability. Now I was informed of a software called Wave59 ( and that this piece can at least search for already defined patterns.

Well, they don't offer a free trial - you have to give your credit card details for the first free one month trial. Ok - can live with that, because it prevents the suckers.

What makes me uncomfortable is their sales tactic and arguments on their website - too childish.

So, I hope that I made it clear that I don't want to promote that thing - I am looking for opinions of that software or hints for comparable ones or even better the original thing a software which creates and tests the rules itself (genetic programing).


PS: I already know about Orphelin's tool ;)


Posted: Fri Nov 30, 2007 12:52 pm
by explorer

Wave59 and many other similar software gives you an ENTRY signal. Entry signals are 20% of a trading strategy. Unless all other part of your strategies are done to your satisfaction, I wouldn't spend $2500 on entry signals that TB and many websites provide free.

If you care to know more about patterns, a number of books around $50 out there to explain how to recognize and enter them. NONE of them explain how to manage the trade (hint.) So unless you MASTERED exits, money management, risk management, portfolio selection, testing (i.e., the other 80% of a strategy), it would be much wiser to spend time there in my opinion. You could worry about entry signals last.

And let's don't forget that all back testing is irrelevant (at least to me), because one normally doesn't stop to optimize until the result is good. Only forward testing (Walk Forward) tells you if your system is robust enough in the real world. The reason I bring that up here, because if you go out to find an expensive software, among other things, you should make sure it has forward testing capability, or at least an output than can be fed into a Walk Forward testing engine. (This is of course a controversial statement to some, since not everyone cares about forward testing, but I can only tell, what I believe.)

Just my 2c