IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/ags/uiucrr/37487.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

The Profitability of Technical Analysis: A Review

Author

Listed:
  • Park, Cheol-Ho
  • Irwin, Scott H.

Abstract

The purpose of this report is to review the evidence on the profitability of technical analysis. To achieve this purpose, the report comprehensively reviews survey, theoretical and empirical studies regarding technical trading strategies. We begin by overviewing survey studies that have directly investigated market participants’ experience and views on technical analysis. The survey literature indicates that technical analysis has been widely used by market participants in futures markets and foreign exchange markets, and that about 30% to 40% of practitioners appear to believe that technical analysis is an important factor in determining price movement at shorter time horizons up to 6 months. Then we provide an overview of theoretical models that include implications about the profitability of technical analysis. Conventional efficient market theories, such as the martingale model and random walk models, rule out the possibility of technical trading profits in speculative markets, while relatively recent models such as noisy rational expectation models or behavioral models suggest that technical trading strategies may be profitable due to noise in the market or investors’ irrational behavior. Finally, empirical studies are surveyed. In this report, the empirical literature is categorized into two groups, “early” and “modern” studies, according to the characteristics of testing procedures. Early studies indicated that technical trading strategies were profitable in foreign exchange markets and futures markets, but not in stock markets before the 1980s. Modern studies indicated that technical trading strategies consistently generated economic profits in a variety of speculative markets at least until the early 1990s. Among a total of 92 modern studies, 58 studies found positive results regarding technical trading strategies, while 24 studies obtained negative results. Ten studies indicated mixed results. Despite the positive evidence on the profitability of technical trading strategies, it appears that most empirical studies are subject to various problems in their testing procedures, e.g., data snooping, ex post selection of trading rules or search technologies, and difficulties in estimation of risk and transaction costs. Future research must address these deficiencies in testing in order to provide conclusive evidence on the profitability of technical trading strategies.

Suggested Citation

  • Park, Cheol-Ho & Irwin, Scott H., 2004. "The Profitability of Technical Analysis: A Review," AgMAS Project Research Reports 37487, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics.
  • Handle: RePEc:ags:uiucrr:37487
    DOI: 10.22004/ag.econ.37487
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://ageconsearch.umn.edu/record/37487/files/AgMAS04_04.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.22004/ag.econ.37487?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    Agricultural Finance;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ags:uiucrr:37487. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: AgEcon Search (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/dauiuus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.