IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/sin/wpaper/04-a003.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Re-Examining the Profitability of Technical Analysis with White’s Reality Check

Author

Listed:

Abstract

In this paper, we re-examine the profitability of technical analysis using the Reality Check of White (2000, Econometrica) that corrects the data snooping bias. Comparing to previous studies, we study a more complete “universe” of trading techniques, including not only simple trading rules but also investor’s strategies, and we test the profitability of these rules and strategies with four main indices from both relatively mature and young markets. It is found that profitable simple rules and investor’s strategies do exist with statistical significance for NASDAQ Composite and Russell 2000 but not for DJIA and S&P 500. Moreover, the best rules for NASDAQ Composite and Russell 2000 outperform the buy-and-hold strategy in most in- and out-of-sample periods, even when transaction costs are taken into account. We also find that investor’s strategies are able to improve on the profits of simple rules and may even generate significant profits from unprofitable simple rules.

Suggested Citation

  • Po-Hsuan Hsu & Chung-Ming Kuan, 2004. "Re-Examining the Profitability of Technical Analysis with White’s Reality Check," IEAS Working Paper : academic research 04-A003, Institute of Economics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan.
  • Handle: RePEc:sin:wpaper:04-a003
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.econ.sinica.edu.tw/upload/file/04-a003.2008090210570460.pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lakonishok, Josef & Shleifer, Andrei & Vishny, Robert W, 1994. " Contrarian Investment, Extrapolation, and Risk," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 49(5), pages 1541-1578, December.
    2. Ryan Sullivan & Allan Timmermann & Halbert White, 1999. "Data-Snooping, Technical Trading Rule Performance, and the Bootstrap," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 54(5), pages 1647-1691, October.
    3. K. Geert Rouwenhorst, 1998. "International Momentum Strategies," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 53(1), pages 267-284, February.
    4. Gencay, Ramazan, 1998. "The predictability of security returns with simple technical trading rules," Journal of Empirical Finance, Elsevier, vol. 5(4), pages 347-359, October.
    5. Mark J Ready, 2002. "Profits from Technical Trading Rules," Financial Management, Financial Management Association, vol. 31(3), Fall.
    6. Neely, Christopher J. & Weller, Paul A., 1999. "Technical trading rules in the European Monetary System," Journal of International Money and Finance, Elsevier, vol. 18(3), pages 429-458.
    7. Jensen, Michael C & Bennington, George A, 1970. "Random Walks and Technical Theories: Some Additional Evidence," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 25(2), pages 469-482, May.
    8. Stephen J. Brown & William N. Goetzmann & Alok Kumar, 1998. "The Dow Theory: William Peter Hamilton's Track Record Reconsidered," Journal of Finance, American Finance Association, vol. 53(4), pages 1311-1333, August.
    9. Chan, Louis K. C. & Karceski, Jason & Lakonishok, Josef, 1998. "The Risk and Return from Factors," Journal of Financial and Quantitative Analysis, Cambridge University Press, vol. 33(02), pages 159-188, June.
    10. Knez, Peter J & Ready, Mark J, 1996. "Estimating the Profits from Trading Strategies," Review of Financial Studies, Society for Financial Studies, vol. 9(4), pages 1121-1163.
    11. repec:hrv:faseco:30721347 is not listed on IDEAS
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Rodrigo Chicaroli & Pedro L. Valls Pereira, 2015. "Predictability of Equity Models," Journal of Forecasting, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 34(6), pages 427-440, September.

    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:sin:wpaper:04-a003. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (HsiaoyunLiu). General contact details of provider: http://edirc.repec.org/data/sinictw.html .

    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.

    If CitEc recognized a reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.