This is correct. It's so obvious but most people simply don't see it for what it is.

The interesting thing about these platforms is that they can actually record what OTHER people are doing, see what the successful people do, and possibly just copy them.

You built a fine tool for others to use. With a free tier. Nice work...

It's hard to win picking individual stocks, and yes you should not only hold a few stocks at a time with all of your portfolio.

But you don't have to bet your entire portfolio. You can only trade a portion of it hedging your risk. In addition, while it may be more of a fools game to go big on one or two stocks, you can look at your risk profile and align your long term strategy with different sectors and tax strategies.

I am no means a trading expert, but to discourage people from investing just because certain types of trading is more akin to playing the lottery - is just as irresponsible. People should be encouraged to be more engaged with their money and at the very least follow how their index fund is doing, how it's allocated, and learn why it is allocated the way it is.

To make money off less frequent trades I believe (again, just my opinion) that your decisions must be based on news/insight/insider info, not charting patterns. In other words, more fundamentals. And that's much harder to automate.

Of course, you will find people that tell you the opposite and that they make money. My response to this would be: Of course there are those that make money due to simple laws of probability. With a lot of people trading there will be some winners. But it is mostly due to luck rather than skill. And the fewer trades your make (lower frequency) the harder it is to assign any kind of significance numbers to the results.

Technical analysis isn't typically based on patterns. Banks trade using TA (see Lehman Bros Forex trading handbook - available online) - it's not strange or unusual to trade a mean reversion strategy at HFT or retail trading levels. Nor a momentum strategy, or even trend following. Nobody serious trades the candlestick patterns you're referring to in algo trading.

There is enough data to train all forex pairs - tick data going back decades, for free, via Dukascopy and other sources.

You're spreading FUD, and while there is definitely a need for people to be cautious, your warnings are not based in reality.

Better to warn them about the 70-90% losing rate of all retail traders (reported officially by all UK brokers), or the perils of overleveraging, or the risk of gapping/illiquidity in crypto... I could go on. But not what you mention - that's a strawman.

You are correct. My definition of TA was these candlestick patterns, like the ones ("bullish engulfing") shown on the landing page. Mean reversion, momentum, etc are fundamental concepts that have solid mathematical foundations. I have absolutely nothing against these ;)

But my experience is entirely outside cryptocurrencies, so take that for what you will. I'm just curious to hear if you're also applying this perspective outside cryptocurrency trading. If anything I'd expect it to be far easier to profitably trade cryptocurrencies these days since the space is still so inefficient.

People often think there are arb opportunities in crypto when there are none because the price already includes the inefficiencies, latencies, and difficulties of moving fiat across country borders or taking money out.

Also, the price often includes the risk of the exchange being hacked or running away with your money, which has happened a lot recently. So when people look at arb opportunities they often don't take into account that these risks must be reflected in the exchange prices. Sketchy exchange prices are lower due to the risk factor of having balances there. That's not the case for regulated financial markets.