(Replying to PARENT post)
This is easy to see in the massive consolidation in the market making space in traditional finance over the last decade and also you can watch it in real-time right now in the crypto space. Even two years ago, it was pretty trivial to be successful as a market maker using quite naive models and a system glued together in Python in a couple days. Today, things have gotten significantly more competitive: many single man operations have become uncompetitive and even larger (3-10 man) and more sophisticated firms are feeling the heat from behemoths like Susquehanna, Jane St, and Jump Trading.
It's amazing how you can feel the crypto market getting more efficient in front or your eyes. It's like running on a treadmill, and you're always terrified it will start going faster than you and your team can run.
(Replying to PARENT post)
(Inventing involves significant risks. You could lose all of your capital. Nothing I've writtend should be construed as investment advice)
(Replying to PARENT post)
Also, here's my favorite counter argument to EMH - https://securityboulevard.com/2020/04/investors-buy-up-the-w...
(Replying to PARENT post)
That flies right past EMH and into the realm of pure numerology.
(Replying to PARENT post)
Technical analysis is predicated upon the assumption that the efficient market hypothesis is true, and that all investor sentiment and other relevant information is all already priced in.
Whether TA is actually valid or if it's just drawing random foofy lines on a chart remains up for debate.
(Replying to PARENT post)
For technical analysis to be anything other than an abstract form of gambling, the efficient market hypothesis has to be flat out false.
Representing the market using brownian motion only applies in cases where the market is under the weak or strong forms of EMH.