The Effectiveness of the Transaction Systems on the Dax Index

Abstract

The purpose of the article/hypothesis: The aim of this article is to examine the effectiveness of trading systems built on the basis of technical analysis tools in 2015–2020 on the DAX stock exchange index. Efficiency is understood as generating positive rates of return, taking into account the risk incurred by the investor, as well as achieving better results than passive strategies. Presenting empirical evidence implying the value of technical analysis is a difficult task not only because of a huge number of instruments used on a daily basis, but also due to their almost unlimited possibility to modify parameters and often subjective evaluation.Methodology: The effectiveness of technical analysis tools was tested using selected investment strategies based on oscillators and indicators following the trend. All transactions were carried out on the Meta Trader 4 platform. The analyzed strategies were comprehensively assessed using the portfolio management quality measures, such as the Sharpe measure or the MAR ratio (Managed Account Ratio).Results of the research: The test results confirmed that the application of described investment strategies contributes to the achievement of effective results and, above all, protects the portfolio against a significant loss in the period of strong turmoil on the stock exchange. During the research period, only two strategies (Ichimoku and ETF- Exchange traded fund) would produce negative returns at the worst possible end of the investment. At the best moment, however, the „passive” investment achieved the lowest result. Looking at the final balance at the end of 2019, as many as four systems based on technical analysis were more effective than the „buy and hold” strategy, and at the end of the first quarter of 2020 – all of them. When analyzing the management quality measures, it turned out that taking into account the 21 quarters, the passive strategy had the lowest MAR index. The Sharpe’s measure is also relatively weak compared to the four leading strategies.