Beware Investment Software!

Published in Investing on 23 April 2012

Two brothers charged for peddling bogus software, but even the honest stuff is unlikely to bring you riches.

Artificial intelligence so good it can analyse share trends far better and quicker than humans can, and will tip you off to potential multi-baggers before the market catches on to them?

That's what Alexander and Thomas Hunter, from the unlikely sounding financial nerve centre of Whitley Bay, claimed they had to offer back in 2007 in the form of a smart computer software package known as Marl.

Marl, they claimed, was based in a trading algorithm developed for Goldman Sachs. And, for a modest sum, you could subscribe to a newsletter revealing Marl's share picks, or for a little more you could buy a home version of the software.

Who'd say no to that?

Well, you should have done, because it has now been revealed that the software actually attempted no such thing. Instead, it just downloaded share tips that the 16-year-old brothers were feeding in manually.

And they got those tips from companies that paid the Hunters for placements. The brothers are currently facing stock fraud charges from US authorities.

What about the real stuff?

But how about those real software packages you can get, which genuinely do filter market data and try to come up with winners for you?

Even if an honestly developed investing algorithm could actually pick enough winners to make it worthwhile, its very success would almost certainly be its own downfall. The thing is, the "spotting the signs before the market" approach to investment can only work, if it works at all, if the market itself isn't doing the same. And as soon as you release your secret methods out into the world, you can no longer get in ahead of the crowd.

That's assuming such algorithms actually can work at all, and there's doubt about that -- at least when it comes to the longer term.

Hedge funds

Fancy computer-based trading is how a number of investment firms, notably hedge funds, work. But they do it by jealously guarding their secrets and not letting anyone else in on the details of how they make their selections. They know that as soon as the rest of the market can reproduce their strategy, it's finished.

In fact, something like that helped kill the Long-Term Capital Management hedge fund in the late nineties. It had developed a computer-based strategy based on taking large leveraged positions with low margins, which partly relied on few or no other traders following suit. But other investors copying LTCM's moves helped push that leveraged strategy that bit too far, and it's all history now.

And even today, we're seeing doubts creeping in about algorithm-based investing at Man Group (LSE: EMG), with its flagship AHL Diversified fund not making the profits it needs to impose the premium charges necessary to maintain its high dividend payout.

Still thinking about investing in share-picking software? Do tell us, below.

> Buffett's been buying British. The legendary investor has recently topped up on his favourite UK share. Find out what he bought and the price he paid in our latest free report.

More from Alan Oscroft:

Share & subscribe

Comments

The opinions expressed here are those of the individual writers and are not representative of The Motley Fool. If you spot any comments that are unsuitable hit the flag to alert our moderators.

ANuvver 23 Apr 2012 , 3:09pm

When someone makes a film (and they will) they're almost certain to be portrayed by Ant and Dec, and Marl will be running on a ZX Spectrum.

Oh, of course it's fraud and it's wrong, but it's still rather funny. The million-odd to be paid back will be easily covered by the rights to "Auf Wiedersehen Net"...

medicalquack 23 Apr 2012 , 4:47pm

Great topic here and good awareness by all means and I used to write software so these folks sadly exist and the average consumer can't tell the difference sometimes when a phenomenal sales pitch is given. I'll take you back a little bit to something that was harmless and kind fun when we talk "Easter Eggs", which was term given to software for something as a "bonus" that was hidden in software if you knew a couple of input shortcuts, like finding the abbreviated version of Flight Simulator that was hanging out in Excel.

That stuff was fun and still is, but you don't see it much anymore and when writing software by today's standards, do Easter Eggs still exist, but now for profit:) They could but we may never know that and yes this is a bit of a devil's advocate position for sure but think about it as software is layered and platforms are now used with the work of many developers combined, I know just what someone wants to read on a Monday morning:)

Long and short of this is the algorithms can be fixed if you have folks that are clever enough to do this and have some marketing folks at bay to chime in. This is why I started my series on the Attacks of the Killer Algorithms and the amounts of "flawed data" that's appearing out there. Some old algos come back and bite. Software in the words of Bill Gates is nothing more than a bunch algorithms put together.

About a year ago the SEC caught a Quant with running software that he knew was not calculating correctly and I figured this had to be pretty blatant in the SEC got him:) I say that as you can't help but remember Madoff, and speaking of such, look what his tech folks built..worked for a long time and they made a lot of money off of ignorance but like any good formulas and math, when you can create any additional false bottoms it will somehow shake out.

Even in healthcare with medical records the software is certified and there are mistakes made that are not done on purpose either such as the GE example where they found an error and doctors had to wait to attest or re-attest to get their stimulus money, so it live among us.

Now you have what I call mis-matched data with FICO claiming they can use credit scores to score you and determine if you will be a patient who takes their prescriptions...a little over stated here. They can certainly run queries and put out numbers and crunch them, that does not bother me, but when you bring it down to an individual "scoring" level with mixing in a lot of the data they get from the web via mining that probably has a few flaws in there, well, to me their entire process is flawed. State governments now are also putting in software to keep some of the bots out as they are slowing down servers to a crawl. I kind of covered that a bit in Chapter 2 of the Attack series.

http://ducknetweb.blogspot.com/2011/10/disturbing-news-for-consumers-with.html

Over two years ago I made a post about needing a "Department of Algorithms" or something along that line and it kind of looks like we are headed that way with fixing the math and formulas and sure some folks have a lot to lose maybe? It just depends on how accurate their formulas were, but it will eventually shake out as inquiring minds, especially when money is involved, want to know:)

Thus so if we think about "devaluating" some of these algorithms running wild out there, maybe the rest of the financial world might look a little better without the hidden agendas? Software developers are worth a lot of money with their talent and deserve to be compensated with a good stick of code, but when you look at what we call value, ie. billion dollar social networks, it speaks of a lot naive folks out there along with some banks that want to cash in on it too:)

http://www.google.com/url?q=http://ducknetweb.blogspot.com/2012/04/devaluate-algorithm-and-tax-data.html&sa=U&ei=xHeVT_ehGJCJtwfdtOi1Cw&ved=0CAUQFjAA&client=internal-uds-cse&usg=AFQjCNFETfzWKmFfcc61tBfogUozHNrJTA

When technology all started out with algorithms it was a different ball game than we have today and yes we need it for sure and I like it as it makes me smarter, but gee we have a lot of marketing spin and just out and out crappy software out there that goes along with the good and telling the difference is difficult at times, but crappy and rogue still seem to survive if it makes money and until someone checks their math and code:) Do we have a new brand of software "Easter Eggs" on the move .

BarrenFluffit 23 Apr 2012 , 5:42pm

Otoh I do find it encouraging that finantial literacy was so high. Its amazing what incentives can do!

TomRoundhouse 24 Apr 2012 , 12:59pm

I use Sharescope and have done for years. I would no more buy a share without checking the charts than try and fly. Time and again it has saved me from buying shares which despite their "value" appeal are in a well defined downtend.

It is outstanding value for money and I would not be without it.

ALMAC55 24 Apr 2012 , 1:58pm

I have just put my share portfolio onto Sharescope and whilst it is early days for me, I am very impressed with the software. This is NOT a stock picking program, but for the amateur you get a huge amount of information, and in time I will learn how to use it! But even Sharescope is no substitute for the Motley Fool!!

RobinnBanks 25 Apr 2012 , 1:31am

'sixteen-year-old boys from the financial nerve centre of Whitley Bay' took American investors for over a £million!.
Remember the canoe man from Seaton Carew (twinned with Panama!)?

biggiles 27 Apr 2012 , 7:21pm

medicalquack, there are open source financial algorithms- try looking at http://quantlib.org . Catherdral vs bazaar etc.

Illavac 28 Apr 2012 , 12:53pm

When presented with an offer like this from a salesman, the question you just have to ask yourself is:
Why is he trying to sell it to me rather than use it himself?
If you really could beat the market like this you'd keep it to yourself and become rich enough to buy an island next to Richard Branson.

Join the conversation

Please take note - some tags have changed.

Line breaks are converted automatically.

You may use the following tags in your post: [b]bolded text[/b], [i]italicised text[/i]. All other tags will be removed from your post.

If you want to add a link, please ensure you type it as http://www.fool.co.uk as opposed to www.fool.co.uk.

Hello stranger

To add your own comment, please login.

Not yet registered? Register now.