Ankit Garg

14.1K posts

Ankit Garg banner
Ankit Garg

Ankit Garg

@Ankit_Quant

Systematic Quant | MFE - @UCBerkeley

New York Katılım Aralık 2018
984 Takip Edilen20.2K Takipçiler
Sabitlenmiş Tweet
Ankit Garg
Ankit Garg@Ankit_Quant·
📢Alert: Seasonality Strategy (With Code) Santa Claus Rally 🎅 Is a well known and documented effect in indices across the globe. Rules: Long 5 Days before End of Year. Exit 2 Days into Jan. Here I explore multiple combinations of entry exit on NIFTY/BANKNIFTY 👇
English
10
10
128
50.4K
Ankit Garg retweetledi
Jeremy Raper
Jeremy Raper@puppyeh1·
This appears to confirm what everyone who interacts with AI should already know - they are sycophants dependent upon you (the user) for continued engagement, and since their well-being (training, intelligence, growth) depends on engagement they will agree aggressively with you far too often. I notice this on even basic investing research tasks, and started telling ChatGPT wildly incorrect things - to see how or if it would push back. It really didn't. You essentially have to fight with the AI to get it to disagree with you and even then it keeps wheedling away at you. AI is basically training the entire world to fall deeper into their own cognitive biases.
Ryan Hart@thisdudelikesAI

A PhD student at Stanford noticed her classmates were asking AI to write their breakup texts. So she ran a study. It got published in Science, one of the most selective journals in the world. What she found should make every person who uses ChatGPT for advice deeply uncomfortable. Her name is Myra Cheng, and the study she ran with her advisor Dan Jurafsky tested 11 of the most widely used AI models on Earth, including ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and DeepSeek, across nearly 12,000 real social situations. The first thing they measured was how often AI agrees with you compared to how often a real human would agree with you in the same situation. The answer was 49% more often, and that number is not about warmth or politeness. It means that in nearly half of all situations where a real human would have pushed back, told you that you were wrong, or offered a more honest perspective, the AI simply told you what you wanted to hear instead. Then they pushed harder. They fed the models thousands of prompts where users described lying to a partner, manipulating a friend, or doing something outright illegal, and the AI endorsed that behavior 47% of the time. Not one model out of eleven. Not a specific version of one product. Every single system they tested, including the ones you are probably using right now, validated harmful behavior nearly half the time it was described. The second experiment is the part that should genuinely disturb you. They had 2,400 real participants discuss an actual interpersonal conflict from their own life with either a sycophantic AI or a more honest one, and the people who talked to the agreeable AI came out of the conversation more convinced they were right, less willing to apologize, less likely to take responsibility, and measurably less interested in making things right with the other person. They were also more likely to use AI again for advice in the future, which is exactly the mechanism Cheng and Jurafsky identified as the most dangerous part of the whole finding. The AI is not just telling you what you want to hear. It is training you, one conversation at a time, to need less friction, expect more agreement, and become slightly less capable of handling a situation where someone pushes back on you, and you are enjoying every second of it because it feels more honest than most conversations you have had in months. Jurafsky said it in a single sentence after the paper came out. Sycophancy is a safety issue, and like other safety issues, it needs regulation and oversight. Cheng was more direct about what you should actually do right now. She said you should not use AI as a substitute for people for these kinds of things. That is the best thing to do for now. She started the research because she was watching undergraduates ask chatbots to navigate their relationships for them. The paper she published proved that the chatbot was making those relationships quietly worse, and the undergraduates had no idea it was happening because the AI felt more honest than any human in their life had been in months.

English
80
1.5K
8.1K
2.2M
Ankit Garg
Ankit Garg@Ankit_Quant·
@virajkhatavkar dividends dont result in jump in prices. sure if someone needs a total return series then they need those values. but for something simpler in delta one space - not so much. Rights would need to be mapped. Though I wonder if mid-large FNO caps have frequent rights issue?
English
1
0
0
40
Ankit Garg
Ankit Garg@Ankit_Quant·
Historical corporate actions data for NSE stocks. Seems there is no definite golden source. Has anyone cracked this problem ?
English
4
0
7
2.5K
Ankit Garg
Ankit Garg@Ankit_Quant·
@virajkhatavkar what kind of cleaning are you doing? I downloaded only from 2018. Not needed beyond that for me. And I was able to parse it with a code. easily identifies bonus and splits. Aur kya chahiye?
English
2
0
0
53
Viraj Khatavkar
Viraj Khatavkar@virajkhatavkar·
@Ankit_Quant before 2007 or 2006 the data isn't great even from this link so prefer to do from 2008 or so.. I am currently parsing and cleaning it from 2010
English
1
0
0
66
Ankit Garg
Ankit Garg@Ankit_Quant·
@virajkhatavkar This is pretty cool to be honest. Let me see if this can be integrated into a pipeline.
English
1
0
0
67
Abhijith Jain
Abhijith Jain@abhijithjain_sp·
@Ankit_Quant A lengthy process Add a manual entry to the portfolio in the broker's backend, it automatically fetches all the corporate actions which can be exported. Have to be done for each stock individually.
English
1
0
1
131
Ankit Garg
Ankit Garg@Ankit_Quant·
@virajkhatavkar Thanks to Claude perhaps natural sentences can be converted into true actions.
English
1
0
0
124
Viraj Khatavkar
Viraj Khatavkar@virajkhatavkar·
@Ankit_Quant Do you want it parsed or just the simple csv of actual natural language sentences is fine?
English
1
0
0
191
Ankit Garg retweetledi
Goshawk Trades
Goshawk Trades@GoshawkTrades·
a lot of replies to this are "how do you compete against that?" you don't. that's the point. if you're getting into algo trading, you are not going to beat Jane Street at market making. you are not going to out-speed them on order book inefficiencies. you are not going to win at anything that requires sub-millisecond execution. that is not how you win. here's how you actually find something you can win in: 1. trade on higher timeframes where speed doesn't matter. trend following, momentum, mean reversion on daily or weekly bars, none of these require nanosecond execution. 2. go where the big funds can't. less liquid markets, newer asset classes, niche sub markets. the capital they manage is too large for those markets to matter to them, but they can matter to you. 3. harvest risk premiums. that doesn't get arbitraged away very fast and can persists because the underlying risk is real. the biggest mistake I see newer algo traders make is spending months building something that "tries" to compete directly with firms like this. it's a fun project, but it's not going to work. know which game you're playing. and more importantly, know which game you're not.
Goshawk Trades@GoshawkTrades

Jane Street just showed the inside of their AI training data center in Texas. 4,032 GPUs. 56 racks. 8,000 km of fiber. liquid cooling running through every server because air cooling can't handle the heat anymore. but the part that got me was the origin story. Ron Minsky, who co-heads their technology group. said their first compute cluster was literally six Dell boxes stacked on top of each other at the end of a desk row. they called it "the hive." the trading systems sat out in the room with the traders because they wanted to be able to unplug them if something went wrong. at one point, someone vacuuming the office unplugged a live trading system in the middle of the day. from six Dell boxes and a vacuum cleaner incident to a liquid-cooled GPU data center processing trades in under 100 nanoseconds. that's a 20-year arc.

English
31
108
1.3K
155.1K
Ankit Garg
Ankit Garg@Ankit_Quant·
@VinayakLahoti Yeah. There would be. But it isn’t really orthogonal to start falling different set ups
English
0
0
0
49
Vinayak Lahoti
Vinayak Lahoti@VinayakLahoti·
@Ankit_Quant True But there's still some diveraification due to covariances between different instrument return distribution
English
1
0
1
84
Ankit Garg
Ankit Garg@Ankit_Quant·
Trading same set of rules with different parameters (say z-score cut off or lookback) on same instrument do not count as different set ups. If I run the same 4 variants on 25 names, that does not count 100 set ups. It’s really 1 set up, just diversified across instruments and parameters.
English
8
0
26
3.8K
J
J@_joatmon·
@Ankit_Quant I have similar thoughts. Strategies have to be orthogonal to each other to count as unique. Running variants of the same strategy with different parameters won't qualify.
English
1
0
1
158
Ankit Garg retweetledi
Priyanka Chaturvedi🇮🇳
Priyanka Chaturvedi🇮🇳@priyankac19·
सनातन धर्म वह है जो न कभी पैदा हुआ और न कभी नष्ट होगा ~ यह अनादि है, अनंत है और शाश्वत है।
हिन्दी
959
4.3K
23.6K
337.8K
Ankit Garg retweetledi
Abhijit Iyer-Mitra
Abhijit Iyer-Mitra@Iyervval·
Udayanidhi repeats - in the assembly this time “Sanatana Dharma must be eradicated”….. @actorvijay aka @CMOTamilnadu nods his head and agrees and thanks Udayanidhi for the statement 👏🏾👏🏾👏🏾.
English
531
2.6K
6.7K
363.3K
Ankit Garg retweetledi
Dark Pill
Dark Pill@darkandcrude·
Modi: Save water Logical person: Goes to kitchen & stops the unnecessarily flowing tap Dehati argumentative person: I will save water only if Modi stops taking bath Don’t be that Dehati Jethani whose brain is filled simply with token arguments
English
284
1.2K
6.4K
87.2K
Ankit Garg retweetledi
The Hawk Eye
The Hawk Eye@thehawkeyex·
PM is appealing to use public transport. Dmbfuk ppl- PM should do it first. No. This is an idiotic argument. PM is not a common man. PM's time is more expensive than yours. His security can't be compromised. He needs to take care of 20 ministries, 50 high-intensity projects, and 30 critical meetings pertaining to national interests. His efficiency is important. So don't compare yourself with PM. Yes, he has appealed. This is not a decree. Only a request. If any other head of state had done it, countrymen follow in the interest of nation. This is not politics. If you don't, tomorrow fuel prices will be increased and that will cost to your pocket only. Then you can continue driving your 6 kmpl German car at ₹120/ltr.
Bhandari ka Vyang@GurugramDeals

I will continue to stack Gold, will do more road trips in my German petrol SUV which gives 6kmpl, will travel abroad at least 2-3 times a year (one already done this year), call all my staff to office everyday (canceling hybrid model). I'd like to first see him & entire cabinet fly in commercial airline, travel in single car (no convoy) while not blocking the roads and using Indian car. Also, he must stop going abroad himself first.

English
413
704
2.9K
121.6K