Discovering Universal Technical Indicators with Alphaevolve
Posted29 days agoActive29 days ago
papers.ssrn.comResearchstory
informativeneutral
Debate
20/100
EconomyTechnical IndicatorsMachine Learning
Key topics
Economy
Technical Indicators
Machine Learning
Discussion Activity
Light discussionFirst comment
N/A
Peak period
2
0-1h
Avg / period
2
Key moments
- 01Story posted
Dec 4, 2025 at 4:33 PM EST
29 days ago
Step 01 - 02First comment
Dec 4, 2025 at 4:33 PM EST
0s after posting
Step 02 - 03Peak activity
2 comments in 0-1h
Hottest window of the conversation
Step 03 - 04Latest activity
Dec 4, 2025 at 4:38 PM EST
29 days ago
Step 04
Generating AI Summary...
Analyzing up to 500 comments to identify key contributors and discussion patterns
ID: 46153392Type: storyLast synced: 12/4/2025, 9:45:12 PM
Want the full context?
Jump to the original sources
Read the primary article or dive into the live Hacker News thread when you're ready.
These motifs included multi-scale momentum, entropy-based filtering, volatility-adaptive scaling, and regime gating. They reappeared independently across runs, suggesting that certain indicator structures may function as “market invariants” under diverse microstructures.
The system does not use prior knowledge of finance; it only evaluates candidate architectures by out-of-sample performance and stability. The repeated convergence raises questions about whether modern markets impose structural constraints that shape successful technical signals.
Across markets with very different behavior — crypto (jump-prone), FX (mean-reverting), equity indices (regime-switching) — the evolved indicators tended to modulate position sizing based on: • local entropy (as a proxy for noise/chaos) • short + medium horizon trend consistency • volatility bursts
This is consistent with the idea that markets penalize signals most during entropy spikes, regardless of asset class.
Would be interested in perspectives from people studying microstructure-aware signal generation.