# Saaa-wing batter



## Gringotts Bank

Some swing trades should give very good returns in next few days/weeks.

NCK
AKP
EML
PRG
ING
SSM
IPH
COF
CIM


----------



## Roller_1

What tells you this GB?


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Roller_1 said:


> What tells you this GB?



If a stock's previous swing was fairly 'clean' or regular, the next swing tends to follow suit and have predictable targets.  Trying to capture the second half of an already established upswing.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

COF is off to a good start.  

Might remove that one from the list.


----------



## peter2

@Gringotts Bank   I think it would be in all our interests if you provide more detail. The proverbial dart throwing monkey can pick nine stock codes and a few of them will go up.  

How much are you going to risk on each trade? overall?
How are you going to create a profit by trading all of them?


----------



## Gringotts Bank

peter2 said:


> @Gringotts Bank   I think it would be in all our interests if you provide more detail. The proverbial dart throwing monkey can pick nine stock codes and a few of them will go up.
> 
> How much are you going to risk on each trade? overall?
> How are you going to create a profit by trading all of them?




I'm not putting much effort into this - it's pretty informal and I won't post real time exits or stops unless I'm watching at the time.  I'm only taking some of the trades posted.  Just putting up the list in case someone with a lot of cash and not a care in the world wants to piggy back me.  Such people exist.

Method is simple - explained above.

SSM would have sold that at 1.30.  Reached its target today.

New:  long SBM at close, target 3.18

Watch SKC.  Pot stocks ready to move.


----------



## skc

Gringotts Bank said:


> COF is off to a good start.
> 
> Might remove that one from the list.




lol. 



Gringotts Bank said:


> Watch SKC.  Pot stocks ready to move.




Why are you watching me?!?! I don't move pot stocks.


----------



## Trembling Hand

HC has finally taken over ASF


----------



## Gringotts Bank

SIG up to 1.35
watch AOG for breakout.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Sell AOG at open.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

ECX, EVT

The original stocks in-trade, nothing much happening.


----------



## Quant

I read this thread and my IQ dropped 10 points


----------



## skc

Gringotts Bank said:


> Sell AOG at open.




You called a breakout then you sell the open? 



Quant said:


> I read this thread and my IQ dropped 10 points




It is not possible for IQ to go negative.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

skc said:


> You called a breakout then you sell the open?




Yep.  AOG had a very near target.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Quant said:


> I read this thread and my IQ dropped 10 points



If you think complexity is a requirement for profitability, you're in error.


----------



## Quant

Gringotts Bank said:


> If you think complexity is a requirement for profitability, you're in error.





Well keeping the complex as simple as possible is a positive but plain simple aint making anyone rich  , thinking is under rated


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Quant said:


> plain simple aint making anyone rich




Is that so?  Better tell all those people who got filthy rich following the simplest of approaches.


----------



## Trembling Hand

Gringotts Bank said:


> Is that so?  Better tell all those people who got filthy rich following the simplest of approaches.



You are talking about the people who buy a lottery ticket?


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Some gold and silver stocks getting close to breakout.

PRU, SLR, AQG.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

open:

NCK
AKP
EML
PRG 
ING
SSM
IPH
CIM
SBM
EXC 
EVT
+ several gold stocks at today's close likely.

closed:

AOG
SSM


----------



## Gringotts Bank

closed returns

AOG +2%
EML +2%  (sold at 1.59 today)
SSM +6%

Most of the open trades are in negative territory.  PRG did exactly what the system predicted - just drew the lines manually and placed them incorrectly.  Have coded the lines to avoid a repeat of this.

Most of the gold stocks weren't added at close, apart from PRU which broke out.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Sold ING - too slow to move.

break even.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Add APE and RMS at close.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Sell RMS

+2%

Some targets are very close to the entry.  Others aren't.
Win rate has to be very high for this approach to work.

A pattern emerging - those stocks which have met the target quickly tend to power on.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Add AWC MTR and SLC at close


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Open:
NCK @ 7.44
AKP @ 16.45
PRG - fat finger
IPH @ 4.98
CIM @ 38.66
SBM @ 2.86
ECX (not EXC typo) @3.9
EVT - fat finger but let's see how it goes
SIG @ 1.29
AWC @1.845
MTR @ 3.07
SLC @ 2.48

closed:
AOG +2%
EML +2%
SSM +6%
RMS +2%
ING 0%


----------



## Gringotts Bank

sell SBM 3.09  
+8%


----------



## tech/a

Quick to sell winners
Slow to sell losers.

I prefer the opposite.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

tech/a said:


> Quick to sell winners
> Slow to sell losers.
> 
> I prefer the opposite.




True.  That's why it needs a very high win rate.  Average loser is bigger than the average winner. 

Stops are always at the most recent low pivot (close<pivot).  Profit targets are calculated at entry.  Not going to do position sizing calcs on here but that will affect things further.


----------



## tech/a

Do you know the average win rate?
Do you know the average win size in terms of R
Do you know the average loss in terms of R.

Or is this a wing it exercise in Hypotheticals.

What if you swapped to selling losers really quickly --even if they return to B/E before
they hit a stop
and you hold winners to at least > an R multiple that reflects a loss R multiple?

You may position size with a 1-2% stop but by ratcheting you could end up with
.5% in reality.
Much easier to profit .

Just an Idea as the duck flies by.


----------



## Roller_1

Have you backtested this GB?? or are you winging it?

Just saw your post Tech beat me to it =|


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Roller_1 said:


> Have you backtested this GB?? or are you winging it?
> 
> Just saw your post Tech beat me to it =|




If what I do here looks reasonable, then I might spend the money to get it coded to the point where it can be backtested.  The job is far too complicated for me.  I have it coded to the point where the lines are plotted as I need them... then I just do the rest manually. 

What I was looking for initially was a system that allows me to trade higher turnover stocks, since my reversion systems (for midcaps) began to suffer far too much from slippage.  With reversion systems on the ASX, you only need a few people to know where the turning points are to make things difficult.  Depth can suddenly get very thin at the very point you need to enter.


----------



## Roller_1

Gringotts Bank said:


> If what I do here looks reasonable, then I might spend the money to get it coded to the point where it can be backtested.  The job is far too complicated for me.  I have it coded to the point where the lines are plotted as I need them... then I just do the rest manually.
> 
> What I was looking for initially was a system that allows me to trade higher turnover stocks, since my reversion systems (for midcaps) began to suffer far too much from slippage.  With reversion systems on the ASX, you only need a few people to know where the turning points are to make things difficult.  Depth can suddenly get very thin at the very point you need to enter.




What orders are you using on your reversion systems to get the slippage issues? i use LMT orders so that helps, you may get a partial fill or missed trade evry now and then but not too bad. Works well. Then i exit on the open in the auction so i've always had the opening price


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Roller_1 said:


> What orders are you using on your reversion systems to get the slippage issues? i use LMT orders so that helps, you may get a partial fill or missed trade evry now and then but not too bad. Works well. Then i exit on the open in the auction so i've always had the opening price




Limit contingent orders.


----------



## Roller_1

Gringotts Bank said:


> Limit contingent orders.



Don't really know what you mean by that but ok


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Roller_1 said:


> Don't really know what you mean by that but ok



contingent = conditional


----------



## Roller_1

i wa


Gringotts Bank said:


> contingent = conditional



i was talking about the other bits to that post, did you edit it? or maybe i was seeing things


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Roller_1 said:


> i wa
> 
> i was talking about the other bits to that post, did you edit it? or maybe i was seeing things



oh yeh, I just allow one or two price steps on top of the limit.  Last price + a buffer.


----------



## Roller_1

Gringotts Bank said:


> oh yeh, I just allow one or two price steps on top of the limit.  Last price + a buffer.



How can slippage occur if you're using a LMT order


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Roller_1 said:


> How can slippage occur if you're using a LMT order



A thin market.  Wide spreads.  Remember I'm using contingent orders, so they will trigger when I'm not watching.  You get a tiny fill and it takes off, leaving you with an annoying parcel to offload.


----------



## Roller_1

I trade the all ords and have my limit orders just sitting in the market waiting, i dont have too many issues, i am using liquidity filters though so i'm not trading dog stocks. I did get a partial today though but i think it may fill later on.


----------



## Boggo

tech/a said:


> Do you know the average win rate?
> Do you know the average win size in terms of R
> Do you know the average loss in terms of R.
> 
> Or is this a wing it exercise in Hypotheticals.
> 
> What if you swapped to selling losers really quickly --even if they return to B/E before
> they hit a stop
> and you hold winners to at least > an R multiple that reflects a loss R multiple?
> 
> You may position size with a 1-2% stop but by ratcheting you could end up with
> .5% in reality.
> Much easier to profit .
> 
> Just an Idea as the duck flies by.




In addition to what the duck says, an extract from a book I have here.


----------



## Quant

Boggo said:


> In addition to what the duck says, an extract from a book I have here.



Furthermore here is a probability matrix  , a 50% drawdown in an account needs a 100% return to get back to scratch  . Cant speak for anyone else but in my world % trade success is a higher priority than R , don't get me wrong they are both important for sure but % has a bigger say in curve smoothness and risk of ruin  . 2 systems with the same expectancy I will take the high % every time even though the low % potentially has better returns  . Definitely a whole thread could be devoted to this , but I'm already convinced so I will leave that up to others  .

Risk of ruin is the worst case scenario , in a large enough sample size at some stage you will see the skinnier end of the curve  .


----------



## Gringotts Bank

OZL @ 2.18


----------



## skc

Gringotts Bank said:


> OZL @ 2.18




That is either an awesome entry price... or a typo.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

skc said:


> That is either an awesome entry price... or a typo.




yeh mistake OZL @ 6.63
sell 6.86


----------



## Gringotts Bank

*Open:*
[NCK @ 7.44 - see below]
AKP @ 16.45
[PRG - fat finger ]
IPH @ 4.98
CIM @ 38.66
ECX @3.9
EVT - taking this out of calcs from now on
AWC @1.845
MTR @ 3.07
SLC @ 2.48
APE @ 7.96
MYX @ 1.095 (new)
BKL @ 106.12 (new)
AQG @2.12 (new)
NCK has a second buy signal at 7.09.  New average @ 7.26.

*closed:*
AOG +2%
EML +2%
SSM +6%
RMS +2%
ING 0% (reached its target today - should have held on)
SIG -8%
OZL +3%
SBM  +8%


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Position sizing is possible to some degree since the targets/stops are hard levels.  But it's tricky when some targets are close and others quite a distance away. 2-5% risk per trade might work ok if the system turns out to have a high win rate.

Stopped out trades are going to be shorted since they too appear to behave according to the levels identified.

Short SIG 1.195


----------



## tech/a

How are you doing that?
CFD
What about slippage from the spread.

This looks suspiciously like your winging it!


----------



## Gringotts Bank

tech/a said:


> How are you doing that?
> CFD
> What about slippage from the spread.
> 
> This looks suspiciously like your winging it!




I've already said that this thread is an exploratory exercise, and I'm not interested in putting too much effort into it.  Trading diaries don't have much value unless they are carried on for many years.  But they can be used as a very rough guide as to whether the idea is worth coding up into something backtestable.

I am taking _only some _of the trades with real money, to get a feel for it.  I'm not saying which ones.


----------



## tech/a

The profitable ones I'm sure


----------



## Gringotts Bank

sell AWC 1.905
+3%


----------



## Boggo

Gringotts Bank said:


> sell AWC 1.905
> +3%




Can I ask why you sold GB, I still hold on my weekly system since 17th Oct.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Boggo said:


> Can I ask why you sold GB, I still hold on my weekly system since 17th Oct.




I made the buy based on manually drawn lines.  The coded lines have a slightly different angle and the target was hit a little while back.  So I don't have anything useful to say, sorry.  Looks pretty comfortable for a measured move up from here.


----------



## Boggo

Gringotts Bank said:


> I made the buy based on manually drawn lines.  The coded lines have a slightly different angle and the target was hit a little while back.  So I don't have anything useful to say, sorry.  Looks pretty comfortable for a measured move up from here.




No worries GB, profit is profit


----------



## Roller_1

Gringotts Bank said:


> Position sizing is possible to some degree since the targets/stops are hard levels.  But it's tricky when some targets are close and others quite a distance away. 2-5% risk per trade might work ok if the system turns out to have a high win rate.




Win rate would want to be bloody high with a 5% risk per trade!


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Sold MYX 1.11 +1.5%
*
Open: *n = new at close
AKP @ 16.45
IPH @ 4.98
CIM @ 38.66
ECX @3.9
MTR @ 3.07
SLC @ 2.48
APE @ 7.96
BKL @ 106.12
AQG @2.12
NCK ave 7.26
BAL @5.73 n
SGR@5.2 n
SKC @ 4.12  n
SIG short at 1.195

*closed:*
AOG +2%
EML +2%
SSM +6%
RMS +2%
ING 0%
SIG -8%
OZL +3%
SBM +8%
AWC + 2%
MYX +1.5%


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Roller_1 said:


> Win rate would want to be bloody high with a 5% risk per trade!




1-2% (of total capital) is probably going to be more realistic.  Nearby stops/targets can require positions which are far too large.

The absolute % gain for winners is going to range between 2% and ? 15%.

I'm looking at a R:R of about 0.7:1.  Very approximate.  That would mean I'd need a 70% win rate if my thinking is correct.

Then there's profitability.  The 'do I get to eat tonight' index.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Sell PRU 0.32, +10%
Sell SLC 2.62, +6%
Sell BKL 1.08,+2%


----------



## Gringotts Bank

SGR 5.25, +1%*

Open: *n = new at close
AKP @ 16.45
IPH @ 4.98
CIM @ 38.66
ECX @3.9
MTR @ 3.07
SLC @ 2.48
APE @ 7.96
BKL @ 106.12
AQG @2.12
NCK ave 7.26
BAL @5.73
SKC @ 4.12
SIG short at 1.195
BAP need lower price to enter, n
RCR need lower price, n
SFR @6.11, n

*closed:*
AOG +2%
EML +2%
SSM +6%
RMS +2%
ING 0%
SIG -8%
OZL +3%
SBM +8%
AWC + 2%
MYX +1.5%
SGR 5.25, +1%
PRU 0.32, +10%
SLC 2.62, +6%
BKL 1.08,+2%


----------



## Gringotts Bank

cover SIG short at the open, +21%


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Sell SKC 4.23, +3%


----------



## Gringotts Bank

*Open: *n = new at close
AKP @ 16.45
IPH @ 4.98
CIM @ 38.66
ECX @3.9
MTR @ 3.07
APE @ 7.96
AQG @2.12
NCK ave 7.26
BAL @5.73
BAP @ 5.39, n
[RCR - was waiting for entry, but doesn't look right.  No position]
SFR @6.11
BGA @ 6.35, n

*closed:*
AOG +2%
EML +2%
SSM +6%
RMS +2%
ING 0%
SIG -8%
OZL +3%
SBM +8%
AWC + 2%
MYX +1.5%
SGR 5.25, +1%
PRU 0.32, +10%
SLC 2.62, +6%
BKL 1.08,+2%
SIG [short] +21%
SKC +3%


----------



## Gringotts Bank

EMC @ .93, n
SAS @ .21, n


----------



## Gringotts Bank

http://www.chrisperruna.com/2007/03/07/a-study-in-human-psychology/

Every expert I've ever encountered ranks psychology as the single most important factor in trading success/failure.  Yes, have an edge and money management sorted, but above all, one's mindset will trump everything.  You literally cannot succeed with the wrong mindset.  And conversely, even the most modest edge and ad hoc sizing method will succeed massively with the right mindset.  A statistical expectancy does not ensure a psychological expectancy, though it helps.

Some 'experts' would love you to believe that it takes 50000 hours of staring at charts or 5000 lines of complicated coding or a room full of screens to succeed.  It's not true.

http://www.chrisperruna.com/2016/08/07/my-wifes-buy-hold-strategy-still-crushing-the-professionals/


----------



## tech/a

Mindset alone will not guarantee success
Nor will a portfolio

Just as there are horrible golfers who practice relentlessly using affirmations 
Lots of coaching 
There are a few who get their card
So it is with investment.

GB
Why are you not following this guy?

You seem to jump from one idea to the next.

It's not that hard!


----------



## tech/a

You know having amassed more than I could spend in a lifetime the secret in my view is

Recognise opportunity
Understand how to take advantage of it
DO SOMETHING

You only need to get 1 right

And a huge dose of LUCK


----------



## Quant

Positive Expectancy builds a positive mindset  .  There is the " simple " part .


----------



## CanOz

Gringotts Bank said:


> http://www.chrisperruna.com/2016/08/07/my-wifes-buy-hold-strategy-still-crushing-the-professionals/




High tide floats all boats....good on her for picking some winners....let's see how she goes taking profits when she should. Can you find a better example of psychology....maybe Brett Steenbarger at least?


----------



## tech/a

If your undercapitalised 
You can be as positive as you like
But you'll STILL suffer from fear during draw down
If you have plenty of bucks you'll be able to make. Clear decisions


----------



## tech/a

Exmouth is pretty warm
Diving with the whale sharks


----------



## Gringotts Bank

CanOz said:


> High tide floats all boats....good on her for picking some winners....let's see how she goes taking profits when she should. Can you find a better example of psychology....maybe Brett Steenbarger at least?




I've posted heaps of information over the years; some of it academic (incl. Steenbarger), some personal, some anecdotal, some involving practical exercises, some trading diaries.  Mostly it serves as fodder for ridicule.  Either that or it just gets ignored or shut down.  In fact I was thinking today how every single argument I've had on ASF in some way links to me defending this stuff, so I'm better off saying nothing and just doing my own thing.  cynic, minwa and a few others get it, but even with them it's hard to get a discussion going.


----------



## ThingyMajiggy

Gringotts Bank said:


> so I'm better off saying nothing and just doing my own thing.




I think it's just people don't really know what your "thing" is, you seem to swap around a lot. If a certain way of going about things is what you believe in, then stick at doing that and prove the nay-sayers wrong, easy. Might as well stop trying to "discuss" it with others and talk them around, we obviously all have a different idea of what "works", so it's highly unlikely that you're going to change any minds, especially if what they're doing has clearly worked for them, get on with it and do what you think will work for you. Time will always tell.


----------



## tech/a

Exactly TJ


----------



## Gringotts Bank

NCK sell 6.76, -7%.  Counts as two losing trades.  Won't add to position in-trade from now on.

Every stopped out trade was to be shorted but NCK already met its short target intraday at exactly 6.54 (encouraging).  Other than that unchanged from yesterday.

Eventual win rate impossible to guess at.  If it turns out to be profitable, massive leverage would be required to take every trade.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

tech/a said:


> Exmouth is pretty warm
> Diving with the whale sharks




What's that mean...


----------



## tech/a

I'm in Exmouth
What else would it mean?


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Sell CIM 41.07.  Close to target but struggling to hit it.  +6%
Looking at the depth, 41 might be a more realistic price.  Depth very thin and this one's not an actual trade.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Sell EMC 1.02, +10%


----------



## Gringotts Bank

*Open: *n = new at close
AKP @ 16.45
IPH @ 4.98
ECX @3.9
MTR @ 3.07
APE @ 7.96
AQG @2.12
BAL @5.73
BAP @ 5.39
SFR @6.11
BGA @ 6.35
SAS @ .21

*closed:*
AOG +2%
EML +2%
SSM +6%
RMS +2%
ING 0%
SIG -8%
OZL +3%
SBM +8%
AWC + 2%
MYX +1.5%
SGR +1%
PRU  +10%
SLC  +6%
BKL +2%
SIG [short] +21%
SKC +3%
EMC +10%
CIM +5%
NCK -7%
NCK -7%


----------



## tech/a

What do the + and - % relate to

Capital invested?
Profit ?
R?


----------



## Gringotts Bank

tech/a said:


> What do the + and - % relate to
> 
> Capital invested?
> Profit ?
> R?




Actual % profit (sellprice - buyprice)/buyprice*100%.  If a constant risk-per-trade is applied, then such a figure is not all that important, obviously.  But stocks can gap, so it needs recording.

I haven't calculated the RRR, but it looks to be around 0.6.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Summary at 3 weeks using notional 100k capital base, leverage and 1% risk per trade.  Assumes 0.6 average RRR.


current closed profits:  $7000 (approx)

if all open trades lose* from this point on, total profit will be: -$8500  (approx)

if all open trades win  "................................................": $13500  (approx)

if half of open trades win "...........................................": $2500 (approx.)
All depends on what happens with the remaining trades.  Current win rate in a down market has been very high.  Ords is -1% over the same period.

*the idea with the system is that any stock which gets stopped out is shorted.  The two stocks which have been stopped out so far proved to be excellent shorting opportunities (SIG, NCK), so maybe some of the losers can be recouped. That would make things interesting.  

Next step is to get the coding improved for ease of scanning and maybe backtesting.  Currently takes nearly 30 minutes to find the stocks of interest which won't work if trying to enter at the close.


----------



## CanOz

Lever up......


----------



## Gringotts Bank

I'm not confident enough yet.  I'm still only placing some of the trades.

The edge does seem to apply across different instruments and time frames but is very time-consuming to find it.  That's the main constraint, along with funding.

MFF @ 1.965
HFR @ 1.025
AIA @ 6.62
IOF @ 4.71


----------



## Gringotts Bank

Sell SAS .23, +10%


----------



## Gringotts Bank

AKP @ 16.45
IPH @ 4.98
ECX @3.9
MTR @ 3.07
AQG @2.12
BAL @5.73
BAP @ 5.39
SFR @6.11
MFF @ 1.965
AIA @ 6.62
IOF @ 4.71


*closed:*
AOG +2%
EML +2%
SSM +6%
RMS +2%
ING 0%
SIG -8%
OZL +3%
SBM +8%
AWC + 2%
MYX +1.5%
SGR +1%
PRU +10%
SLC +6%
BKL +2%
SIG [short] +21%
SKC +3%
EMC +10%
CIM +5%
NCK -7%
NCK -7%
SAS +10%
APE - 8%
BGA -6%
HFR +2%


----------



## Gringotts Bank

APE short 7.35
BGA short 5.97


----------



## tech/a

You have no allowance for slippage
In and out 
If your swinging long short and trading CFDs you'll have high slippage 


Plus transaction costs


----------



## Trembling Hand

tech/a said:


> You have no allowance for slippage
> In and out
> If your swinging long short and trading CFDs you'll have high slippage
> Plus transaction costs




Thats besides the point. The exercise is to be as vague as possible in the process so as to claim success and proclaim all mentioned theories above and below from here on in legitimate and backed by 'sound evidence'.


----------



## Gringotts Bank

I actually had this coded up.  I've done this many times, either coded it myself or paid someone else to do it.

And guess what...?

There was no statistical edge!  I was trading on confidence (ie. an approach which looked very real, but wasn't).  Everything is well and dandy until you put your technique under the microscope and have an honest look with a backtest.  Then when the maths comes in, you're like "what???", and you start to doubt yourself.  And when you doubt yourself, you make losing trades _with the very same system!!_  It's the confidence that puts you in tune with the flow of the market, and it's _the confidence _which makes you the money.

So the moral of the story is - don't worry about edges or special techniques.  Real edges _do_ exist, but none of them are particlarly juicy.  If they were juicy, hedge funds would be all over them like a rash and trade them into the gorund.

Big Mike is big on the psychological edge.  He says all the top traders spend their time honing that part of their game.  I agree with him.  In fact I'd say it's 95% of the game.


----------

