# Nick Radge's Weekend Trend Trader



## p2tr

Does anyone have any experience using Nick Radge's Weekend Trend Trader? 

Thinking of buying his TurnKey code. The system generates an incredible MAR (CAGR/maxDD) of 1.16 on the US market (Russell 3000 small cap) over 17 years (1995 - 2012).


----------



## minwa

The chartist seems to be advertising a fair bit recently keeps poping up on banners.

Anyone have any audited results on this guy ? Couldn't find anything on the site, looked like a typical sales page with lots of join now buttons


----------



## Ken Oath

I would be interested to hear of any leads for results as well.  Certainly been hearing a lot of Nick Radge.  Not that I doubt his experience or previous results but I always wonder about peoples motives when they are selling a system rather than using it themselves.

Learnt that the hard way about 15 year ago with a 'foolproof' gambling system for the horses with a fancy brochure and a $2500 join fee.  Who was making the guaranteed income and who was taking the risk?


----------



## RegularGains

I saw this book recommended in a different thread. Has anyone put this system to use? Does it work?


----------



## Sean K

p2tr said:


> Does anyone have any experience using Nick Radge's Weekend Trend Trader?
> 
> Thinking of buying his TurnKey code. The system generates an incredible MAR (CAGR/maxDD) of 1.16 on the US market (Russell 3000 small cap) over 17 years (1995 - 2012).



Is it audited?

I think he's got an FSL, but if you can't see audited results then you should be cautious.


----------



## tech/a

Known Nick Radge personally for 18 yrs.
He trades all of his methods personally.

It really is worth the $20 to explore the inside of The
Chartist. You'll have a month to look around
Study the charts and the analysis.
There are massive amounts of specific stock and systems management
Charts and commentary. Fully disclosed result for all systems and methods
From inception to now and much more!

Nick is a no nonsense guy, professional and passionate about making
A difference in your trading.

Sure I'm an advocate he's been instrumental in making me a lot
Of money and he and Trish are valued friends.


----------



## Sean K

tech/a said:


> Known Nick Radge personally for 18 yrs.
> He trades all of his methods personally.
> 
> It really is worth the $20 to explore the inside of The
> Chartist. You'll have a month to look around
> Study the charts and the analysis.
> There are massive amounts of specific stock and systems management
> Charts and commentary. Fully disclosed result for all systems and methods
> From inception to now and much more!
> 
> Nick is a no nonsense guy, professional and passionate about making
> A difference in your trading.
> 
> Sure I'm an advocate he's been instrumental in making me a lot
> Of money and he and Trish are valued friends.



Yet results still not audited.


----------



## tech/a

kennas said:


> Yet results still not audited.




I've never asked.
I will--- he's on a plane to the US right now but will.

I've watched all the systems' live for years to me thats 
Good disclosure.
Pretty hard to hide anything while it's published every day.


----------



## RegularGains

How much do you need to start trading his system? What is the average annual return from such a system?


----------



## Sean K

tech/a said:


> I've never asked.
> I will--- he's on a plane to the US right now but will.
> 
> I've watched all the systems' live for years to me thats
> Good disclosure.
> Pretty hard to hide anything while it's published every day.



I've seen all the winning charts also Tech. Never seen any money put down, or any losing chart results. If you get some audited financial results I would love to see. Otherwise, he's a private trader, selling winning charts. 

This 'trend trader' system, I haven't seen demonstrated, so can't make a judgement but will rely on those that have the results at hand.



> The system generates an incredible MAR (CAGR/maxDD) of 1.16 on the US market (Russell 3000 small cap) over 17 years (1995 - 2012)




Actually, of the time I've seen Nick post and been a member of his forum, I have never seen it. Maybe I didn't have access to that part of his web site.


----------



## IFocus

kennas said:


> Yet results still not audited.





Don't know about audited but he never hid bad results and there were a few as always in trading but he certainly isn't a scammer unlike the other 99% out there


----------



## Sean K

I went to Radge's website to look for facts, but found none.

Then, I went to urbanspoon to look for a restaurant for next weekend and the banner add was The Chartist.


----------



## tech/a

> I've seen all the winning charts also Tech. Never seen any money put down, or any losing chart results. If you get some audited financial results I would love to see. Otherwise, he's a private trader, selling winning charts.




The charts are live so when you fork out your $20 you'll be able to log on and watch yourself.
Ive just logged on and there are plenty in play 1 stopped out so there is a draw down and 6 still open some in profit and some betwen entry and exit. Looks pretty normal to me---nothing fudged.
You'll also be able to search through past results. Those who are seriously interested and need more than the site offers---and it offers plenty --- should give him a call or email. You wont get slick sales talk youll actually get answers to your questions 
There is an FAQ section as well.

For $20 to have a look around----



> This 'trend trader' system, I haven't seen demonstrated, so can't make a judgement but will rely on those that have the results at hand.




Its a $10 paper if you want to have a look.

But I guess if its Under $7000 its of little value and if its above then its a rip off.

*So why does he educate*.

My opinion is --- from knowing the guy----

(1) How much golf can you play (And he's not getting better!---or younger--latest excuse!).
(2) How much fishing can you do without a commercial licence!
(3) Like a lot of Successful traders Nick loves the challenge of not only the markets but the challenge of Business. He wants others to be successful as he knows what success can do to peoples life and life styles. He is an expert in his field so I cant see where it DOESN'T make sense to make that your line of Business. It fills in the void that successful trading leaves. It gives BOTH Nick and Trish a common interest and challenge with satisfaction of being successful in teaching your clients something they will have for life ---while answering your own challenge of business success. (Business --another profession which holds that 90% Fail tag).

I hear it loud and clear but my chosen field is Civil Construction and my Challenge is Trading!


----------



## rnr

kennas said:


> Yet results still not audited.




The Weekend Trend Trader (WTT), an eBook published in November 2013, is a trading/investment strategy designed for and tested on the US stock Market.

The WTT trading system outlined in the book does not form part of the subscription service offered by The Chartist therefore, as a consequence, records of trade entry and exit signals are not recorded for publication or audit.

Weekend Trend Trader


----------



## Sean K

Which accounting firm has audited this system's results?

I'd like to get their name and number.


----------



## tech/a

kennas said:


> Which accounting firm has audited this system's results?
> 
> I'd like to contact them to get their opinion.




Audited results are a sticking point for you.

On a $10 paper.
When he comes back I'll certainly broach the topic
head to head.
Can you point me to *ANY* educator or trader
you know of who actually has audited trading results.

I ran T/Trader for 7 yrs live.
Ran a profit from $30,000 to $376,000 when I stopped it.
All live and all for people to view just like Nicks.
Its in "Holy Grail's"
Never asked for audited results they are there for all to see.
As is Radges and if you go to Penfolds site so is his.

Are audited results all you require Kennas?

And If I gave you a system that returned say 30-60% over 3 yrs that you could trade on futures
What would you pay?
Lets say we use someone like Ernst and Young---I just happen to be a client.
You get the results not the system.
The proof you need.


----------



## rnr

kennas said:


> Which accounting firm has audited this system's results?




Not sure to whom this question is directed!


----------



## systematic

kennas said:


> I went to Radge's website to look for facts, but found none.
> 
> Then, I went to urbanspoon to look for a restaurant for next weekend and the banner add was The Chartist.






Mate, you obviously don't know how google adsense (bing ads etc) works.
It's google following you around the web, showing you ads according to its best guesses at your interests...Not Nick Radge following you around the internet!

Hope you found a nice restaurant.


----------



## Sean K

Dear all, 

Anyone with a FSL proclaiming XX% results can not do so without producing financially audited results. It's that simple. Get a grip! 

Actually, I need to advise the ASX if this is really the case. 

p2tr, please provide a link to this claim.  


I'm going to Biota Dining in November. Looks fantastic!!

Kennas


----------



## tech/a

kennas said:


> Dear all,
> 
> Anyone with a FSL proclaiming XX% results can not do so without producing financially audited results. It's that simple. Get a grip!
> 
> Actually, I need to advise the ASX if this is really the case.
> 
> p2tr, please provide a link to this claim.
> 
> 
> I'm going to Biota Dining in November. Looks fantastic!!
> 
> Kennas





Sorry I've missed the Claim.
Where and who made a claim of return?
I did just above when I asked what you'd pay
But you seem to have created something from nothing?



> The system generates an incredible MAR (CAGR/maxDD) of 1.16 on the US market (Russell 3000 small cap) over 17 years (1995 - 2012).




This will be shown on simulation results. I'm sure you'd get them.


----------



## banco

tech/a said:


> *So why does he educate*.
> 
> My opinion is --- from knowing the guy----
> 
> (1) How much golf can you play (And he's not getting better!---or younger--latest excuse!).
> (2) How much fishing can you do without a commercial licence!
> (3) Like a lot of Successful traders Nick loves the challenge of not only the markets but the challenge of Business. He wants others to be successful as he knows what success can do to peoples life and life styles. He is an expert in his field so I cant see where it DOESN'T make sense to make that your line of Business. It fills in the void that successful trading leaves. It gives BOTH Nick and Trish a common interest and challenge with satisfaction of being successful in teaching your clients something they will have for life ---while answering your own challenge of business success. (Business --another profession which holds that 90% Fail tag).
> 
> I hear it loud and clear but my chosen field is Civil Construction and my Challenge is Trading!




I'd be shocked if less than 85% of his income came from selling trading related services as opposed to actual trading.


----------



## tech/a

banco said:


> I'd be shocked if less than 85% of his income came from selling trading related services as opposed to actual trading.




Well you'd be very very shocked


----------



## IFocus

rnr said:


> Not sure to whom this question is directed!




kennas had a major blow up with Radge......never moved on by the sounds of it keeps having a shot at him like I do at Abbott big difference between the two IMHO.


----------



## banco

tech/a said:


> Well you'd be very very shocked




IIRC correctly his ASX systems at least have not done that well over the past few years so presumably his income from them would be pretty miserly.


----------



## minwa

banco said:


> IIRC correctly his ASX systems at least have not done that well over the past few years so presumably his income from them would be pretty miserly.




He posted a chart of his Growth or Power portfolio, forgot which one on the Chartist FB page a while ago I can't find it now. It was in a drawdown for more than a year. It will be very very difficult for any subscriber to keep on paying & follow someone else's system for that long period of time. Most subscribers probably won't be around when/if the system overcomes the drawdown.

All system providers should have a rule of no subscription fee for losing period. Something like a lot of systems on Collective2, $xx only if profitable for the month. 

I have also searched for Radge's performance and could not find much, although he claims to have run a hedge fund in the past and used to have systems performance ran on Collective2 that are now removed. 

On the bright side he is only charging $660 for each systems codes..unlike a lot of others for $3000+


----------



## tech/a

banco said:


> IIRC correctly his ASX systems at least have not done that well over the past few years so presumably his income from them would be pretty miserly.




His US method has been extraordinary.
I'm sure he trades more than as well as the publicly available methods.


Question to all.
Is there 1 ( or more ) well accepted educator anywhere in the world.
It seems to me that the general population believes *every* educator is 
A waste of time and money.

Yet people will pay 100,000 to become a doctor.
Or $50,000 to become a pilot.
It appears that any money invested in learning how to trade
Or taking a short cut and hiring an expert to point you in the
Right direction ( like hiring a pilot ) is a waste of money.


----------



## rb250660

minwa said:


> He posted a chart of his Growth or Power portfolio, forgot which one on the Chartist FB page a while ago I can't find it now. It was in a drawdown for more than a year. It will be very very difficult for any subscriber to keep on paying & follow someone else's system for that long period of time. Most subscribers probably won't be around when/if the system overcomes the drawdown.
> 
> All system providers should have a rule of no subscription fee for losing period. Something like a lot of systems on Collective2, $xx only if profitable for the month.




I speculate that his subscription income has fallen significantly. The email and online advertising has skyrocketed in the past 12 months.



tech/a said:


> It seems to me that the general population believes *every* educator is a waste of time and money.




This is what I think. The old adage: If they were that good they wouldn't need to sell their own systems. But I'm a skeptic


----------



## Wysiwyg

tech/a said:


> Question to all.
> Is there 1 ( or more ) well accepted educator anywhere in the world.
> It seems to me that the general population believes *every* educator is
> A waste of time and money.



Not one in particular. I think a lot of the stuff has been said and done before in a general sense. I know I repeat on this forum what I have read. Using computers for neural networks or machine learning appears to be an interesting path to explore.    
Simple trend following works okay and in the right conditions works exceptionally well.

Enjoy your discussions mate.


----------



## RegularGains

tech/a said:


> His US method has been extraordinary.




US POWER SETUPS ®? This one? https://www.thechartist.com.au/Benefits/short-term-share-trading.html

Do you have a link to the results? Does his strategies work in down markets (shorting etc)?


----------



## tech/a

rb250660 said:


> I speculate that his subscription income has fallen significantly. The email and online advertising has skyrocketed in the past 12 months.




Complacency in advertising is a bad error in business. Woolies are expanding all the time so to are Coles
Don't see them pulling back.
When your a small business the exciting thing is that 99% of the population have no idea who you are 
So get your name out there.
Increased advertising doesn't mean a thing other than your getting yourself out there.





> This is what I think. The old adage: If they were that good they wouldn't need to sell their own systems. But I'm a skeptic




I often see this argument.
So if your a leading brain surgeon you shouldn't teach what you do.
Or Heart Transplant surgery---if your that good why teach it.

Finance is the only industry I know of which absolutely shuns education.
You can't teach it because you shouldn't  have to.
You can't present it to forums because you are just pumping your ego.
You shouldn't invest in it because you'll just get ripped off.

So your left to self educate.
Most find this the most expensive education of all.

So what do you suggest.
How have you become a profitable trader---I'm presuming you are!


----------



## tech/a

RegularGains said:


> US POWER SETUPS ®? This one? https://www.thechartist.com.au/Benefits/short-term-share-trading.html
> 
> Do you have a link to the results? Does his strategies work in down markets (shorting etc)?




Contact Radge


----------



## systematic

minwa said:


> All system providers should have a rule of no subscription fee for losing period. Something like a lot of systems on Collective2, $xx only if profitable for the month.




That's ridiculous.
What?  And charge more if you have a period that performs above the historical system average?  I guess that would be fair.

In my opinion:  A subscription fee should be a fairly small percentage of your portfolio, and it's a cost you choose to pay for information - no different to buying a "charting" program, a subscription to Australian Financial Review or whatever.  You wouldn't hit your data supplier up for the fact that you had a losing period whilst using their price feed?  Being upset about it suggests to me that maybe someone has overextended themselves.

Of course, the model of no pay if losing and pay extra if winning can be fair (as mentioned above) and of course, is how some funds operate (fee for performance type model).  

In my book...as long as the service is honest and tells you what information you are going to get...and then gives it to you (at the agreed on price)...you can't complain.  No more than you can complain to the AFR for losses when they post on the front page that the market has crashed overnight.

Like in any market that exists; sadly their are the sellers that are dishonest - but that's a different issue.

An honest system provider gives you the information they said they would give, upon signing up.  That's it.


----------



## Sir Burr

tech/a said:


> His US method has been *extraordinary*.




synonyms:	remarkable, exceptional, amazing, astonishing, astounding, sensational, stunning, incredible, unbelievable, phenomenal; striking, outstanding, momentous, impressive, singular, memorable.

A strong word to use Tech, has it beaten the index since inception?


----------



## tech/a

Sir Burr said:


> synonyms:	remarkable, exceptional, amazing, astonishing, astounding, sensational, stunning, incredible, unbelievable, phenomenal; striking, outstanding, momentous, impressive, singular, memorable.
> 
> A strong word to use Tech, has it beaten the index since inception?




I believe so.
I don't know monthly results
But on a few occasions I remember Nick commenting on how well it was going with double digit returns
I remember thinking at the Time that it was extraordinary ,excellent, well above average,impressive.
It's a short term method which is very active in the market.
you get the trades emailed or " The chartist " can for a fee handle your trades.
Thats about all I know.

We hardly ever talk trading!


----------



## rb250660

tech/a said:


> Finance is the only industry I know of which absolutely shuns education.




Unfortunately a result of the shonky operators out there flooding this game. My cousin lost everything to one of these guys. I guess that's where my skepticism comes in.



tech/a said:


> So your left to self educate.




To a large extent, yes.



tech/a said:


> So what do you suggest.
> How have you become a profitable trader---I'm presuming you are!




Original ideas, think counter-intuitively, understand what drives price action. Perhaps take an existing idea and make enough transformations/improvements to really make it your own.

I have my ideas on how to be profitable and they're pretty different (and not up for discussion) but hey, I'm sure there are literally thousands of ways to drag profits from the game. And yes, your presumption is correct; I'd better be careful here, kennas might want to see audited statements :

----

Back to the WTT system. I have coded it, it works on ASX and US data, it's not something I would trade because it doesn't meet my objectives. If low maintenance trend following is your thing it's probably worth a look. Do your own validation, it only costs US$9.53 to buy the idea, or free if your clever enough... Code it, validate it and do it (I think that's roughly what Nick says!).


----------



## minwa

systematic said:


> That's ridiculous.
> What?  And charge more if you have a period that performs above the historical system average?  I guess that would be fair.
> 
> In my opinion:  A subscription fee should be a fairly small percentage of your portfolio, and it's a cost you choose to pay for information - no different to buying a "charting" program, a subscription to Australian Financial Review or whatever.  You wouldn't hit your data supplier up for the fact that you had a losing period whilst using their price feed?  Being upset about it suggests to me that maybe someone has overextended themselves.
> 
> Of course, the model of no pay if losing and pay extra if winning can be fair (as mentioned above) and of course, is how some funds operate (fee for performance type model).
> 
> In my book...as long as the service is honest and tells you what information you are going to get...and then gives it to you (at the agreed on price)...you can't complain.  No more than you can complain to the AFR for losses when they post on the front page that the market has crashed overnight.
> 
> Like in any market that exists; sadly their are the sellers that are dishonest - but that's a different issue.
> 
> An honest system provider gives you the information they said they would give, upon signing up.  That's it.




Comparing a news and chart provider to a signal provider...seriously ??

If you ran a cherry picking farm would you pay the same money to 

1. A guy who turns in 5 buckets a day.
2. A guy who turns in 0 buckets a day, but not only that, he interferes with other workers and reduces 2 buckets picked by other guy.

Or would you change it to a $/per bucket turned in ?

Same as paying for a losing period. But according to your mentality, the guy no. 2, did what he promised to do, TRIED to pick cherries. Like a system which goes into a long period of drawdown, it TRIED to give you information that made money, but it didn't work.

I guess you're the type that invests in mutual funds instead of hedge funds.


----------



## TheUnknown

I was subscribed to thechartist US Power setup..., last year it returned something like 40%+ return... Last time i had access to the website it was back in feb/march this year and at that time all profit from last year was gone. I dont know what profit they are in now or what loss.

The ASX power setup was a sh!tbox in terms of return complete rubbish, dont know who would pay for that junk guess that is the reason why he has none stop google ads which are not cheap.


Anyone that has access to US Power setups can you post how its doing this year since feb/march after giving back all profits from last year?


----------



## systematic

minwa said:


> Comparing a news and chart provider to a signal provider...seriously ??
> 
> If you ran a cherry picking farm would you pay the same money to
> 
> 1. A guy who turns in 5 buckets a day.
> 2. A guy who turns in 0 buckets a day, but not only that, he interferes with other workers and reduces 2 buckets picked by other guy.
> 
> Or would you change it to a $/per bucket turned in ?
> 
> Same as paying for a losing period. But according to your mentality, the guy no. 2, did what he promised to do, TRIED to pick cherries. Like a system which goes into a long period of drawdown, it TRIED to give you information that made money, but it didn't work.




...You managed to miss my point.  I also compared it to managed funds (in performance fees - using YOUR example of not paying whilst in drawdown; I simply queried whether you think you should pay more when the system OUTperforms?)

Look - you missed it.  What I am saying is - *in my opinion* - you buy a system.  For $10, $100 or $1000.  You like the system.  You like its stats etc.  And YOU decide to trade it.  Do you owe the system provider any of your profits?  Do they owe you a refund because the system went into drawdown?  Are you seriously suggesting they do?

So - assuming (and that's a big assumption) you agree with me in buying a "one off" system...how does that differ to a "signal provider?"  If you like the newsletter's philosophy and disclosed stats etc enough to use it - that's your choice.  That's my opinion.  It's your choice whether to keep going or not in a drawdown.  Again - does the vendor owe you anything?  Do you owe them anything?

Of course- there's nothing to stop a vendor offering the money back - that's their business choice.





minwa said:


> I guess you're the type that invests in mutual funds instead of hedge funds.




...I only invest in one fund, and I'm the investment manager.


----------



## gordon2007

I've had some experience with Nick on a business level and it was all good.

I've also seen Nick's actions on a personal level and I will say this, he has helped a very young man facing very significant adversities. Nick has donated his time, money and efforts to this person without asking anything in return. I will always hold Nick in a very high regard and will always believe money is not his sole objective in life. I found him to be someone who genuinely cares about your success in life,  not just in investing. 

He is, without a doubt, an educator, not someone just after your money.


----------



## Julia

tech/a said:


> Yet people will pay 100,000 to become a doctor.
> Or $50,000 to become a pilot.



Both educational programs being run by accredited organisations and with qualifying examinations and physical checks all along the way.
Doesn't really seem like a practical analogy to me, though I understand the point you're trying to make.



> So you're left to self educate.



And nothing wrong with that.  Unlike medicine or aviation, all the necessary information is available for free on the internet.  Anyone with a reasonable comprehension capacity can become financially literate.
The same cannot be said of someone wishing to become a doctor or a pilot.


----------



## minwa

systematic said:


> ...You managed to miss my point.  I also compared it to managed funds (in performance fees - using YOUR example of not paying whilst in drawdown; I simply queried whether you think you should pay more when the system OUTperforms?)
> 
> Look - you missed it.  What I am saying is - *in my opinion* - you buy a system.  For $10, $100 or $1000.  You like the system.  You like its stats etc.  And YOU decide to trade it.  Do you owe the system provider any of your profits?  Do they owe you a refund because the system went into drawdown?  Are you seriously suggesting they do?
> 
> So - assuming (and that's a big assumption) you agree with me in buying a "one off" system...how does that differ to a "signal provider?"  If you like the newsletter's philosophy and disclosed stats etc enough to use it - that's your choice.  That's my opinion.  It's your choice whether to keep going or not in a drawdown.  Again - does the vendor owe you anything?  Do you owe them anything?
> 
> Of course- there's nothing to stop a vendor offering the money back - that's their business choice.
> 
> 
> ...I only invest in one fund, and I'm the investment manager.




Buying a system that you then "own" is different to a ongoing subscription. I agree if you see the stats for the system and then buy it and assuming the stats were correct, the vendor owes no refunds. For an ongoing subscription it is different. 

Buying a system is like a buying a lawn mower how you use it is up to you. Subscribing to an ongoing subscription that losses money consistently over the defined period (say 1 month for short term trading portfolios or 3 months for intermediate holdings) is like continuing to pay for a gardener to work on your garden but with weeds growing faster than they are cut.  

On outperformance, it is up to the vendor if they want to increase the price of their subscription as their signals keeps generating better performance than the last period. I will bet that given the choice, people will be more than happy to pay higher subscription fees next period if this period performs better than the last as opposed to paying for a subscription keeps losing money.


----------



## Muschu

gordon2007 said:


> I've had some experience with Nick on a business level and it was all good.
> 
> I've also seen Nick's actions on a personal level and I will say this, he has helped a very young man facing very significant adversities. Nick has donated his time, money and efforts to this person without asking anything in return. I will always hold Nick in a very high regard and will always believe money is not his sole objective in life. I found him to be someone who genuinely cares about your success in life,  not just in investing.
> 
> He is, without a doubt, an educator, not someone just after your money.




I've met Nick a couple of times and communicated with him by phone and email.

My view is that he and his wife are very authentic and good people who also contribute to our society in selfless ways that are unrelated to their business. 

As for the business model and its merit .... DYOR... I think a 14 day trial costs $19 and that this gives access to an enormous amount of current and historic data as well as views on future direction.

Rick


----------



## skc

My  on Radge based on my subscription to his service back in 2009 for 6 months, when I just got into trading. 

Positives
- Service was as much educational as it was giving signals. He taught about reading charts as well as trade and risk management.
- Service was fairly priced.
- It requires fairly minimal efforts to follow.
- Nick was approachable and appeared geniune. He signed a copy of his book (it came with the subscription) with personal encouragement which made me felt warm and fuzzy.

Negatives
- Results were patchy and overall probably just paid for the subscription fee and probably didn't cover cost of capital over the period I subscribed.
- It had too many breakout type setup for what was a pretty volatile period. And it was a bit too slow to capitalise on market reversals (e.g. the current market has been ripe for shorting for 2 weeks, but Radge's system may still be waiting for another 150 point fall before break of support is confirmed).
- It's trend following without regards to fundamentals (which is fine) but it disagreed with my emerging style which relied on both analysis.

Overall I rated the experience as a big positive. The principals in trade and risk management that I learned stayed with me till this day. It may not be the best system to live off (as drawdown/quiet periods can be long), but I think it's quite suitable for someone with a regular income and little trading experience. You can go into the market reasonably well protected from massive drawdown and learn some universally useful principals of trading. If you make some profit on the side it's a bonus. If you grow your interest in the market as a result and develop your own style and turn into a full time trader... even better. 

So on that note I don't think an audited result was that important to me. Every signal he called live were recorded on his website for all subscriber to see. I don't know how far back the data is available to current subscribers but I'd imgaine someone here can quickly tell us.

Please again note that my subscription was some 5 years ago so many many things may have changed.




minwa said:


> On outperformance, it is up to the vendor if they want to increase the price of their subscription as their signals keeps generating better performance than the last period. I will bet that given the choice, people will be more than happy to pay higher subscription fees next period if this period performs better than the last as opposed to paying for a subscription keeps losing money.




Neither here nor there imho. As long as the seller of the subscription spells out that conditions, it's up to the buyer to decide whether that is acceptable. Any system will go into drawdown over different periods, and with Radge's services, any reduction in subscription fee is likely very small relative to the drawdown (and any subsequent profit) anyway.


----------



## tech/a

Julia said:


> Both educational programs being run by accredited organisations and with qualifying examinations and physical checks all along the way.
> Doesn't really seem like a practical analogy to me, though I understand the point you're trying to make.




You can do Finance as a degree and I've been told academics are terrible traders. Particularly if they attempt discretionary trading. Dr Bruce Vanstone is an academic who teaches his trading knowledge and its pretty intense and its pretty expensive---you don't come out with a degree or diploma.
You could add Dr Howard Bandy into the mix.

Guys like Nick have actually worked and traded not only their accounts but the accounts of some pretty high stake traders and have more experience than 99% of those here. They know what works---they know that "When you get it you get it for life.

They also know that its not going to be profits every month or even every year of your trading life. They know there will be years of feast and years of famine. The general public accept the Feast but not the famine. They'll jump ship as soon as THEY anticipate a change of fortune. Accepting the advice when its profitable and rejecting it when in drawdown. Frankly I want to know how the Pros handle bad times---anyone can handle good times.




> And nothing wrong with that.  Unlike medicine or aviation, all the necessary information is available for free on the internet.  Anyone with a reasonable comprehension capacity can become financially literate.
> The same cannot be said of someone wishing to become a doctor or a pilot.





I think this is true and possible for those who have a longer time horizon.
But those who wish to trade really should in my view get quality guidance.
Not just to regurgitate but to learn---watch and see their light bulb moment where the KNOW they GET IT.
Then they have it for life!


----------



## RegularGains

tech/a said:


> Contact Radge




I did and he just replied:



> We operate three portfolios within the US PowerSetups service. A membership gives you access to all three.
> 
> (1) The Discretionary Portfolio will trade on the short side during down markets. The two systematic strategies are long only and will revert to cash.
> (2) You do not require any software.
> (3) Returns since Jan 2013 includes IB standard comm rates:
> Discretionary: +39.5%
> Systematic "Original": +48.5%
> Systematic "HFT": +24.6% (note: this strategy requires margin. Margin was not available for 5 months last year rendering the strategy useless)
> 
> Nick


----------



## PinguPingu

Does anyone know how the Growth portfolio is going? With the ASX YTD being ~-1% now it would be interesting to see a comparison.

 Just trading the ASX50 div momentum trades have been great this year, its also been in cash this entire decline. It will be interesting to see how it performs going forward if we get interest rate rises. 

Interesting note, his ASX 'Hit & Run' discretionary set up hasn't traded since September 9th, and with this recent decline it is now outperforming the ASX with a return of 19.23% vs 13.99% since Jan 1st 2013 when it was implemented.  But like the momentum strategy, under 2 years is not enough time to make a true judgement.


----------



## Sir Burr

tech/a said:


> I believe so.
> I don't know monthly results
> But on a few occasions I remember Nick commenting on how well it was going with double digit returns
> I remember thinking at the Time that it was extraordinary ,excellent, well above average,impressive.
> It's a short term method which is very active in the market.
> you get the trades emailed or " The chartist " can for a fee handle your trades.
> Thats about all I know.
> 
> We hardly ever talk trading!




Tech,

From the post above:



> Systematic "HFT": +24.6% (note: this strategy requires margin. Margin was not available for 5 months last year rendering the strategy useless)




Same period S&P500 gained 35% vs HFT 24.6%.

I'm not for a second saying Nick isn't excellent at what he does but the numbers do not match extraordinary.


----------



## tech/a

Ok whatever
Clearly the method was designed to trade with margin
And it would have done better had IB retained it's margin for Aussi traders---- but if you insist.

I was talking about a conversation some time ago and he was 
Happy with the US method. The figures he was chatting about a the time was
In my view extraordinary.

To most people a profit is extraordinary.


----------



## burglar

tech/a said:


> ... To most people a profit is extraordinary.




Yes. I remember profit ... from the old days .... and savings!!!

I remember savings too.


----------



## Porper

burglar said:


> Yes. I remember profit ... from the old days .... and savings!!!
> 
> I remember savings too.




What many tend to forget is that we aren't in a bull market...unlike the U.S. It's a bear market bounce with the banks, Telstra etc. pretty much dragging the XJO higher by themselves. This is why most traders are struggling. Even proven mechanical systems have been/are struggling though nothing changes...we have been here before and will be again in the future. Patience, as the good times will return...just not yet. Those that have diversified into other markets are doing ok.


----------



## Julia

tech/a said:


> To most people a profit is extraordinary.



????  Then what are we all doing here?


----------



## tech/a

Julia said:


> ????  Then what are we all doing here?




Well I'm interacting


----------



## piggybank

Well it appears the feedback from the Amazon buyers (of Nick's above mentioned book) have been very positive...

http://www.amazon.com/Weekend-Trend.../178-2513996-9462426?ie=UTF8&showViewpoints=1


----------



## Sean K

p2tr said:


> Does anyone have any experience using Nick Radge's Weekend Trend Trader?
> 
> Thinking of buying his TurnKey code. The system generates an incredible MAR (CAGR/maxDD) of 1.16 on the US market (Russell 3000 small cap) over 17 years (1995 - 2012).



I still haven't seen this validated. 17 years of audited results? Tech was going to ask Radge about this.


----------



## Wysiwyg

kennas said:


> I still haven't seen this validated. 17 years of audited results? Tech was going to ask Radge about this.



Would it be illegal to advertise a subscription service that was based on a backtest?



> Thinking of buying his TurnKey code. The system generates an incredible MAR (CAGR/maxDD) of 1.16 on the US market (Russell 3000 small cap) over 17 years (1995 - 2012).


----------



## Sean K

Wysiwyg said:


> Would it be illegal to advertise a subscription service that was based on a backtest?



Good question. I'll ask ASIC.


----------



## tech/a

kennas said:


> I still haven't seen this validated. 17 years of audited results? Tech was going to ask Radge about this.




 Radge is still in the US and I'm still on a ship in the Pacific



Wysiwyg said:


> Would it be illegal to advertise a subscription service that was based on a backtest?




Why?

If you did have audited results for 17 yrs then if you failed to match the results you could argue you haven't traded 17 yrs.
Infact pretty well 100 % of traders who subscribe to a method fail to hold through any drawdown
And it could be argued are their own worst enemies.

Mind you if a method I was trading systematically traded outside of the farthest range of deviation I'd close out as well.
But that's not the case in most cases I know of.


----------



## Wysiwyg

tech/a said:


> Why?



Most of those FX Expert Advisors are sold on back test results after optimisation so probably all good. Not interested really as I don't even follow the guy. His business and I wish him well.


----------



## systematic

I don't understand the vitriol.  I took a look at the book thanks to this thread, it was a nice little read.  Always nice to see a backtest in a book (however short) as opposed to the 99.99% of other books that don't bother.

Re: buying the code:  isn't that what you're buying?  The _code_ to run the system on software?  Back tested results are just that; a test going backwards in time to see how something you've proposed would have done.  Never mind the details, pitfalls etc involved...that's the essence of it.  

If I have a theory that stocks mentioned over a certain frequency on ASF outperform the market over the next time period...I can back test that.  Whether it was a _good_ back test or a poorly constructed, over optimised, data fitted back test (happens all too often, including in academia)...is another (important) story.

Anyway, I thought that's how most system code was sold?  Standard sort of back tests provided...up to the buyer to decide if that fits their needs or not (meaning; the type of back testing itself, not just the results).  

So, what's the prob?


----------



## banco

A number of years ago the annual results of the growth portfolio was on the actual chartist website but they were taken down at some point.


----------



## davetapson

Bought the book, coded up the code and although I've not been running it long enough to have any significant data, it's doing better than I thought it would.  

By better, I mean the buys it's shot out have maintained value / grown while our market (JSE) has been, um, 'consolidating'.

*disclaimer*  There is no guarantee that I've coded up what Nick has described.  However, there is no reason it should be (hugely) different, and I've been coding a while so I have as good a shot as any in getting it right.  Might buy the turnkey code at some stage to compare out of interest, but the exchange rate ZAR/AUS is a right kick in the balls.


----------



## PinguPingu

An amazing run since July last year for Nick's dividend momentum strategy (ASX50 universe ), looks to end up 66% with leverage since the July 2013 inception date. The MidCap50 hasn't done quite so well, down about 14%


----------



## davetapson

Still trading WTT, still looking pretty damn good.


----------



## Wysiwyg

davetapson said:


> Still trading WTT, still looking pretty damn good.



This system would surely be doing very well.


----------



## minwa

https://www.thechartist.com.au/trading-system-mentor

$15k to learn mostly coding..only a few modules on actual trading topics..(and basic ones like expectancy/position sizing)..


----------



## kid hustlr

Read this thread from top to bottom.

Have been with The Chartist since July 15 - the experience has been great - Nick is really accessible and always happy to help despite how ordinary/obvious my questions are. 

On performance:
Up to this point I've struggled but I'd be keen to see any long only ASX traders who have made solid returns in the past 6-18 months. There can't be many. Nick is completely transparent with his results and posts every month on his page - I'm not sure what more you can ask of him. 

The new offering is something a little different, initially it caught me off guard also however upon closer inspection I think there's a market there. It's hard to argue with someone who is trying to give you all the tools he knows to let you go out on your own. I think there is a market there.

If you're expecting 40% YOY or to turn into a winning futures trader over night then this isn't for you. I see it as a passive investment tool which in the long run will return pretty well - only time will tell I guess.


----------



## PinguPingu

I have noticed he has removed a few of his not so great performance version of the US HFT strategy and some others. 

That said, I think the Div momentum strategy is great for such a simple system, and the growth portfolio he trades himself is very good in defending positions, so a nice fit for people to margin up on comfortably. Just wish he didn't raise his prices by 30% last year


----------



## systematic

minwa said:


> $15k to learn mostly coding..only a few modules on actual trading topics..(and basic ones like expectancy/position sizing)..




I would imagine a percentage of the pricing would be to reflect the 6 months one-to-one mentoring, not just the course.  (No idea - just thinking out loud).


----------



## Trendnomics

minwa said:


> https://www.thechartist.com.au/trading-system-mentor
> 
> $15k to learn mostly coding..only a few modules on actual trading topics..(and basic ones like expectancy/position sizing)..




We all pay for our education one way or another (majority of us pay the market for our education).


----------



## Porper

Trendnomics said:


> We all pay for our education one way or another (majority of us pay the market for our education).




The important thing is to have your mentor trading alongside you with transparency...Nick Radge does.

There are plenty of Educators out there that don't trade at all. Not hard to figure out why...they don't have a positive expectancy. Some of course are just scammers with a few named and shamed on here.


----------



## satanoperca

As a subscriber many years ago, when first embarking on the steep learning curve of understand trading/investing, Nick made me realize through his transparency that the game was extremely difficult to master even for seasoned professionals. This made it easier to accept losses, because even the professionals do, or that be it the genuine ones.


----------



## Muschu

I agree with the positive comments about Nick and am also a previous subscriber.

I've commented to Nick that one of the things I liked about The Chartist was that it was "boutique". 

However I did feel quite surprised at the cost and conditions of this particular program.  

The outcomes will need to justify the investment.  For those that participate I hope it goes exceptionally well.


----------



## brisman

I respect what he does but I don't think his returns are very exciting. Arguably he takes less risk.  For example his US momentum strategy might have taken you to cash during the recent fall in the market this month, when I've had to defend some positions.  So I'd consider it for diversification as a relatively passive strategy, but with returns higher than the index.


----------



## Trendnomics

I enjoy reading/viewing all the free content Nick produces, and I tend to agree with him on most matters.

There is however, one subject matter that I'm in disagreement with, and that is "model dynamics" - which in my opinion slightly resembles curve fitting.

Have a look at one of his recent videos, which touches on this subject (relevant part starts at 13 minutes):

https://vimeo.com/142478047

Let me know what you guys think.


----------



## systematic

PinguPingu said:


> I have noticed he has removed a few of his not so great performance version of the US HFT strategy and some others.
> 
> That said, I think the Div momentum strategy is great for such a simple system, and the growth portfolio he trades himself is very good in defending positions, so a nice fit for people to margin up on comfortably. Just wish he didn't raise his prices by 30% last year





...What do you mean, "has removed?" I have a reason for asking.

Do you mean, removed from future consideration (i.e. this system is now retired) or do you mean, removed and this system is no longer reflected on any performance pages etc?

Any elaboration appreciated.  As I said, I have a reason for asking.


----------



## kid hustlr

I would email Nick directly about that.

I believe the HFT ha d some modifications made to it (standard / conservative option was added due to an index filter change).

I also know there was an API issue where I believe they got clobbered several years back.

I do agree that there used to be both performance summaries on the website whereas now there is only one. I'm assuming Nick is now suggesting all subscribers trade the conservative option but not 100% sure on this and I can understand why removing the API shocker could raise eye brows.


----------



## PinguPingu

brisman said:


> I respect what he does but I don't think his returns are very exciting. Arguably he takes less risk.  For example his US momentum strategy might have taken you to cash during the recent fall in the market this month, when I've had to defend some positions.  So I'd consider it for diversification as a relatively passive strategy, but with returns higher than the index.




To be fair, that is pretty much what he advertises. Following his systems won't make you insanely ritch, but it will add a little bit more of a 'second income' as he states, at low maintenance. Show me someone making 15-20+% a year who doesn't have painful drawdowns on a system the layman can follow and trade themselves (i.e not derivatives trading) 

As I stated, what I think is great about his 'conservative' systems is the ability to use margin - if they go to cash fairly quickly that is what you want. When things are going great, they go great. 

@Systematic, pretty much what kidhustlr said. He removed the standard  US HFT option from peformances and removed the API bug big loss result. I think he has also removed the midcap50 div momentum results, but also stated he doesnt' advise clients to trade that universe now.


----------



## 2Finn5

DMS as per the ebook since 1995.




On a compounded basis.

Both charts based off ASX20, historical consituency included, historical yield based on historical uncorrected price and actual distributions.


----------



## soso

kid hustlr said:


> Nick is completely transparent with his results and posts every month on his page - I'm not sure what more you can ask of him.




Sorry getting this old thread alive, but there's something that's needs to be spoken out. About 1 year ago he updated his performance page, removed the actual performance numbers and instead it's only some nice looking charts. 

E.g. The US momentum strategy chart, one barely sees SP500 down there, the momentum strategy looks awesome. However this year SP500 is at new highs wihle the momentum strategy it's not. The actual reality is not even close to what that chart is saying. 

I queried Nick in the past about this unfortunate change, he said he changed it because the actual numbers were confusing. I fail to see how the actual numbers were confusing and this performance chart not...

Anyway in the past years seems that the chartist is investing a lot in marketing. Not that it's a bad thing, but sometimes makes one wonder.


----------



## Valued

soso said:


> Sorry getting this old thread alive, but there's something that's needs to be spoken out. About 1 year ago he updated his performance page, removed the actual performance numbers and instead it's only some nice looking charts.
> 
> E.g. The US momentum strategy chart, one barely sees SP500 down there, the momentum strategy looks awesome. However this year SP500 is at new highs wihle the momentum strategy it's not. The actual reality is not even close to what that chart is saying.
> 
> I queried Nick in the past about this unfortunate change, he said he changed it because the actual numbers were confusing. I fail to see how the actual numbers were confusing and this performance chart not...
> 
> Anyway in the past years seems that the chartist is investing a lot in marketing. Not that it's a bad thing, but sometimes makes one wonder.
> 
> View attachment 67684




I think if you're not fully convinced a particular system works then it may not be for you. Confidence in your system is important. For example, I dislike systems based purely on technical analysis because matters like interest rates and GDP are quite easy to ascertain. No bullish candle in the USD can stand in the way of the Fed lowering interest rates...


----------



## RowanC

soso said:


> Sorry getting this old thread alive, but there's something that's needs to be spoken out. About 1 year ago he updated his performance page, removed the actual performance numbers and instead it's only some nice looking charts.
> 
> E.g. The US momentum strategy chart, one barely sees SP500 down there, the momentum strategy looks awesome. However this year SP500 is at new highs wihle the momentum strategy it's not. The actual reality is not even close to what that chart is saying.
> 
> I queried Nick in the past about this unfortunate change, he said he changed it because the actual numbers were confusing. I fail to see how the actual numbers were confusing and this performance chart not...
> 
> Anyway in the past years seems that the chartist is investing a lot in marketing. Not that it's a bad thing, but sometimes makes one wonder.
> 
> View attachment 67684




I tend to agree with you here. Charts and graphs are a good way to mask the unflattering truths that lurk behind many trading strategies. It would be nice to get a clearer picture of things by seeing actual figures like the Sharpe or Max DD.

That said I think if you asked Nick he would be happy to disclose any info as he does seem like a legit guy.


----------



## skc

RowanC said:


> I tend to agree with you here. Charts and graphs are a good way to mask the unflattering truths that lurk behind many trading strategies. It would be nice to get a clearer picture of things by seeing actual figures like the Sharpe or Max DD.
> 
> That said I think if you asked Nick he would be happy to disclose any info as he does seem like a legit guy.




Agree.

When you show a long term chart (this one >10 years) you are illustrating the long term performance. If you want shorter term month by month performance then a monthly performance table against the benchmark is a much clearer way to show that.

With long term charts, once you have a few good periods of outperformance, any underperformance in subsequent periods are difficult to see. The system could be treading water for the last 5 years if it beat the index by 50% in year one, and the chart would still show a long term outperformance. 

Trading someone else's system is hard for this reason alone...


----------



## Roller_1

I think you will find it so people with less experience can get a feel for what to expect.

Anyway, is anyone trading The WTT?


----------



## soso

RowanC said:


> That said I think if you asked Nick he would be happy to disclose any info as he does seem like a legit guy.




I don't doubt Nick's integrity, I'm pretty sure he will provide any available performance data if a (potential) client asks for it. My main complaint was the usefulness of the data that is readily available. Adding actual numbers in the performance page would be helpful imo, e.g. I may constantly check the performance page every few months to see how it's doing, why send an email each time for the actual numbers?

Lastly fwiw, he sent me an email explaining the reason for current performance page layout - "_We use this data because it is constantly requested by current and prospective clients_".


----------



## soso

Roller_1 said:


> Anyway, is anyone trading The WTT?




davetapson was trading it, but last report from him was about 1.5 years ago.


----------



## lftrader

There are much bbetter traders out there. You must look for yourself. No one will talk about a service that makes money. All the talk is about losers using curvefitted systems.


----------



## Porper

lftrader said:


> There are much bbetter traders out there. You must look for yourself. No one will talk about a service that makes money. All the talk is about losers using curvefitted systems.




Happy for you to point us in the direction of a great trader doing no advertising. Also, can you explain the "curve fitting" remark. Proof would be good for you too...on all counts. Waiting with baited breath


----------



## CanOz

Trading any system is difficult, as trading itself is difficult. At least with Nick's systems they're very robust. They'll stand the test of time. You only need to to understand HOW they work to understand how robust they are.

The only question is can the trader stand the test of time, regardless of who's system it is. 

I plan on trading a portfolio of Nick's systems and my own on my SMSF. Nick's systems add the low volatility element i need for when most of my systems perform poorly. Who knows what in store for the market in the years to come, but i'm pretty confident Nick's systems will outlast my own. Maybe the world goes as Howard says and our systems are our least worries....


----------



## 2Finn5

I've been trading WTT for over two years now.  Well, it's my code based on the ebook, with one intentional difference and a universe of ASX stocks I spent some time coming up with.

Performance since the start of the year (including brokerage but not including dividends):


----------



## CanOz

2Finn5 said:


> I've been trading WTT for over two years now.  Well, it's my code based on the ebook, with one intentional difference and a universe of ASX stocks I spent some time coming up with.
> 
> Performance since the start of the year (including brokerage but not including dividends):
> 
> View attachment 67698




Interesting Finn, how exactly does the WTT work? I have run tests on the 20% flipper as a weekly system and it gets a win rate of 60%. Pretty encouraging. I'm planning on running it as a weekly and the MR system which is a daily.


----------



## 2Finn5

WTT is a weekly system, buying on open on the first trading day of the new week if a 20 week high is made on the previous week's close.  Add an index filter which stops entries during downtrends.  Stops are set to risk no more than 2% of total equity to start with and tightened if the index filter shows a downtrend.  Enter twenty positions as they come up and hold them until they indicate a sell.

I've added some position scoring to the system to try to pick better candidates if the number of buy signals exceeds the amount of cash on hand.  It probably doesn't make much difference overall.

Nick also posted (when his forums were public) stating that he avoids any stocks under takeover even if they trigger a buy signal, and to sell any held stocks two weeks after a takeover offer being made public.  I've been doing this and it avoided a few stocks that just stagnated after a buy signal, so running a system backtest since I started trading gives worse results than I have received by trading the signals but ignoring those stocks under takeover.  So it should mean that the historical backtests I ran were also a bit pessimistic.

I'm curious you managed to get the 20% flipper to work - I coded that one up too, and couldn't get decent results from the ASX no matter what I did with it.  Well, the backtests were profitable, but not by enough to justify the time and effort and paperwork to actually trade it.


----------



## CanOz

2Finn5 said:


> WTT is a weekly system, buying on open on the first trading day of the new week if a 20 week high is made on the previous week's close.  Add an index filter which stops entries during downtrends.  Stops are set to risk no more than 2% of total equity to start with and tightened if the index filter shows a downtrend.  Enter twenty positions as they come up and hold them until they indicate a sell.
> 
> I've added some position scoring to the system to try to pick better candidates if the number of buy signals exceeds the amount of cash on hand.  It probably doesn't make much difference overall.
> 
> Nick also posted (when his forums were public) stating that he avoids any stocks under takeover even if they trigger a buy signal, and to sell any held stocks two weeks after a takeover offer being made public.  I've been doing this and it avoided a few stocks that just stagnated after a buy signal, so running a system backtest since I started trading gives worse results than I have received by trading the signals but ignoring those stocks under takeover.  So it should mean that the historical backtests I ran were also a bit pessimistic.
> 
> I'm curious you managed to get the 20% flipper to work - I coded that one up too, and couldn't get decent results from the ASX no matter what I did with it.  Well, the backtests were profitable, but not by enough to justify the time and effort and paperwork to actually trade it.




I think the big difference is i use it on the Russel 3000. Because the principle is to catch multi baggers at 20% you get allot more good ones in the US. The bigger the universe the better i reckon.


----------



## Lone Wolf

CanOz said:


> I'm planning on running it as a weekly and the MR system which is a daily.




Is the MR system the same as what is used for the US high frequency strategy? The US HFT strat potentially puts out a large number of orders. You need a way to manage how many trades actually get taken, ie. only fill the first x number of trades, kill the rest.


----------



## Roller_1

Lone Wolf said:


> Is the MR system the same as what is used for the US high frequency strategy? The US HFT strat potentially puts out a large number of orders. You need a way to manage how many trades actually get taken, ie. only fill the first x number of trades, kill the rest.




You will need a API to trade it as designed, which he has. It also allows bulk upload of trades into IB's TWS too. It would take <15mins a day to run the system


----------



## Lone Wolf

Roller_1 said:


> You will need a API to trade it as designed, which he has. It also allows bulk upload of trades into IB's TWS too. It would take <15mins a day to run the system




Yes, if you don't have the coding ability to make an API, The Chartist has one for sale.

You really do need to use IB too, as brokerage would kill you on any Australian broker. I'm trying to picture how a HFT strat would be affected by the lack of marign with IB and having to wait T+3 for the sale funds to clear... Wrong thread for this really, thanks for your input though.


----------



## Trendnomics

2Finn5 said:


> I've been trading WTT for over two years now.  Well, it's my code based on the ebook, with one intentional difference and a universe of ASX stocks I spent some time coming up with.
> 
> Performance since the start of the year (including brokerage but not including dividends):
> 
> View attachment 67698




Interesting thanks for posting!

What is your annual return in %? Would be good for comparison purposes (I'm also a systematic trend-follower).


----------



## Lone Wolf

2Finn5 said:


> I've been trading WTT for over two years now.  Well, it's my code based on the ebook, with one intentional difference and a universe of ASX stocks I spent some time coming up with.
> 
> Performance since the start of the year (including brokerage but not including dividends):
> 
> View attachment 67698




The profit/loss per trade seems very small for the first couple months then suddenly changes. I don't want to pry into exact details, but did you modify your position size?


----------



## CanOz

Here is an example of how running two portfolios can smooth out the returns. I only went back three years in this example. Its best to only ever test a minimum of 2 years as i believe EOD systems need two years of results to be fair to the systems capability.

The first one is the Flipper, followed by the combined results and the last one is the MR system on its own.


----------



## Roller_1

CanOz said:


> Here is an example of how running two portfolios can smooth out the returns. I only went back three years in this example. Its best to only ever test a minimum of 2 years as i believe EOD systems need two years of results to be fair to the systems capability.
> 
> The first one is the Flipper, followed by the combined results and the last one is the MR system on its own.




That's a good way to see the results of combining portfolios Can, looks good.


----------



## Trendnomics

CanOz said:


> Here is an example of how running two portfolios can smooth out the returns. I only went back three years in this example. Its best to only ever test a minimum of 2 years as i believe EOD systems need two years of results to be fair to the systems capability.
> 
> The first one is the Flipper, followed by the combined results and the last one is the MR system on its own.




I'm a little bit confused.

For the impressive combined returns, you are simply adding the Flipper and MR annual returns together. Generally, percentages are not to be added together (normally multiples of each other).

Do both systems run on the same allowed capital? Or are there two separate pots of capital? If separate (exactly same sized pots), you need to half each of the individual returns and then multiply by each other - for the overall return on funds.

This would reduce your largest combined annual return (69.30%), to 36.12% - still impressive.


----------



## CanOz

Roller_1 said:


> That's a good way to see the results of combining portfolios Can, looks good.




Yeah, it would be great to be able to throw in a couple of longer terms FX or Futures systems just to diversify a bit more. They could take up the slack when the two equity systems go into draw down and then hibernate.

The main thing here is to know that there will be draw-downs, likely right when you start too. If you prepare yourself for it, then it should be a little easier to stomach.


----------



## Trendnomics

CanOz said:


> Yeah, it would be great to be able to throw in a couple of longer terms FX or Futures systems just to diversify a bit more. They could take up the slack when the two equity systems go into draw down and then hibernate.




Ahhh, the ever avoidance of drawn-downs! How much has that cost people in potential returns? Probably, more than the actual draw-downs.


----------



## minwa

Can, for fair comparison you should average the combined returns, so should be about 34.65%, 24.9%, 8.85%, 23.65% which averages out to 23%pa.  Pretty good if the test was unleveraged. 

Only downside is it relies pretty heavily on a bull market in equities.


----------



## peter2

You beat me to it trendnomics.  Percentages are pricks to work with. 

If you lose 50% one year and make 100% next year. Have you really made an average of 25%/year?


----------



## CanOz

Trendnomics said:


> Ahhh, the ever avoidance of drawn-downs! How much has that cost people in potential returns? Probably, more than the actual draw-downs.




Not meaning to avoid draw downs, but it is possible to smooth out equity curves with a diverse portfolio of systems. But yeah you're absolutely right, if you can't trade it because you can't stomach it, it will cost you allot more than the draw-down.


----------



## CanOz

minwa said:


> Can, for fair comparison you should average the combined returns, so should be about 34.65%, 24.9%, 8.85%, 23.65% which averages out to 23%pa.  Pretty good if the test was unleveraged.
> 
> Only downside is it relies pretty heavily on a bull market in equities.




yes, my bad, i had the average in there and changed it. Thanks for pointing that out. There are unleveraged returns.


----------



## CanOz

CanOz said:


> Here is an example of how running two portfolios can smooth out the returns. I only went back three years in this example. Its best to only ever test a minimum of 2 years as i believe EOD systems need two years of results to be fair to the systems capability.
> 
> The first one is the Flipper, followed by the combined results and the last one is the MR system on its own.




This should be the correct combined returns , averaged and not added. To be absolutely correct i need to add up the individual P/L.


----------



## Trendnomics

CanOz said:


> This should be the correct combined returns , averaged and not added. To be absolutely correct i need to add up the individual P/L.




I hate to be that guy, but averaging is incorrect - see my previous post.


----------



## Valued

CanOz said:


> Yeah, it would be great to be able to throw in a couple of longer terms FX or Futures systems just to diversify a bit more. They could take up the slack when the two equity systems go into draw down and then hibernate.
> 
> The main thing here is to know that there will be draw-downs, likely right when you start too. If you prepare yourself for it, then it should be a little easier to stomach.




Has anyone even made a forex system that works (outside of day trading)? The problem with forex systems I have seen is that they fail to warn of over-exposure and risk because they don't tell you that two currency pairs correlate very strongly and you enter both and basically have just double the risk on the same outcome. They also don't factor in carrying costs and considering whether that's the best currency pair to gain the exposure you want. They also don't warn you if you're exposing yourself to the same structural risks e.g. if you long both the NOK and the CAD at the same time you're basically at that point just long on oil twice (which may not be a bad thing, if you are aware you're long on oil).


----------



## CanOz

Valued said:


> Has anyone even made a forex system that works (outside of day trading)? The problem with forex systems I have seen is that they fail to warn of over-exposure and risk because they don't tell you that two currency pairs correlate very strongly and you enter both and basically have just double the risk on the same outcome. They also don't factor in carrying costs and considering whether that's the best currency pair to gain the exposure you want. They also don't warn you if you're exposing yourself to the same structural risks e.g. if you long both the NOK and the CAD at the same time you're basically at that point just long on oil twice (which may not be a bad thing, if you are aware you're long on oil).




All good points, perhaps ETFs are a way to diversify a portfolio of EOD systems.


----------



## Quant

The Published equity curves ive seen on these systems never has adjustments EOFY for tax on closed positions , i seriously doubt the real returns on any of these systems .  Tax has serious implications on the curve , most of these simulations have nothing to do with reality  . Just putting it out there , flame proof suit at the ready  ... go for gold


CNAR are the only figures that reflect reality


----------



## CanOz

Quant said:


> The Published equity curves ive seen on these systems never has adjustments EOFY for tax on closed positions , i seriously doubt the real returns on any of these systems .  Tax has serious implications on the curve , most of these simulations have nothing to do with reality  . Just putting it out there , flame proof suit at the ready  ... go for gold
> 
> 
> CNAR are the only figures that reflect reality




What are the tax implications for a SMSF or family trust fund?


----------



## Quant

CanOz said:


> What are the tax implications for a SMSF or family trust fund?




Super Income which is earned in the fund (investment earnings) is taxed at a maximum rate of 15%. Capital gains longer than 12 months within the fund will be taxed at 10%.

The amount of tax your fund will pay will depend on whether the fund has any tax deductions or tax credits. For example, a growth fund may only pay 7% tax because its dividend income entitles it to tax credits.


Family trusts you need to consult an accountant or the like  , as far as i know the goal posts have been moving there and i have no experience with them .


----------



## lenny

CanOz said:


> Interesting Finn, how exactly does the WTT work? I have run tests on the 20% flipper as a weekly system and it gets a win rate of 60%. Pretty encouraging. I'm planning on running it as a weekly and the MR system which is a daily.





Hi CanOz,

Do you have a Reg-T account with IB to trade the MR strategy?


----------



## CanOz

Why do I need a reg T?


----------



## Lone Wolf

Ooops...

I'll just delete that post. Somehow I didn't see that there was an entire page of posts I hadn't read yet. 

But Thanks Can, I do need to look into US markets.


----------



## lenny

CanOz said:


> Why do I need a reg T?




If it's anything like Nick's HFT Strategy you'll need a Reg-T to get around T+2 settlement, but I could be wrong.


----------



## 2Finn5

Trendnomics said:


> Interesting thanks for posting!
> 
> What is your annual return in %? Would be good for comparison purposes (I'm also a systematic trend-follower).




Trading started 15 Apr 14 and returns to the end of 2014 were -13%.
01 Jan 15 to 01 Jan 16 return was +17.2%
01 Jan 16 to yesterday return was +23.5%


----------



## 2Finn5

Lone Wolf said:


> The profit/loss per trade seems very small for the first couple months then suddenly changes. I don't want to pry into exact details, but did you modify your position size?




I've been increasing total system equity with deposits to try to reduce commission drag - started trading the system with 25k in April 14, and have added another 19k of which about 14k was in Feb/Mar of this year.

I worked out that I could increase position size by a factor of 8 and pay the same amount of brokerage, so effectively I was costing myself 3 to 4 % returns per year by not having larger total equity.  Having said that I wanted to trade real money and make sure the system was doing what I thought it should before putting more on the line.  With the profits I'm now at around 57k total equity so I've halved my commission drag, so I think I'll just let this system ride for now while working on my next system.

As for the increase in volatility, position size increasing accounts for some, but also the stocks getting picked by the system seemed have much better days since Feb this year.  When looking at the profit/loss per day chart also consider the total positions held - until early march in the downtrend positions were getting closed and none getting opened, so not much was going to happen.


----------



## Lone Wolf

2Finn5 said:


> I've been increasing total system equity with deposits to try to reduce commission drag - started trading the system with 25k in April 14, and have added another 19k of which about 14k was in Feb/Mar of this year.




Thanks for sharing Finn. Knowing that the position size changed helps to better understand the equity curve you posted.

I understand what you say about commission drag. You want enough capital to minimise the drag, but first you want to be confident that the system is worthy of your capital.


----------



## Sir Burr

RowanC said:


> Charts and graphs are a good way to mask the unflattering truths that lurk behind many trading strategies.




How? Are you saying the new good research overwrites the older actual trading curve?


----------



## RowanC

Sir Burr said:


> How? Are you saying the new good research overwrites the older actual trading curve?




I just mean that showing an equity curve makes it difficult to see the actual details of the performance. Something as simple as the maximum drawdown is hard to see on an equity curve. When you start compounding returns even a 40% drawdown looks like a little minor bump in the road, but sure isn't easy to live through for most traders.

That's why I would prefer to see metrics like Max DD, Sharpe Ratio, Sortino etc to get a true indication of a strategy, along with an equity curve at an absolute minimum.


----------



## lftrader

Porper said:


> Happy for you to point us in the direction of a great trader doing no advertising. Also, can you explain the "curve fitting" remark. Proof would be good for you too...on all counts. Waiting with baited breath




This is competitive business. No one will give kudos to a good trader in public. Trading is a zero-sum game. If someone can make me lose by suggesting a bad service, he has chances of gaining from that. The service I follow warned me in advance that the US market will fall hard by the end of the week. I thanked the trader who provides the service in social media and he just replied with a "Thanks", no other talk, no bragging, no fancy websites.


----------



## lftrader

RowanC said:


> I just mean that showing an equity curve makes it difficult to see the actual details of the performance.




Even worse is the fact that this equity curve corresponds to one possible path.


----------



## CanOz

lftrader said:


> This is competitive business. No one will give kudos to a good trader in public. Trading is a zero-sum game. If someone can make me lose by suggesting a bad service, he has chances of gaining from that. The service I follow warned me in advance that the US market will fall hard by the end of the week. I thanked the trader who provides the service in social media and he just replied with a "Thanks", no other talk, no bragging, no fancy websites.





Wow, that's unreal, a service that predicts the future, must be worth a mint! Where do I sign up for that?


----------



## cartm

Hi Everyone, I came across this forum because I was looking for information/experiences on the Weekend Trend Trader strategy, so I signed up.

A bit about me. My background is running equity long/short funds, both emerging and developed markets. More recently I am trading my own account, still equities, but more focus on options strategies, trading volatility and relative value.

I have a few ongoing interests/projects, and one is building a momentum/CTA system, which is how I came across WTT.

Would anyone care to provide their latest experiences of using the WTT strategy? 2Finn5, would you be willing to share an update? CanOz, did you start it up, how’s it all going?

I read the thread from top to bottom. My take-aways:

Nick Radge – strikes me as a decent guy from my limited interaction with him and his firm. I thought his book Every-day Traders was excellent, and I make an effort to re-read it regularly.

Trader Vendors – Nick has something to sell and this is made pretty clear I think. Most all professional traders know that trading can be volatile, so have alternative income streams. Mine are real estate and hedge funds. His is his trading business.

Results Removal – I don’t know of many systems that live forever in one form. Usually the alpha from successful systems disappears over time, so the system is either enhanced or discarded. Seems like this is what Nick has done.

Audited Results – at the start Kennas was continually asking about track and audited results. Unless you’re a regulated fund and aiming to raise hundreds of millions, you are not going to produce a daily NAV because it costs tens of thousands every year, it’s a huge headache and no matter what you decide it will be criticized from what’s included and excluded.

Good luck everyone.


----------



## soso

Hi Cartm,

The easiest way for you to verify the results is to code WTT (or buy it from Nick) then test it starting 2014 until today. That's out of sample data, since the book was published at the end of 2013.

And your take-aways sound plausible to me.

Cheers


----------



## eNyce

I was fully subscribed to his system back in 2014. And although I found it interesting to learn some technical trading techniques I really doubt the long term viability of all the technical strategies they employed.


----------



## Newt

I won't give code, as that would be giving away Nick's IP, but this is what I get for 20 positions trading WTT since 1/1/2014 in a single backtest against All Ords.  Nick is the real deal, and WTT is an elegant example of his thinking, and caution, in action.  

You can see the filter conditions cutting in to reduce drawdown in market downturns - the higher green bars in the first equity graph (non-log) are reductions in the number of open positions.

Its not really fair to try and assess performance of a system like this in anything under a 2 year period.


----------



## willy1111

Thanks for posting.

I have a lot of respect for Nicks delivery of information. I think it is the best on the market, or at least it suited my personality after going through the begginers cycle .

Is that on current and past All Ords with only those in the XAO at time of entry taken?

Are there stock price limiters in there? Ie only stocks under $10 at time of entry


----------



## Newt

willy1111 said:


> Thanks for posting.
> 
> I have a lot of respect for Nicks delivery of information. I think it is the best on the market, or at least it suited my personality after going through the begginers cycle .
> 
> Is that on current and past All Ords with only those in the XAO at time of entry taken?
> 
> Are there stock price limiters in there? Ie only stocks under $10 at time of entry





That's average daily turnover >$350k, but on current All ords - Norgate's standard database.  Includes $9.90 commission on entry and exit.  With Nick's rules I think you'd be unlucky to get taken on with a company going bust, but even then max capital loss 5%.  No limiters on stock price.

I haven't checked that code against Nick's original ebook recently, but could double check if anyone is concerned.

(standard financial disclaimer - do your own research.  I have purchased Nick's books, but have never been a subscriber to his services.  Do however greatly admire his work and the amount of material he has made publically available)


----------



## soso

Newt said:


> I won't give code, as that would be giving away Nick's IP, but this is what I get for 20 positions trading WTT since 1/1/2014 in a single backtest against All Ords.




Nice results! I would also like to see the results for original Nick's universe, that is Russell 3000. Last time I checked, I think about 1 year ago, SP500 did better than WTT starting from 2014. I don't have Norgate subscription anymore to check the recent performance. 

Newt, you coded the WTT yourself or is it Nick's version?

Cheers


----------



## Newt

That's my coding in Amibroker based on his ebook rules, with monte carlo selection of trades to introduce some variability.  Similar results on a few runs though.

Note how anyone that started trading it in the last 9 months would probably having nothing good to say however.  Pretty classic "miserable" trend trading, as Brett Penfolds would say.


----------



## Trendnomics

Newt said:


> I won't give code, as that would be giving away Nick's IP, but this is what I get for 20 positions trading WTT since 1/1/2014 in a single backtest against All Ords.  Nick is the real deal, and WTT is an elegant example of his thinking, and caution, in action.
> 
> You can see the filter conditions cutting in to reduce drawdown in market downturns - the higher green bars in the first equity graph (non-log) are reductions in the number of open positions.
> 
> Its not really fair to try and assess performance of a system like this in anything under a 2 year period.
> View attachment 72245
> View attachment 72246



Thanks for posting - nice to see some standard back-test results on the forums again. 

*Awaits Dr. Howard's response stating how it's all wrong* 



Newt said:


> Note how anyone that started trading it in the last 9 months would probably having nothing good to say however.  Pretty classic "miserable" trend trading, as Brett Penfolds would say.




Indeed it's been lovely to endure!


----------



## rb250660

Is that backtest done with survivorship free data?


----------



## Trendnomics

rb250660 said:


> Is that backtest done with survivorship free data?




Another hair splitting moment on ASF....

The backtest was ONLY performed for three and a half (~3.5) years worth of data. Even if delisted securities were not included, the potential error would be of an insignificant factor, for such a short test period.


----------



## Newt

Trendnomics said:


> Thanks for posting - nice to see some standard back-test results on the forums again.




Thanks TN - Its good to be able to dig out some hard('ish?) facts when people ask decent questions.


----------



## Newt

rb250660 said:


> Is that backtest done with survivorship free data?




No, only standard Norgate database, however I do believe TN is right to say unlikely to have affected outcome too much.  Trend following strategies tend to get you out of most deteriorating stocks, but there are no absolutes unfortunately.  

Now I think back, reading the Weekend Trend Trader book not that long after digesting some CANSLIM (Bill O'Neill) got me serious about the value to zooming out to a longer weekly timeframe for reference, or just trading it in directly.
(please see Peter2's weekly momentum thread for a detailed description on the pros and cons of systematic/discretionary weekly trading)


----------



## Wysiwyg

rb250660 said:


> Is that backtest done with survivorship free data?



If the turnover filter is high enough (and/or average period large enough) then backtest results will not include small capitalisation stocks that have made it into the All Ords after the test period beginning. The stocks selected in backtest from the All Ords list today will to the most part, if not all, be stocks that were in the test list back at the beginning.

Note: All Ords is rebalanced yearly in March.


----------



## rb250660




----------



## Menacingsalt

Quick bump to this thread. Is anyone still trading the WTT and how has the performance been? Planning to do on the US universe, like the extremely simple rules and the logic behind the system makes a lot of sense. I’ve reached out to Nick the last few weeks and he’s been very helpful with questions I had but interested on views others had.


----------



## willoneau

I have traded the WTT for last three years


----------



## Menacingsalt

Thanks Boba. Do you mind if I asked how its performed and is the system something you would stick to over the long run. I think I read somewhere that the system has a 100% probability of profit after 3 years.


----------



## Sir Burr

Menacingsalt said:


> I’ve reached out to Nick




I'm trading one of his sold Amibroker systems (similar to WTT), tweaked version and is doing OK. A long shot better than his subscription service where I lost money hand over fist not to mention the *opportunity* cost.

Leason learnt to do it yourself.

By the way, as far as Nicks sold Amibroker systems go. I bought the system with a "future leak". I didn't pick up until many months later, maybe a year.  He had already fixed it (had a few iterations) but unless you pick up on problems yourself he does not freely update/send/advise of any corrected code.

If I didn't complain about it I would still be using his wrong coding.

I think WTT would be OK but check it well.


----------



## Menacingsalt

Sir Burr said:


> I'm trading one of his sold Amibroker systems (similar to WTT), tweaked version and is doing OK. A long shot better than his subscription service where I lost money hand over fist not to mention the *opportunity* cost.
> 
> Leason learnt to do it yourself.
> 
> By the way, as far as Nicks sold Amibroker systems go. I bought the system with a "future leak". I didn't pick up until many months later, maybe a year.  He had already fixed it (had a few iterations) but unless you pick up on problems yourself he does not freely update/send/advise of any corrected code.
> 
> If I didn't complain about it I would still be using his wrong coding.
> 
> I think WTT would be OK but check it well.




Thanks for that Sir, are you referring to the power setups? I imagine it’s a tough system to trade as there could be months of losers. I did ask for some stats (win loss/% ratio) but there are none to disclose here which is a shame for obvious reasons. 

Are you talking about the flipper strategy? That is worrying, certainly an update is needed to all people who purchased the code. His mechanical strategies all appear sound but agree that they would need to be backtested to give the comfort to trade.

How has the strategy you bought performed. No worries if you’re reluctant to share.


----------



## Sir Burr

Menacingsalt said:


> That is worrying, certainly an update is needed to all people who purchased the code.




Yes definitely, although WTT is simple (simple is good!) and I don't think would have the same problem.


> there are none to disclose here which is a shame for obvious reasons.




Are you saying Nick has told you not to disclose results here? Be interesting to see if they line up with my ACTUAL results. I think he may have small print about disclosing results. Smoke and mirrors.


----------



## Menacingsalt

Sir Burr said:


> Yes definitely, although WTT is simple (simple is good!) and I don't think would have the same problem.
> 
> 
> Are you saying Nick has told you not to disclose results here? Be interesting to see if they line up with my ACTUAL results. I think he may have small print about disclosing results. Smoke and mirrors.




Apologies if not clear here. They won’t provide results due to the ambiguity of the setups (I.e not everyone can take all trades on offer hence performance can differ). Also some compliance restrictions though don’t know what they would be.

I know the system was up 40% in 2013 when I enquired but was hoping for 10 years of results. Otherwise it’s very hard to trade it. I’m stating the bleeding obvious there though


----------



## willoneau

my results with WTT have been good considering last 12 months the markets have been flat. Also the tweeking you can do to the code can change the results quite a bit , there is code with it to do monti carlo back testing which is good too. It is a system that is easy to run in background while doing other things , which helps diversify more than one strategy.


----------



## peter2

Menacingsalt said:


> interested on views others had.




Nick's WTT is a simple and robust trend following system. Like all trend following systems it needs bullish market conditions to show it's best results. It will struggle to produce profits when markets go sideways and will produce large draw downs in bearish markets. 

It's important to understand this before starting any trend following system. Overall you'll get slightly above average returns with the occasional large draw down. You must be comfortable with this and hold through these draw downs. 

There are a number of tweeks that can be applied to reduce these draw downs but they require more active management and in fact reduce the total profits.


----------



## Sir Burr

Menacingsalt said:


> I know the system was up 40% in 2013 when I enquired but was hoping for 10 years of results. Otherwise it’s very hard to trade it. I’m stating the bleeding obvious there though




Haha true.

Any subscription system might be difficult to aquire actual data too.


> They won’t provide results due to the ambiguity of the setups (I.e not everyone can take all trades on offer hence performance can differ).




Yep it can be tweaked indefinitely.

Peter2 words are spot on and maybe only a monte carlo will show what you your after. Ask Nick to provide it using the standard settings. I'm sure he would be happy to before you outlay.


----------



## Menacingsalt

willoneau said:


> my results with WTT have been good considering last 12 months the markets have been flat. Also the tweeking you can do to the code can change the results quite a bit , there is code with it to do monti carlo back testing which is good too. It is a system that is easy to run in background while doing other things , which helps diversify more than one strategy.




Thanks for the information, I like the ideas behind the system so it’s good to see some positive results. Also good to know that there is code to backtest. Nick has been transparent in that he doesn’t trade the strategy. I’d rather do something like this than the tradelongterm blackbox.

Thanks again


----------



## Menacingsalt

peter2 said:


> Nick's WTT is a simple and robust trend following system. Like all trend following systems it needs bullish market conditions to show it's best results. It will struggle to produce profits when markets go sideways and will produce large draw downs in bearish markets.
> 
> It's important to understand this before starting any trend following system. Overall you'll get slightly above average returns with the occasional large draw down. You must be comfortable with this and hold through these draw downs.
> 
> There are a number of tweeks that can be applied to reduce these draw downs but they require more active management and in fact reduce the total profits.




Thanks for the reply Peter. A systemic approach is definitely appealing, one I have confidence in. I was a member at the Chartist a decade ago and like Nicks methods a lot. There are so many sharks out there and I fell cropper to one on forexfactory called James16. Decided to go the property route instead.

Anyway I read a book recently called Thinking fast and slow (for other reasons) which made me realise why I was no good at trading and why the J16 thread appealed. Clearly a systemic approach would be best if I can follow the rules.

I like the idea of an index filter to protect against downturns. I’d also have to look at the exit strategy, that appears to me to be the biggest puzzle.

Nick is offering mentoring now to design strategies.its expensive but might be worth considering for someone like me.

Thanks again


----------



## Menacingsalt

Sir Burr said:


> Haha true.
> 
> Any subscription system might be difficult to aquire actual data too.
> 
> 
> Yep it can be tweaked indefinitely.
> 
> Peter2 words are spot on and maybe only a monte carlo will show what you your after. Ask Nick to provide it using the standard settings. I'm sure he would be happy to before you outlay.




Yes it’s unfortunate, I reckon they must have a record of the number of trades, win loss ratio/%, drawdown. Guess if you miss the one or two big trends then the results are mute.

Never mind thanks for the advice, I’ll go down the systemic route.


----------



## peter2

I remember James16, that was a long time ago and was also surprised to learn that he turned roque. His beginners thread was a FF classic. Even I looked at his DBHC and DTLC on 4H charts.

Can you follow the rules? That's the big question for everyone who wants to trade. Following the rules every now and then doesn't work. It has to be >95% (nobody's perfect). 

Nick was a good teacher (I haven't seen anything of him since his forum went to subscription). I do know he tries to make new traders aware of the probable draw downs associated with every system.


----------



## Menacingsalt

peter2 said:


> I remember James16, that was a long time ago and was also surprised to learn that he turned roque. His beginners thread was a FF classic. Even I looked at his DBHC and DTLC on 4H charts.
> 
> Can you follow the rules? That's the big question for everyone who wants to trade. Following the rules every now and then doesn't work. It has to be >95% (nobody's perfect).
> 
> Nick was a good teacher (I haven't seen anything of him since his forum went to subscription). I do know he tries to make new traders aware of the probable draw downs associated with every system.




The logic was sound, Support\Resistance at round numbers then look for PA - pinbar\BUOB etc, be picky etc. Problem was I don't think he was trading, he would mine these charts and use them for his tutorials. There was a reliance on a high win rate. Logic is fairly sound and rules can be developed around it incorporating risk\reward otherwise there might only be one or two setups a month. Personal site was held together by another guy who left a few years back then it caved in. The site no longer exists and noone was told it was to be pulled. I think James simply created the thread, curve fitted the charts, used reverse psychology to create a personal forum (its a labour of love etc) then coin it in via subscriptions. The thread was the perfect advertising material.

Nick is certainly different, he expouses trading the proper way as you say instead of 'you'll never have a losing trade' ala James.


----------



## 2Finn5

WTT is doing ok.  That is on SelfWealth, performance after brokerage.


----------



## StockyGuy

peter2 said:


> I remember James16, that was a long time ago and was also surprised to learn that he turned roque. His beginners thread was a FF classic. Even I looked at his DBHC and DTLC on 4H charts.




Lol after that I had to look up that thread up on FF.  Think I found it - currently 7145 pages long, one of those FF threads that one could go blind/insane trying to read the entirety of lol.  Anyway, people are definitely still using it, last reply on it 50 minutes ago.  Typically such threads on FF never deal with EVERY eventuality and permutation and thus, as with most things, mileage may vary.  I had a quick look at the first page but am not currently in right frame of mind to attempt digestion of such word salad.  I tend to think that such long, old popular threads usually have some value, so I might have a crack some time.


----------



## MovingAverage

I've been running the WTT for a few years now. Overall I'm happy with the system given it really only requires 0.5 of an hour per week for me to run and set buy/sell orders. I purchased the turnkey code from Nick. I tweaked a couple of the parameters slightly based on some of my own analysis. I'm only trading XAO stocks. For this year to date (1/1/2019 to 10/12/19) it's returned around 7.8% net P&L, which given the time I put into it is I think ok. Approximately 66% of trades during that period have been winners. Happy to share here any other statistics you might be interested in.


----------



## qldfrog

MovingAverage said:


> I've been running the WTT for a few years now. Overall I'm happy with the system given it really only requires 0.5 of an hour per week for me to run and set buy/sell orders. I purchased the turnkey code from Nick. I tweaked a couple of the parameters slightly based on some of my own analysis. I'm only trading XAO stocks. For this year to date (1/1/2019 to 10/12/19) it's returned around 7.8% net P&L, which given the time I put into it is I think ok. Approximately 66% of trades during that period have been winners. Happy to share here any other statistics you might be interested in.



Quick question
Isn't 8pc lower than the xao index and are you not better off using an index etf?
I have my own systemic portfolio started later in the year but a 1/01/19 start should give you stellar results i would have thought?
Does this match Nick system returns?


----------



## MovingAverage

qldfrog said:


> Quick question
> Isn't 8pc lower than the xao index and are you not better off using an index etf?
> I have my own systemic portfolio started later in the year but a 1/01/19 start should give you stellar results i would have thought?
> Does this match Nick system returns?




With the benefit of hindsight it would have been better to load up into an index etf, but if only you could read into the future we'd always be taking the best investment options. There is no way I would fully load up into an index etf anyway. In 2018 the system returned a net P&L of around 27% and in 2017 the system returned a net P&L of around 21%. 2019 has definitely been on the lower-side of the system's performance but I've done extensive monte-carlo simulations and the 7.8% for 2019 year to date is within spec albeit on the lower end of the monte-carlo range.


----------



## qldfrog

I added the comments as my own trend based system would have made a killing in the first monts.i sadly started in February, good but not as good
It is interesting, i should code one to see the behaviour for example in the last quarter 2018
Maybe i could smooth my results by combining with this approach


----------



## Newt

8% sounded a bit low for WTT, so did some playing on my personal interpretation of code for Nick's eBook.  The challenge with 2019 was the protective index filter on WTT pushed the system fully into cash from the Oct 18 pullback until early Feb.  It would have been almost May before the system was fully invested again.

Depending on your risk acceptability criteria movingAverage, you might want to consider going outside XAO on strict volume/turnover criteria - but any extra gains are very likely to come at the cost of higher DDs.

I read somewhere Nick's experience with traders starting out is they generally can only tolerate DDs of about 1/2 to a 1/4 what they initially think they can handle.

Also a good lesson on how an index filter protects from excessive DD, but at the cost of lower total returns.  Out of interest I ran (my code) on XAO universe from 1/1/20 and got about 19% return.  With index filter over-ridden was 28%.  (8% was certainly possible at around 25% lower end of the sorted Monte Carlo runs).

Incidentially, going outside XAO with price and volume/turnover filters, achieved 53% and 44% respectively (for filter ON, and filter OFF).  Which doesn't really fit with the filter prognostications above - probably just reflects greater variability/volatility going outside XAO.


I'm NOT suggesting you kill the index filter BTW - only pointing out there's no such thing as a free lunch.....


----------



## qldfrog

Newt said:


> 8% sounded a bit low for WTT, so did some playing on my personal interpretation of code for Nick's eBook.  The challenge with 2019 was the protective index filter on WTT pushed the system fully into cash from the Oct 18 pullback until early Feb.  It would have been almost May before the system was fully invested again.
> 
> Depending on your risk acceptability criteria movingAverage, you might want to consider going outside XAO on strict volume/turnover criteria - but any extra gains are very likely to come at the cost of higher DDs.
> 
> I read somewhere Nick's experience with traders starting out is they generally can only tolerate DDs of about 1/2 to a 1/4 what they initially think they can handle.
> 
> Also a good lesson on how an index filter protects from excessive DD, but at the cost of lower total returns.  Out of interest I ran (my code) on XAO universe from 1/1/20 and got about 19% return.  With index filter over-ridden was 28%.  (8% was certainly possible at around 25% lower end of the sorted Monte Carlo runs).
> 
> Incidentially, going outside XAO with price and volume/turnover filters, achieved 53% and 44% respectively (for filter ON, and filter OFF).  Which doesn't really fit with the filter prognostications above - probably just reflects greater variability/volatility going outside XAO.
> 
> 
> I'm NOT suggesting you kill the index filter BTW - only pointing out there's no such thing as a free lunch.....



That is maybe the limit of his system:
But nothing prevent you to tweak the code to your own confort zone, for example a more dynamic version where you change your index check to a shorter period
Do not take me wrong Nick introduced me to the concept of  system  trading and then each can run free and build its own technique
These last few posts entice me to dig back in code and backtest for maybe a system3 or hybrid


----------



## MovingAverage

Hi All,
Just a quick follow up on my earlier post regarding my WWT's performance for 2019. My earlier calculation of 7.8% was a little conservative. Apologies, but first time I've looked at the entire 2019 performance and I was a bit quick on pulling the trigger. I thought it might be more interesting if I actually posted a performance graph for my actual live WTT trades this year. So here it is below--I've extracted this out of Stator (which I use to track all my trades). Hope this gives you some better insight.

A few words to explain what is being show here (remember this is only for the period of 1/1/19 through to end of last week). The green graph is the position P&L, which is basically the value of all open positions minus the value of all closed positions. At the start of 2019 it was a little under $20k. At the bottom of the graph is an orange line and a blue line. Orange represents the value of all open positions and the blue line represents the value of all closed positions. You can see that the position P&L grew from $20k to a peak of around $70k in early August. During this period the XAO saw solid upward moment and my WTT system continued to open new positions and didn't really close any positions during the period. At the start of 2019 my system only had single digit open positions but by around April the system had reached its maximum number of open position (which is 20). In August we saw the XAO enter a downward trend and this explains why from August you see the open position profit (the orange graph) drop off as open positions were being closed. From August you also start to see close position profit (the blue graph) dramatically increase as open position profits become released. 

And no..my WTT system didn't open and close 210 positions during 2019--this is just a quirk of Stator.


----------



## MovingAverage

Newt said:


> 8% sounded a bit low for WTT, so did some playing on my personal interpretation of code for Nick's eBook.  The challenge with 2019 was the protective index filter on WTT pushed the system fully into cash from the Oct 18 pullback until early Feb.  It would have been almost May before the system was fully invested again.
> 
> Depending on your risk acceptability criteria movingAverage, you might want to consider going outside XAO on strict volume/turnover criteria - but any extra gains are very likely to come at the cost of higher DDs.
> 
> I read somewhere Nick's experience with traders starting out is they generally can only tolerate DDs of about 1/2 to a 1/4 what they initially think they can handle.
> 
> Also a good lesson on how an index filter protects from excessive DD, but at the cost of lower total returns.  Out of interest I ran (my code) on XAO universe from 1/1/20 and got about 19% return.  With index filter over-ridden was 28%.  (8% was certainly possible at around 25% lower end of the sorted Monte Carlo runs).
> 
> Incidentially, going outside XAO with price and volume/turnover filters, achieved 53% and 44% respectively (for filter ON, and filter OFF).  Which doesn't really fit with the filter prognostications above - probably just reflects greater variability/volatility going outside XAO.
> 
> 
> I'm NOT suggesting you kill the index filter BTW - only pointing out there's no such thing as a free lunch.....




Thanks Newt. Some good points you raise. I hadn't really considered going outside XAO. I just run a single run sim on my tweaked WTT and including all stocks not just limiting to XAO makes little difference to annual return or DD. My tweaked WTT has an AR of around 25% and a DD of around 20%. Of course, this was just on a single run so I will do some monte sims to get a better understanding of what my system looks like when not restricted to XAO. I need to sleep at night and I know through my live trading I can't deal with a DD greater than 20% so I'll be leaving all the filters as they are  Thanks again for your comments


----------



## MovingAverage

In case anyone is interested, I track the value of my portfolios (WTT is one of my portfolios) using unitisation in Stator - for 2019 the value of those units in WTT has increased 24.9%


----------



## Newt

Thanks for the extra info MovingAverage.  So sounds like you've quite well 2019, much more in line with modelling for your system.  I was going to ask what capital base those absolute profit values were, but you've explained nicely now. 

2 additional thoughts:
1.  Its great you've shown open versus closed profits - can be large differences much of the year in weekly trend following - as you've nicely shown

2.  I was remiss in not including some slippage in the WTT values I posted above (last night).  The numbers looked so good, I was scratching my head why I wasn't actively trading WTT - then realised I normally include 1.5% slippage in buy and sell prices, which makes a significant difference in annual performance.  The effect of this increases as you take more trades during the year of course.  Kudos to Zen Master Skate for pointing out 12 months ago modelling without allowance for slippage is somewhat "courageous".  


Glad to hear you have a system that allows you to sleep at night MA


----------



## tinhat

MovingAverage said:


> I've been running the WTT for a few years now. Overall I'm happy with the system given it really only requires 0.5 of an hour per week for me to run and set buy/sell orders. I purchased the turnkey code from Nick. I tweaked a couple of the parameters slightly based on some of my own analysis. I'm only trading XAO stocks. For this year to date (1/1/2019 to 10/12/19) it's returned around 7.8% net P&L, which given the time I put into it is I think ok. Approximately 66% of trades during that period have been winners. Happy to share here any other statistics you might be interested in.




Firstly, thank you for sharing this information. It is very helpful to know of others experiences and thoughts on stock investing.

In all honesty, I don't think 7.8% return is very good given we have been in a raging bull market all year. As of today, the XAO is up 19% this calendar year (excluding dividends).

I've certainly achieved better than that, but I know that through the two regular stock investing groups that I meet with monthly, level headed investors just like me have out performed me this year too. One of the groups I regularly attend is my local Lincoln Indicators Stock Doctor investor network meetings. Generally the stock doctor selections out performs the market. This year I don' think they have as they favour high quality growth stocks and those have generally be overbought and subject to correction.


----------



## MovingAverage

tinhat said:


> Firstly, thank you for sharing this information. It is very helpful to know of others experiences and thoughts on stock investing.
> 
> In all honesty, I don't think 7.8% return is very good given we have been in a raging bull market all year. As of today, the XAO is up 19% this calendar year (excluding dividends).
> 
> I've certainly achieved better than that, but I know that through the two regular stock investing groups that I meet with monthly, level headed investors just like me have out performed me this year too. One of the groups I regularly attend is my local Lincoln Indicators Stock Doctor investor network meetings. Generally the stock doctor selections out performs the market. This year I don' think they have as they favour high quality growth stocks and those have generally be overbought and subject to correction.




I agree 7.8% is on the low side. Did you see my follow up to that post? I was wrong on my original 7.8% figure and put up a subsequent post giving more details on my CY 2019 performance. If you have a look at that subsequent post you’ll see it has done better than 7.8%.


----------



## willoneau

I ran a back test on my tweaked WTT system from 1/1/19 to 7/12/19, 
36 trades
50% profitable
annual return = 63%
risk adjusted return = 120%


----------



## MovingAverage

willoneau said:


> I ran a back test on my tweaked WTT system from 1/1/19 to 7/12/19,
> 36 trades
> 50% profitable
> annual return = 63%
> risk adjusted return = 120%




Nice. What do your monte simulations look like? Would like to see the best/worst case figures for key metrics. Single runs can be misleading at best and don't give the complete picture.


----------



## willoneau

MovingAverage said:


> Nice. What do your monte simulations look like? Would like to see the best/worst case figures for key metrics. Single runs can be misleading at best and don't give the complete picture.



Will go run one.


----------



## willoneau

1000 run's probability of ignoring entry signal 25%

Annual return              = low- 46.56% high- 63.25% avg- 59.32%.
max equity drawdown =         -5.31%         - 6.14%        - 5.65%
Win %                         =          45.95%        50%            47.65%
Risk Reward Ratio        =          8.94              12.43           11.82


----------



## MovingAverage

willoneau said:


> 1000 run's probability of ignoring entry signal 25%
> 
> Annual return              = low- 46.56% high- 63.25% avg- 59.32%.
> max equity drawdown =         -5.31%         - 6.14%        - 5.65%
> Win %                         =          45.95%        50%            47.65%
> Risk Reward Ratio        =          8.94              12.43           11.82




wow..that's an impressive annual return given the drawdown, which I'm assuming is system and not trade drawdown. you must have done some significant tweaking.


----------



## willoneau

The system was tweaked and went live in July, now look at difference in returns by starting 6 months later.
1/7/19 to 31/12/19
7 trades total with 4 open positions at date end.
annual return = 5.41%
net profit = 2.65%
71% winners

too small a sample but shows what can happen at start of live trading.


----------



## willoneau

MovingAverage said:


> wow..that's an impressive annual return given the drawdown, which I'm assuming is system and not trade drawdown. you must have done some significant tweaking.



Correct system drawdown.


----------



## Warr87

That CAR/MDD is crazy ... I would expect bigger DD given the return.


----------



## MovingAverage

Warr87 said:


> That CAR/MDD is crazy ... I would expect bigger DD given the return.




me too and especially given it is a weekly system. with that dd my first thought was he's running very tight stops but then i noticed the annual return and no way that is running tight stops.


----------



## MovingAverage

willoneau said:


> 1000 run's probability of ignoring entry signal 25%
> 
> Annual return              = low- 46.56% high- 63.25% avg- 59.32%.
> max equity drawdown =         -5.31%         - 6.14%        - 5.65%
> Win %                         =          45.95%        50%            47.65%
> Risk Reward Ratio        =          8.94              12.43           11.82




As a matter of interest--what date range are you running your sims?


----------



## willoneau

Warr87 said:


> That CAR/MDD is crazy ... I would expect bigger DD given the return.



Probably will be over longer time frame and larger trade sample.
36 trades over that time frame.


----------



## willoneau

MovingAverage said:


> As a matter of interest--what date range are you running your sims?



That was 1/1/2019 to 31/12/2019


----------



## willoneau

Most that traded 2019 saw an amazing first six months then flat, well I did anyway after in hindsight. My system took trades all the way up until July then not again until December.


----------



## willoneau

One thing I have noticed after backtesting is that more trades doesn't always result in more profits.


----------



## Newt

Yes willoneau, I'm either very sceptical or extremely jealous.  

Are you including commissions and at least 1-2 % slippage on buy and sell prices each way?  Really need figures for at least 5 or more years for them to mean much.  

I'm extremely thanks for Radge and WTT showing the way to weekly timeframe ASX trading.  I'd learned lots trying to trade a modified Bollinger BO strategy (personal interpretation of BBOF from Holy Grails) for many years, but stopping during 2015 to step back and spend more time looking at weekly data/signals/Amibroker code - which was helpful in so many ways.  

Interesting Nick seems to be going more and more the way of Howard Bandy - shorter timeframes (even intra-day) on US markets including mean reversion.  There is always something to learn.......


----------



## willoneau

Hi Newt , the backtesting takes into account commissions I use Commsec rates as I use them but unable to incorporate slippage as trade signals are taken from open. I have experienced slippage and not getting orders fully filled, Skate says he uses pre-open to help with that problem.
I agree with the larger time frame but am not confident that survivor bias doesn't becomes an issue when I backtest much further than three years. I still backtest way out and around important dates to see how system would have faired.


----------



## MovingAverage

Newt said:


> Yes willoneau, I'm either very sceptical or extremely jealous.
> 
> Are you including commissions and at least 1-2 % slippage on buy and sell prices each way?  Really need figures for at least 5 or more years for them to mean much.
> 
> I'm extremely thanks for Radge and WTT showing the way to weekly timeframe ASX trading.  I'd learned lots trying to trade a modified Bollinger BO strategy (personal interpretation of BBOF from Holy Grails) for many years, but stopping during 2015 to step back and spend more time looking at weekly data/signals/Amibroker code - which was helpful in so many ways.
> 
> Interesting Nick seems to be going more and more the way of Howard Bandy - shorter timeframes (even intra-day) on US markets including mean reversion.  There is always something to learn.......




I was recently listening to Nick talk and he definitely seems to be moving to shorter time frames. He’s been talking a fare bit about mean reversion lately and earlier this year he did explain some of the reasoning behind this, which made sence. However, he did make it clear he wasn’t yet trading intra day here or the US.


----------



## willoneau

From what I understand the US is more suited to mean reversion and AU trend following. Something Nick stated, as I don't trade US markets.


----------



## Newt

Pretty sure he does trade a semi-automated daily strategy on US that is flat by close of trading - have seen him sharing results on Twitter - some big up and down days over last couple of weeks (as you'd expect). 

Always find it refreshing when people are honest about how they're handling the tough days, not just the nicely profitable ones!


----------



## Porper

Upgraded version that was tested on the full ASX using a new ranking algorithm to stop selection bias.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...86NpISFJ5UPWqdoskii3cRVScU7wvpwkDd3W4/pubhtml


----------



## Porper

In his latest members webinar he stated he was definitely going shorter term.


----------



## MovingAverage

Porper said:


> Upgraded version that was tested on the full ASX using a new ranking algorithm to stop selection bias.
> 
> https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...86NpISFJ5UPWqdoskii3cRVScU7wvpwkDd3W4/pubhtml




Do you have any detail of what is involved in the "new ranking algorithm". Nick seems to favour using ROC as a ranking mechanism so do you know if this is the basis for the new ranking algorithm? Thanks MA.


----------



## Porper

MovingAverage said:


> Do you have any detail of what is involved in the "new ranking algorithm". Nick seems to favour using ROC as a ranking mechanism so do you know if this is the basis for the new ranking algorithm? Thanks MA.




I don't have the answer to that.


----------



## Warr87

willoneau said:


> Most that traded 2019 saw an amazing first six months then flat, well I did anyway after in hindsight. My system took trades all the way up until July then not again until December.




I think that was the case for most people. As far as a ratio of CAR/MDD, I've been accepting something along the lines of 1.75 to 2. Not sure what other people's expectations are on that.



willoneau said:


> One thing I have noticed after backtesting is that more trades doesn't always result in more profits.




In my limited experience, that seems to be the case with my testing. I wonder if that would be the case on something like the US market where you are bound to have way more signals then you could take and a deeper market. Something I want to test later on.



Newt said:


> I'm extremely thanks for Radge and WTT showing the way to weekly timeframe ASX trading.  I'd learned lots trying to trade a modified Bollinger BO strategy (personal interpretation of BBOF from Holy Grails) for many years, but stopping during 2015 to step back and spend more time looking at weekly data/signals/Amibroker code - which was helpful in so many ways.
> 
> Interesting Nick seems to be going more and more the way of Howard Bandy - shorter timeframes (even intra-day) on US markets including mean reversion.  There is always something to learn.......






willoneau said:


> From what I understand the US is more suited to mean reversion and AU trend following. Something Nick stated, as I don't trade US markets.




What is his Bollinger BO strategy like? There has been a temptation to buy his code.

And I think mean reversion would work better on the US market. One thing would be slippage and commissions. Any mean reversion strat I have tried on ASX has failed miserably, especially when you include commissions.


----------



## Roller_1

The ranking mrchanism he is using uses the CBT to rank signals, I believe this is used both in the back test and exploration. This eliminates selection bias in the back testing.

I’ve been trading a mean reversion system on the ASX and returned in the mid 30s% last year. You pay more commissions but I just look at it as a cost of doing business. The lack of margin now with interactive brokers is the main issue


----------



## MovingAverage

Roller_1 said:


> The ranking mrchanism he is using uses the CBT to rank signals, I believe this is used both in the back test and exploration. This eliminates selection bias in the back testing.
> 
> I’ve been trading a mean reversion system on the ASX and returned in the mid 30s% last year. You pay more commissions but I just look at it as a cost of doing business. The lack of margin now with interactive brokers is the main issue




how did your mean reversion perform during the July/Dec period of last year compared to the Jan/June period?


----------



## Rsthree

Warr87 said:


> I think that was the case for most people. As far as a ratio of CAR/MDD, I've been accepting something along the lines of 1.75 to 2. Not sure what other people's expectations are on that.




I'm in the process of educating myself. Can you please explain CAR/MDD ratio. The definition and how its used.


----------



## willoneau

*Quote from ASX Market Watch* - Your CAR / MDD is your Compound Annual Return divided by your Maximum Draw Down.  It is a good example of how quickly your system can recover after its largest draw-down.  For example, if your system experienced a maximum draw down of 35%, and its average annual returns were 21%, then we use 21 divided by 35 to get 0.60.  Anything over 0.50 is considered good – this would mean it would take on average around 2 years to recover from your largest draw-down.  If you have a CAR / MDD greater than 1.00, this is considered excellent, as typically your system makes enough on average in a single year to compensate for your largest draw-down.


----------



## Warr87

Roller_1 said:


> I’ve been trading a mean reversion system on the ASX and returned in the mid 30s% last year. You pay more commissions but I just look at it as a cost of doing business. The lack of margin now with interactive brokers is the main issue




I'd love to hear more about how you got a mean reversion system to work. Was it daily, weekly, or intra-day? I'm assuming the last 6months of last year were good for your system.



willoneau said:


> *Quote from ASX Market Watch* - Your CAR / MDD is your Compound Annual Return divided by your Maximum Draw Down.  It is a good example of how quickly your system can recover after its largest draw-down.  For example, if your system experienced a maximum draw down of 35%, and its average annual returns were 21%, then we use 21 divided by 35 to get 0.60.  Anything over 0.50 is considered good – this would mean it would take on average around 2 years to recover from your largest draw-down.  If you have a CAR / MDD greater than 1.00, this is considered excellent, as typically your system makes enough on average in a single year to compensate for your largest draw-down.




I had never really looked up what was an acceptable number. For me, I couldn't try and get 15% returns while risking 30% DD, hence why I set my requirements higher. This is also on the basis that my MDD from backtest will be higher than what I actually get. Time will tell if my expectations are too unrealistic.


----------



## Joe90

Roller_1 said:


> The ranking mrchanism he is using uses the CBT to rank signals, I believe this is used both in the back test and exploration. This eliminates selection bias in the back testing.
> 
> I’ve been trading a mean reversion system on the ASX and returned in the mid 30s% last year. You pay more commissions but I just look at it as a cost of doing business. The lack of margin now with interactive brokers is the main issue




Can you clarify on CBT please?


----------



## Trav.

Joe90 said:


> Can you clarify on CBT please?




Custom Back Test for AmiBroker, I am assuming that he employs expert programmers for the Low-level approach of back testing and customisation of ranking signals

Extracts from AmiBroker help file


----------



## willoneau

Warr87 said:


> I had never really looked up what was an acceptable number. For me, I couldn't try and get 15% returns while risking 30% DD, hence why I set my requirements higher. This is also on the basis that my MDD from backtest will be higher than what I actually get. Time will tell if my expectations are too unrealistic.



Only time will tell, it's how you react to your system when your MDD reaches your back tested results will determine how much you trust your system and continue to follow it. Something paper trading cannot help with, only experiencing it to find out.


----------



## Joe90

Trav. said:


> Custom Back Test for AmiBroker, I am assuming that he employs expert programmers for the Low-level approach of back testing and customisation of ranking signals
> 
> Extracts from AmiBroker help file
> 
> View attachment 100136
> 
> 
> View attachment 100135




Thanks, I figured it was the Custom Back Tester a few minutes after sending my question. Foot in mouth disease.


----------



## Roller_1

MovingAverage said:


> how did your mean reversion perform during the July/Dec period of last year compared to the Jan/June period?




The bulk of my returns came in the second half of last year, it also helped that I upped my position size basically with perfect timing. I have been trading the same system since early 2016 basically and it has returned over 100% (actually I just checked that and I am in a roughly 5% draw down so just under that now).




Warr87 said:


> I'd love to hear more about how you got a mean reversion system to work. Was it daily, weekly, or intra-day? I'm assuming the last 6months of last year were good for your system.




It is a daily system with a maximum hold time of seven days. It enters intraday on limit orders and exits market open. I don’t have any problems with slippage pricewise, it is only getting partial fills or missing a trade when the low of the day is equal to the limit order sometimes you can miss it.

I was one of the first ones to Nick’s mentor course and I started trading this system after I completed that. A few of the guys are trading a version of the WTT and are having great results. On both the US and ASX.


----------



## MovingAverage

Roller_1 said:


> The bulk of my returns came in the second half of last year, it also helped that I upped my position size basically with perfect timing. I have been trading the same system since early 2016 basically and it has returned over 100% (actually I just checked that and I am in a roughly 5% draw down so just under that now).




That's good--most breakout style systems would have had a pretty ordinary performance in the back half.


----------



## Roller_1

MovingAverage said:


> That's good--most breakout style systems would have had a pretty ordinary performance in the back half.




It buys dips not breakouts, could probably be classed as a swing system


----------



## Warr87

Roller_1 said:


> The bulk of my returns came in the second half of last year, it also helped that I upped my position size basically with perfect timing. I have been trading the same system since early 2016 basically and it has returned over 100% (actually I just checked that and I am in a roughly 5% draw down so just under that now).
> 
> It is a daily system with a maximum hold time of seven days. It enters intraday on limit orders and exits market open. I don’t have any problems with slippage pricewise, it is only getting partial fills or missing a trade when the low of the day is equal to the limit order sometimes you can miss it.
> 
> I was one of the first ones to Nick’s mentor course and I started trading this system after I completed that. A few of the guys are trading a version of the WTT and are having great results. On both the US and ASX.




That's a pretty good return. I think everyone here would be happy with that. Was it based off Nick's systems, or something of your own creation? Adding a mean reversion system in the future is definitely something I want.

Also, if you are entering intra-day, are you using EOD data?


----------



## Roller_1

Warr87 said:


> That's a pretty good return. I think everyone here would be happy with that. Was it based off Nick's systems, or something of your own creation? Adding a mean reversion system in the future is definitely something I want.
> 
> Also, if you are entering intra-day, are you using EOD data?




No it is something that I come up with, just ideas from a lot of different places really.

yeh EOD data using Norgate data. That way it is easier to test properly with index constituents etc.

I'm in the process of coming up with a momentum system, probably end up being something similar to what Nick has talked about a monthly rotation system. Testing on the ASX100 atm.


----------



## MovingAverage

Warr87 said:


> Adding a mean reversion system in the future is definitely something I want.




I went live with a short term swing system Aug/Sep last year--in my mind mean reversion is pretty much swing. I'm currently trading a longer term trend system and while in the main it has been good to me there are times it frustrates me. I really like the shorter term swing system as it complements the frustrating "flat" periods on my longer term trend system (think second half of last year). I think psychologically the short term swing system is better suited to my personality.


----------



## Warr87

MovingAverage said:


> I went live with a short term swing system Aug/Sep last year--in my mind mean reversion is pretty much swing. I'm currently trading a longer term trend system and while in the main it has been good to me there are times it frustrates me. I really like the shorter term swing system as it complements the frustrating "flat" periods on my longer term trend system (think second half of last year). I think psychologically the short term swing system is better suited to my personality.




That sounds pretty good. That might be a good angle to come from. I have just started trading my trend system for real, so time will tell how that works out. I am always looking at something else to add in the future and the short system would help during flatter periods as you've pointed out.


----------



## MovingAverage

Warr87 said:


> That sounds pretty good. That might be a good angle to come from. I have just started trading my trend system for real, so time will tell how that works out. I am always looking at something else to add in the future and the short system would help during flatter periods as you've pointed out.




There's a well known RSI/MA based pullback methodology floating around the internet. I just adapted that that methodology.


----------



## TraderJimmy

MovingAverage said:


> I think psychologically the short term swing system is better suited to my personality.



@Warr87 I think I have a similar bias. What systems have you found best in this short term type. I'm in the research phase, not actively trading.


----------



## Warr87

I'm enjoying the weekly timeframe right now but I will add a short term system soon.

depending on how 'short term' you are after, I like some pullback systems based on EOD. Another one for you to look at would be looking for breakout trades. Number of ways to do breakout trades. Darvas box comes to mind, as well as bollingerband squeeze.


----------



## MovingAverage

TraderJimmy said:


> @Warr87 I think I have a similar bias. What systems have you found best in this short term type. I'm in the research phase, not actively trading.




Hi Jimmy, I'm currently trading an EOD swing system. It is based on  RSI and MA--it's a well documented methodology and I'm sure you can find plenty of discussion on the internet by googling swing system RSI and MA. I coded mine in AB and it's been performing ok. Position sizing has a big impact on overall performance but I've landed on a position sizes of around 20% of portfolio value.


----------



## TraderJimmy

MovingAverage said:


> I'm currently trading an EOD swing system. It is based on  RSI and MA



Thanks mate, I'm curious, I've read that this strategy is best for a trending market. Do you take this into account, if so, what indicator(s) do you use to identify the macro trend? As an extension to that, if you had active trades and that macro trend indicator showed that the environment wasn't suitable to trading, would you close those positions?


----------



## tech/a

TraderJimmy said:


> Thanks mate, I'm curious, *I've read that this strategy is best for a trending market*. Do you take this into account, if so, what indicator(s) do you use to identify the macro trend? As an extension to that, if you had active trades and that macro trend indicator showed that the environment wasn't suitable to trading, would you close those positions?




*You cant make money (Other than Arbitrage) without a trend long or short.
*
A trend can be one bar (Which if a daily time frame can be 6 hourly or 24---15 min bars).
If trading short term you can trade from minutes to days using lower time frames to 
identify beginnings middles and ends of trends.

Equally applicable to Stock and Futures.


----------



## MovingAverage

TraderJimmy said:


> Thanks mate, I'm curious, I've read that this strategy is best for a trending market. Do you take this into account, if so, what indicator(s) do you use to identify the macro trend? As an extension to that, if you had active trades and that macro trend indicator showed that the environment wasn't suitable to trading, would you close those positions?



I'm not using a broader market index filter in the sense that a traditional longer term trend trading system might typically use (e.g., XAO close being above the 50 day MA). So no I'm not using a general market trend indicator like that. At a high level so long as the RSI is below a threshold value and the close is above an MA then that will generate a buy setup. The close being above the MA could be considered a "micro trend" I guess. In my system, the close with respect to the MA (micro trend) doesn't close out any positions. Later today I'll post some Ami sim results for you to take a look at


----------



## TraderJimmy

Thanks for that @MovingAverage, I appreciate it.


----------



## MovingAverage

@TraderJimmy here you go. I've just done a quick backtest in Ami to give you a general feel for the performance of my swing system. Remember, this is just a single run and the system performance will vary depending on the combination of trades taken (I prefer to look at a bunch of different simulations through Monte Carlo to get a better understanding of how a system is likely to behave). I've just run this on All Ords constituents between 1/1/2000 through to today.These sims are backtested on a simple position size approach of each position being 20% of portfolio value so max of 5 concurrent open positions. In summary, system has high win rate of around 65%, has average hold time of 4 days, frequent trades for small average profit of around 4% on winning trades.


----------



## Skate

@MovingAverage I would be interested to see a backtest capture of your strategy with the "Portfolio Equity & Profit Table" during the recent COVID-19 period. The backtest period is from: "*1st January 2020 to 30th June 2020*" (All ordinaries Index) I've found this 6 month period to be a "stress test" of a trading system.

*It would be even better if you would change your parameters to match the ones below*
Backtest period = 1st January 2020 to 30th June 2020
Portfolio Size = $300K
Number of positions = 20

*Next question *(nick-radges-weekend-trend-trader thread)
Is this Radges WTT or something you have coded?


MovingAverage said:


> I've just done a quick backtest in Ami to give you a general feel for the performance of *my swing system*




*Open invitation*
Also if anyone is trading "nick-radges-weekend-trend-trader" I would appreciate a backtest result being uploaded here or in the "Dump it here" thread using the above parameters.

Skate.


----------



## MovingAverage

Skate said:


> @MovingAverage I would be interested to see a backtest capture of your strategy with the "Portfolio Equity & Profit Table" during the recent COVID-19 period. The backtest period is from: "*1st January 2020 to 30th June 2020*" (All ordinaries Index) I've found this 6 month period to be a "stress test" of a trading system.
> 
> *It would be even better if you would change your parameters to match the ones below*
> Backtest period = 1st January 2020 to 30th June 2020
> Portfolio Size = $300K
> Number of positions = 20
> 
> *Next question *(nick-radges-weekend-trend-trader thread)
> Is this Radges WTT or something you have coded?
> 
> 
> *Open invitation*
> Also if anyone is trading "nick-radges-weekend-trend-trader" I would appreciate a backtest result being uploaded here or in the "Dump it here" thread using the above parameters.
> 
> Skate.




Sure thing @Skate -- I'll post up the sim results for the parameters you've specified. I'll post them up later tonight. No it's not Radge's WTT, it's my take on the common RSI/MA based swing which I've been live trading for almost 2 years now and yes I coded it in AB (sorry I know my RSI/MA post is a bit off topic for this thread but was just responding to TraderJimmy's question).

I've been live trading my modified version of Radge's WTT since 2015 so I'll put those sim results up as well, but that will have to wait until tomorrow.


----------



## Skate

MovingAverage said:


> Sure thing @Skate -- *I'll post up the sim results for the parameters you've specified.* I'll post them up later tonight. *No it's not Radge's WTT, it's my take on the common RSI/MA based swing which I've been live trading for almost 2 years now *and yes I coded it in AB (sorry I know my RSI/MA post is a bit off topic for this thread but was just responding to TraderJimmy's question). *I've been live trading my modified version of Radge's WTT since 2015 so I'll put those sim results up as well, but that will have to wait until tomorrow*.




@MovingAverage WOW, that is a generous offer to post captures of both strategies. 

*Another minor request*
Is it possible to post the captures in the "Dump it here" thread as the subject matter is in line with the current theme of posts.

*I'm always after educational posts *
Posting captures of your RSI/MA Strategy & your modified Radge WTT Strategy would make for the ideal post as most readers are interested in how & what others are trading. When members formulate their own strategy it tends to motivate others to do the same. 

Thank you.

Skate.


----------



## MovingAverage

Skate said:


> @MovingAverage WOW, that is a generous offer to post captures of both strategies.
> 
> *Another minor request*
> Is it possible to post the captures in the "Dump it here" thread as the subject matter is in line with the current theme of posts.
> 
> *I'm always after educational posts *
> Posting captures of your RSI/MA Strategy & your modified Radge WTT Strategy would make for the ideal post as most readers are interested in how & what others are trading. When members formulate their own strategy it tends to motivate others to do the same.
> 
> Thank you.
> 
> Skate.




No problems....I use Stator to track my live trades so I'll do a performance dump from Stator so you can see the live trades as well.


----------



## Skate

MovingAverage said:


> No problems....I use Stator to track my live trades so I'll do a performance dump from Stator so you can see the live trades as well.




@MovingAverage this is getting better & better. Thank you.

Skate.


----------



## TraderJimmy

Thanks so much @MovingAverage and @Skate. Those results look great (I understand it's one run).

Looking forward to continuing to read and learn.


----------



## soso

Skate said:


> *It would be even better if you would change your parameters to match the ones below*
> Backtest period = 1st January 2020 to 30th June 2020
> Portfolio Size = $300K
> Number of positions = 20
> Skate.




Hi,
WTT coded by myself, reviewed by another online friend, but please take it with a grain of salt.
Btw this is the US market, Russell 3000.

The results are highly sensitive to the ranking algorithm. The WTT book didn't provide a ranking algorithm, but random is not a choice.


Ranking by ROC, you'd lose, Net profit % = -16.59%
Ranking by BFB of last 52 weeks (bank for the buck, highest volatile stocks), Net profit % = 16.48%.

Holly molly, simply changing the ranking formula changes the results by a lot. This is actually my beef with the system, it seems light in parameters but slightly changing 1 parameter you get much different results. E.g. changing the index filter from 10 weeks to 15 weeks the above profit turns to a negative -2.25%. I mention the 15 weeks because 2 years ago I was running multiple backtests from 1990 up to 2 years ago and 15 weeks managed to avoid some fake bear markets and stayed invested. Now fast forward 2 years and 15 weeks index filter crashed and burned this year.

I know that you can't have the cake and eat it too, but every time I get interested into this system I found the general performance since 2013 not better than simply investing directly into the index (SPX or Russell 3000).

Hope it helps.

EDIT: I see you guys are talking about australian market. I've done no backtest on AU data, but judging from Nick's WTT turnkey code page it looks like it's more profitable than US.


----------



## Cam019

soso said:


> The results are highly sensitive to the ranking algorithm. The WTT book didn't provide a ranking algorithm, but random is not a choice.
> 
> 
> Ranking by ROC, you'd lose, Net profit % = -16.59%
> Ranking by BFB of last 52 weeks (bank for the buck, highest volatile stocks), Net profit % = 16.48%.



This is very very interesting! Bang for buck using the 52-week ATR is the ranking system I use for my superannuation system. I was never a fan of using ROC % as a ranking indicator. To me, it always seemed as though ROC ranking would get you into stocks with pre existing, big established trends, and filter the base breakouts in low $ value stocks to the bottom of the list. This is what would have happened this week to GXY even though its potential weekly return is 3rd highest. This is no issue when you are originally establishing a portfolio because you buy everything that meets your entry criteria until the portfolio is full. But, once the portfolio is established and you only have 1 or 2 spaces to fill in the portfolio, especially when you are not trading a $300,000 account (used for all the backtests I have seen on here recently), you might unintentionally filter out the most profitable stocks due to a ranking system that prioritises past price movement over possible weekly returns.
*
Ranking using ROC %




Ranking using Bang for Buck


*


----------



## MovingAverage

I've been trading one of my systems using an ATR based ranking and I like it.


----------



## Warr87

MovingAverage said:


> I've been trading one of my systems using an ATR based ranking and I like it.



Never thought of it. May be worth exploring.


----------



## CNHTractor

Cam019 said:


> Ranking using Bang for Buck




@Cam019 could I ask the code that you use for your Bang for Buck ranking? I'd be interested to see how this works on some of my systems.


----------



## Skate

soso said:


> Hi,
> *WTT coded by myself*, reviewed by another online friend, but please take it with a grain of salt. I know that you can't have the cake and eat it too, but every time I get interested into this system *I found the general performance since 2013 not better than simply investing directly into the index* (SPX or Russell 3000).
> *Hope it helps*.




@soso *your post helps immensely as it's given me an idea*
For those interested, I'll explain my methodology of constructing a strategy for a beginner to follow along. I'll construct the strategy in such a way so it can be used as a "template" for other trading ideas. In the series of posts, I'll construct the WTT strategy as there is renewed interest.

*In the "Dump it here" thread *
1. I'll make a series of post about strategy construction in Amibroker
2. I'll explain what Amiboker is in plain English & some keywords  
3. I'll do a step-through, a "storyboard" a step-by-step construction of a basic WTT strategy 
4. When finished the WTT Strategy will be tradable if you have "Amibroker + a Data supply"
5. I'll make sure the series of posts are understandable even for a beginner to follow
6. I'll make "the series" before posting them & in doing so the series might stay together without interuption

Skate.


----------



## Cam019

CNHTractor said:


> @Cam019 could I ask the code that you use for your Bang for Buck ranking? I'd be interested to see how this works on some of my systems.



Do you mean for Amibroker? If so, I don't use it. I calculate everything using formula through an Excel spreadsheet.


----------



## Skate

CNHTractor said:


> @Cam019 could I ask the code that you use for your Bang for Buck ranking? I'd be interested to see how this works on some of my systems.




@CNHTractor below is the "Bang for Buck" PositionScore for Amibroker. Please test it out before using it.

PositionScore = ((10000/Close) * ATR(200))/100; //Nick Radge - "bang for buck".

Skate.


----------



## Joe90

From my archive, and surprisingly, ASF also has a search function ...
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/amibroker-faq.1679/#post-15711
Further developed by GreatPig
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/amibroker-faq.1679/#post-15722
and
https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/amibroker-faq.1679/#post-15727


----------



## Roller_1

MovingAverage said:


> @TraderJimmy here you go. I've just done a quick backtest in Ami to give you a general feel for the performance of my swing system. Remember, this is just a single run and the system performance will vary depending on the combination of trades taken (I prefer to look at a bunch of different simulations through Monte Carlo to get a better understanding of how a system is likely to behave). I've just run this on All Ords constituents between 1/1/2000 through to today.These sims are backtested on a simple position size approach of each position being 20% of portfolio value so max of 5 concurrent open positions. In summary, system has high win rate of around 65%, has average hold time of 4 days, frequent trades for small average profit of around 4% on winning trades.
> 
> View attachment 107228
> View attachment 107229
> View attachment 107230
> View attachment 107232




Your results are interesting MA, it sounds like your system is very similar to the one I trade. I have a trading mine from around 2016. I use 10 positions at 10% tho not five. I also have about three different entries depending on the current market conditions. The charts below are from my latest version that I tweaked after the initial covid crash, my exit was too slow in the freefalling market. I will add a chart of my initial version after.


----------



## Roller_1

Roller_1 said:


> Your results are interesting MA, it sounds like your system is very similar to the one I trade. I have a trading mine from around 2016. I use 10 positions at 10% tho not five. I also have about three different entries depending on the current market conditions. The charts below are from my latest version that I tweaked after the initial covid crash, my exit was too slow in the freefalling market. I will add a chart of my initial version after.
> 
> View attachment 107327
> 
> 
> View attachment 107328



This is before i tweaked my exit, i stopped trading around a 20% dd. Still hurts but good lesson. Trading my tweaked system now


----------



## MovingAverage

Roller_1 said:


> Your results are interesting MA, it sounds like your system is very similar to the one I trade. I have a trading mine from around 2016. I use 10 positions at 10% tho not five. I also have about three different entries depending on the current market conditions. The charts below are from my latest version that I tweaked after the initial covid crash, my exit was too slow in the freefalling market. I will add a chart of my initial version after.
> 
> View attachment 107327
> 
> 
> View attachment 107328




Thanks for the post @Roller_1. Yes, we seem to have similar stats. Mine definitely has a higher Avg, Profit/Loss % but I think that is probably down to my more aggressive position sizing--your 10% v. my 20%. The big difference I can see between your performance and my performance is the consecutive winners/losers ratio--my system runs at a ratio of a little over 3:1 (3 winners for 1 loser). Your sims have your system running at around 1.5:1. You seem to have a shorter hold time than mine, which is good. By the look of that equity curve you're not running an index filter either? Your three different entries sounds interesting...care to share any high-level insight into your entries?


----------



## MovingAverage

Roller_1 said:


> This is before i tweaked my exit, i stopped trading around a 20% dd. Still hurts but good lesson. Trading my tweaked system now
> 
> View attachment 107331




Oh wow...the before and after exit tweak is a big difference. Nice work.


----------



## Roller_1

MovingAverage said:


> Thanks for the post @Roller_1. Yes, we seem to have similar stats. Mine definitely has a higher Avg, Profit/Loss % but I think that is probably down to my more aggressive position sizing--your 10% v. my 20%. The big difference I can see between your performance and my performance is the consecutive winners/losers ratio--my system runs at a ratio of a little over 3:1 (3 winners for 1 loser). Your sims have your system running at around 1.5:1. You seem to have a shorter hold time than mine, which is good. By the look of that equity curve you're not running an index filter either? Your three different entries sounds interesting...care to share any high-level insight into your entries?




I don't use a index filter to switch off my system, I use one to switch between entry signals. When the market is trending up I want to be involved as much as possible (it still doesn't seem enough in times like now) so I will take any one of the three entries. When the market turns down and my index filter switches on I only want to take the best entries. I found that this was a good way to help reduce drawdown while still being involved in a down trending market. The entries aren't anything special just trying to identify when price is extended to the downside to find swing backup.

The shorter holding period is a product of the different exit. I was using a close above a moving average but when price got too far below after a steep drop it was hard to get price back above before my n-bar exit got hit.

Where abouts do you get that ratio from?

Are you using limit orders to enter the market? If so do you have much trouble with missing trades?

Cheers.


----------



## MovingAverage

Roller_1 said:


> Where abouts do you get that ratio from?
> 
> Are you using limit orders to enter the market? If so do you have much trouble with missing trades?
> 
> Cheers.




Re the ratio: from your results you show Max. Consecutive winners of 21 and Max Consecutive losers of 13, which in round figures is 1.5 winners to 1 loser. While not shown in my post my sims has my Max. Consecutive winners at 25 and Max. Consecutive losers at around 5 giving me a 3 to 1 ratio. Yes I do use limit orders and yes I miss trades especially in the current volatile (up one day down the next day) environment. It is early days yet but I'm pretty certain I can improve on that by setting my entry condition (limit price) based on ATR of the index. I've done some preliminary sims and they are looking promising--early results showing an increase of 15% to 20% of entered trades. Partial fills can be an issue to.


----------



## Roller_1

MovingAverage said:


> Re the ratio: from your results you show Max. Consecutive winners of 21 and Max Consecutive losers of 13, which in round figures is 1.5 winners to 1 loser. While not shown in my post my sims has my Max. Consecutive winners at 25 and Max. Consecutive losers at around 5 giving me a 3 to 1 ratio. Yes I do use limit orders and yes I miss trades especially in the current volatile (up one day down the next day) environment. It is early days yet but I'm pretty certain I can improve on that by setting my entry condition (limit price) based on ATR of the index. I've done some preliminary sims and they are looking promising--early results showing an increase of 15% to 20% of entered trades. Partial fills can be an issue to.




Oh yeh got it. 

I only tend to miss trades when the L = my limit price, they're always the best ones too. Will you still account for each symbols volatility with the ATR calculation?


----------



## MovingAverage

Roller_1 said:


> Oh yeh got it.
> 
> I only tend to miss trades when the L = my limit price, they're always the best ones too. Will you still account for each symbols volatility with the ATR calculation?




No, I'm trying to keep it simple at the moment--my sims so far have just evaluated the ATR of XAO and using that to adjust my order limit. I guess I could determine a stock's sector and then set my order limit based on the ATR of the relevant sector's index. 

I often think about looking at the SPI futures just prior to placing the limit order and adjusting the limit order based on the SPI, but I suspect I can't get near real-time SPI prices into Amibroker (I'm only using Norgate Data). All to complicated really so think I'll just stick with ATR of XAO as it is showing an improvement in trades.


----------



## Roller_1

MovingAverage said:


> No, I'm trying to keep it simple at the moment--my sims so far have just evaluated the ATR of XAO and using that to adjust my order limit. I guess I could determine a stock's sector and then set my order limit based on the ATR of the relevant sector's index.
> 
> I often think about looking at the SPI futures just prior to placing the limit order and adjusting the limit order based on the SPI, but I suspect I can't get near real-time SPI prices into Amibroker (I'm only using Norgate Data). All to complicated really so think I'll just stick with ATR of XAO as it is showing an improvement in trades.




That's interesting, i might have a play too. I'd be worried tho that if the xao has a ATR% of say 1 and your using it to enter a stock with a ATR% of 2-3. Can only test though!


----------



## Rsthree

Skate said:


> @soso *your post helps immensely as it's given me an idea*
> For those interested, I'll explain my methodology of constructing a strategy for a beginner to follow along. I'll construct the strategy in such a way so it can be used as a "template" for other trading ideas. In the series of posts, I'll construct the WTT strategy as there is renewed interest.
> 
> *In the "Dump it here" thread *
> 1. I'll make a series of post about strategy construction in Amibroker
> 2. I'll explain what Amiboker is in plain English & some keywords
> 3. I'll do a step-through, a "storyboard" a step-by-step construction of a basic WTT strategy
> 4. When finished the WTT Strategy will be tradable if you have "Amibroker + a Data supply"
> 5. I'll make sure the series of posts are understandable even for a beginner to follow
> 6. I'll make "the series" before posting them & in doing so the series might stay together without interuption
> 
> Skate.




I look forward to this as I have been trying to code this myself. This will be a great learning platform as the WT book presents a clear and concise strategy which any learner can get their head around, even me.


----------



## Nameless_

Dumb question... 

I've been working for 1.5 years and I'm thinking of using my (small) life savings of 50-100K as a starting capital to start trading with amibroker by buying Nick Radge's WTT for the ASX stocks. 

I was wondering - with a small capital would this be ok, or is it better to invest in some ETFs for a few years to save on brokerage (e.g. with selfwealth) 
Do you think international brokers would be a good broker to use? 
With WTT, am I mean to buy at a market-on-order on the open on Monday morning? 
(Having some difficulties understanding limit orders, market and how this fits into amibroker algo trading)

Does anyone else have other suggestions for someone starting out?


----------



## Garpal Gumnut

Nameless_ said:


> Dumb question...
> 
> I've been working for 1.5 years and I'm thinking of using my (small) life savings of 50-100K as a starting capital to start trading with amibroker by buying Nick Radge's WTT for the ASX stocks.
> 
> I was wondering - with a small capital would this be ok, or is it better to invest in some ETFs for a few years to save on brokerage (e.g. with selfwealth)
> Do you think international brokers would be a good broker to use?
> With WTT, am I mean to buy at a market-on-order on the open on Monday morning?
> (Having some difficulties understanding limit orders, market and how this fits into amibroker algo trading)
> 
> Does anyone else have other suggestions for someone starting out?



It is not a dumb question. No questions=No learning.

I'd suggest you also post this in Beginners Lounge, it may get more answers.

This is the link.

https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/beginners-introduce-yourselves.6063/page-113#post-1088896

I'd also suggest you read more on stock investing, browse the threads here on ASF, and understand there is no rush to get in to the market. It will be there next week, and next decade. Start off low and slow and don't put all your eggs in one basket. Use the search here in ASF as well. I'm unfamiliar with Amibroker and Nick's latest Weekend Trader.

Your online broker should have definitions for limit, at market etc. If not ask a question in Beginners or in a specific forum or thread that fits e.g ETF's. Exploring past posts in ASF will get you up to speed and build your confidence.

I do not feel you are sufficiently knowledgeable to commit your total savings in the market.

I am not an expert on outfits like Selfwealth and they do not seem popular on ASF. Read the Storm Financial thread on trusting your money to others.  

gg


----------



## qldfrog

Garpal Gumnut said:


> It is not a dumb question. No questions=No learning.
> 
> I'd suggest you also post this in Beginners Lounge, it may get more answers.
> 
> This is the link.
> 
> https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/beginners-introduce-yourselves.6063/page-113#post-1088896
> 
> I'd also suggest you read more on stock investing, browse the threads here on ASF, and understand there is no rush to get in to the market. It will be there next week, and next decade. Start off low and slow and don't put all your eggs in one basket. Use the search here in ASF as well. I'm unfamiliar with Amibroker and Nick's latest Weekend Trader.
> 
> Your online broker should have definitions for limit, at market etc. If not ask a question in Beginners or in a specific forum or thread that fits e.g ETF's. Exploring past posts in ASF will get you up to speed and build your confidence.
> 
> I do not feel you are sufficiently knowledgeable to commit your total savings in the market.
> 
> I am not an expert on outfits like Selfwealth and they do not seem popular on ASF. Read the Storm Financial thread on trusting your money to others.
> 
> gg



Only to second Gg:
Move in slowly, understand what you/ your money does.
And do not trust anyone to really care about your interest before theirs.
Some do..but very few from banks to financial advisors
Good luck.it is a start you need to make


----------



## Rsthree

Nameless_ said:


> Dumb question...
> 
> I've been working for 1.5 years and I'm thinking of using my (small) life savings of 50-100K as a starting capital to start trading with amibroker by buying Nick Radge's WTT for the ASX stocks.
> 
> I was wondering - with a small capital would this be ok, or is it better to invest in some ETFs for a few years to save on brokerage (e.g. with selfwealth)
> Do you think international brokers would be a good broker to use?
> With WTT, am I mean to buy at a market-on-order on the open on Monday morning?
> (Having some difficulties understanding limit orders, market and how this fits into amibroker algo trading)
> 
> Does anyone else have other suggestions for someone starting out?




I had similar questions when I first started getting into this a few months ago, so I'm no expert by any means but I can give you a few pointers on what I found.

The general consensus is that you need atleast $20-30k in your pot otherwise the trading fees will eat your profits. I believe Nick recommends a 30k minimum.

IB brokers is the cheapest in terms of trading fees but I believe you need a decent size Account to qualify. They also assume you are an experienced trader so offer little or no support.

I use Selfwealth as a broker, they are more expensive than IB at $9.50 a trade but a lot less then the bigger players like commsec.
At far as I know, all brokers will have a facility for at limit orders. You place the order on the weekend, typically at a small discount to the close price, your offer is then submitted at auction pre open. Have a look at SKATES dump it here thread, this topic is well covered. amibroker can be configured to give you the bid price.

If you haven't already read Nick's WTT, then read it, its a great introduction to systematic trading. Nicks books and educational materials are very accessible for the beginner. I did a trial subscription to his Web site and I found the content  to be of good quality and well laid out. Moreover, everything he preaches is bang on consistent with the advice of the very experienced members on this forum.


----------



## Cam019

Rsthree said:


> If you haven't already read Nick's WTT, then read it, its a great introduction to systematic trading. Nicks books and educational materials are very accessible for the beginner. I did a trial subscription to his Web site and I found the content  to be of good quality and well laid out. Moreover, everything he preaches is bang on consistent with the *opinions* of the very experienced members on this forum.



(need 3 characters to post)


----------



## Nameless_

Thanks everyone for your input! I'll definitely introduce myself in the Beginner's thread too.

I've read Nick's unholy grails and his WTT book, and have read a number of books regarding systematic trading (e.g. turtle traders, market wizards, algorithmic trading, etc as well as the more traditional buy and hold books that people that want to live a FIRE life use (re: financial independence, retire early) - eg barefoot investor and peter thornhills motivated money). I did message Nick and he said 50K should be enough as long as I use a deep discount broker, but the small account size means I would have a lot of drag on my account.

*In terms of learning Amibroker and systematic trading: *
I work full time (and even more overtime including weekends), so I understand I have time constraints when learning Amibroker AFL. I don't think I can be a discretionary trader due to emotions, so systematic trading seems to call out to me more. I have the trial version on my laptop and have been following youtube videos to learn. It seems you have to write it up in a way that ensures you only have the one signal (and not recurring buy signals) and hence there is room for error. Given the steep learning curve, I was thinking it may be easier to cough up the 990 bucks, though I am aware of the opportunity cost it costs me not to mention I don't learn anything on my part. (Cheapest norgate data is 270 bucks a year, and costs 600+ if you want historical delisted data from 1992 required if you were to test your system). The risk is that it takes me too long (e.g. years to learn and by the time I get the hand of it, might as well have started early in buy and hold ETFs or the turnkey code). Time is of the essence for compounding to work, so its hard to know which is the best step (read: cost effective, more bang for buck way) to start.

*In terms of brokers: *
Selfwealth does have a flat fee of $9.50, and have no account maintenance costs. However, say with at 100K account at 20 positions, each trade would be $5000.

Selfwealth = $9.50 per trade
IB = $6 per trade or maintenance fee of $15 bucks (10 USD) whichever is higher

I read somewhere someone said the WTT trade frequency is around 36 trades a year? I don't have the data to back it up so hard to tell so hard to know which is cheaper in the long run. In massive account sizes though, it seems like selfwealth would be the way to go if its just a flat fee... please let me know if my thinking is wrong.

I've also been following Skate's Dump it here thread - solid gold for beginners like me!


----------



## Skate

@Nameless_ as you have quoted Nick Radge

*Two of his gems*
(1) "When people read a trading book they see the words but not the true meaning of what is being said. Many times the valuable lessons are not in the written word. Rather what is being alluded to" (2) "Letting profits continue to grow is the most important aspect of trend following, yet the most difficult"

Skate.


----------



## Warr87

Skate said:


> @Nameless_ as you have quoted Nick Radge
> 
> *Two of his gems*
> (1) "When people read a trading book they see the words but not the true meaning of what is being said. Many times the valuable lessons are not in the written word. Rather what is being alluded to" (2) "Letting profits continue to grow is the most important aspect of trend following, yet the most difficult"
> 
> Skate.




people often let loses run in the hope that they will turn around, whereas they will cash out of a position in fear of losing open profits. probably the biggest thing to overcome when trend following.


----------



## TraderJimmy

Nameless_ said:


> The risk is that it takes me too long (e.g. years to learn and by the time I get the hand of it, might as well have started early in buy and hold ETFs or the turnkey code).



I watched this video of Nick last night and it speaks exactly of the sorts of questions being thrown around here.


----------



## Nameless_

Thanks all for your input - I did spend an hour watching the youtube video that was posted by TraderJimmy. I understand there's a learning curve and am willing to commit to it - just wanted something to jumpstart my learning, and was thinking of running WTT in the background while I try to learn coding AFL by reverse engineering other people's codes, as I understand this process may take years and I have limited hours in a day. 

Knowing that I have limited capital, I don't want to run the risk of losing everything so wanted the best course of action, as I won't have another chance to get another account up and running quickly (will have to save up for another few years). 

I hope that's the lesson that Skate and Warr87 is trying to tell me? (I'm not very good with cryptic messages...)


----------



## Rsthree

Nameless_ said:


> Thanks all for your input - I did spend an hour watching the youtube video that was posted by TraderJimmy. I understand there's a learning curve and am willing to commit to it - just wanted something to jumpstart my learning, and was thinking of running WTT in the background while I try to learn coding AFL by reverse engineering other people's codes, as I understand this process may take years and I have limited hours in a day.
> 
> Knowing that I have limited capital, I don't want to run the risk of losing everything so wanted the best course of action, as I won't have another chance to get another account up and running quickly (will have to save up for another few years).
> 
> I hope that's the lesson that Skate and Warr87 is trying to tell me? (I'm not very good with cryptic messages...)




Learning Amibroker and coding is a big commitment in time and can be a frustrating process. You are right about re engineering existing code. Again I will refer you back to Skates dump it here thread. He has written a version of the Radge WTT code and that also includes a frame work and step by step instruction on how to approach the structure and development of a system code. This will give you a short cut to 12 months of Amibroker learning in a few posts. It also includes back test's which will give u a clue to your other question about the number of trades the system will run over a 12 month period.

Wrt to the points mentioned above by Skate and warr87. I have looked at a few of Radge's videos and probably the two points he mentions most and repeatedly is about risk management and letting your profits run. He stresses that even if you use a coin toss to pick your stocks you will make money if you get those two things right. But you would need to give the laws of probability time and space to do their job. He states that its not unheard of to have the coin flip against you 12 times in a row. 

A run of 12 losses would really test your resolve so he offers risk management approaches to save your account. Eg. Tighten your stops to halve your risk per share if you have 3 losses in a row. This could also be a good way to help your trading psyche.

In your portfolio you will typically have a few big movers which will make most of your money. If you kill these golden geese by taking a profit too early you will not have the leverage over the losers and low performing trades. You can even have 70% of your trades losing money (not ideal) and still make a healthy profit from the big movers. This is a tough one to internalise for most.


----------



## Nameless_

Thanks Rsthree - will definitely continue to read Skate's thread (I'm halfway through since the beginning of the thread!) 

It's definitely hard to swallow 12 losses, especially if this means it is a span over weeks due to the weekly system instead of daily... it seems like once you have a system (and you have to believe in the system), then you have to step up to the plate everyday and put the trades in.


----------



## Warr87

Rsthree said:


> Learning Amibroker and coding is a big commitment in time and can be a frustrating process. You are right about re engineering existing code. Again I will refer you back to Skates dump it here thread. He has written a version of the Radge WTT code and that also includes a frame work and step by step instruction on how to approach the structure and development of a system code. This will give you a short cut to 12 months of Amibroker learning in a few posts. It also includes back test's which will give u a clue to your other question about the number of trades the system will run over a 12 month period.
> 
> *Wrt to the points mentioned above by Skate and warr87. I have looked at a few of Radge's videos and probably the two points he mentions most and repeatedly is about risk management and letting your profits run. He stresses that even if you use a coin toss to pick your stocks you will make money if you get those two things right. But you would need to give the laws of probability time and space to do their job. He states that its not unheard of to have the coin flip against you 12 times in a row. *




This is important and what skate and I were getting at. I liked Radge's video where he went through the mathematical probablility of losing streaks based on winning percentage. He should make people read/watch/acknowledge this before selling them code lol. It's important to remember. And the point there from Rsthree is also important. Just because the probability of heads/tails is 50%, doesn't mean you'll go one for one when flipping. You'll have 'streaks' of heads or tails as well.

Remember that trend trading typically has a win% of 30-35%. That is with hundred's of trades in backtesting to validate as well. That is not a lot of winning and a lot of selling losers. You have to be prepared for it.



Nameless_ said:


> Thanks Rsthree - will definitely continue to read Skate's thread (I'm halfway through since the beginning of the thread!)
> 
> It's definitely hard to swallow 12 losses, especially if this means it is a span over weeks due to the weekly system instead of daily... it seems like once you have a system (and you have to believe in the system), then you have to step up to the plate everyday and put the trades in.




I started trading my system first week in Feb. By the time it got fully invested the market dropped due to COVID. I held on because my system said so. My stops hadn't been hit. I lost 23% of my equity (small amount of capital too) straight up! And my index filter now on so no more trades. You are going to lose. But follow through. I haven't broken even yet but I am close. Is it easy? No. I even muse about my worry in my thread. 

@Nameless_ there is no harm in buying Radge's code and running it in the background while you learn. Even though I coded a working system I decided to buy his as well. I'm trading his large cap code on Tuesday (beginning of the month). Skate has provided a lot of code to look at as well. Trav posts' a lot of gems too in his AB backtesting thread. I am a fan of the reading of some books—get some ideas and then try and code them. When you are stuck, google it.


----------



## tech/a

Interesting
Haven’t read all of the thread
But on streaks of losses.
If your trading an algorithm it will spit out a signal based upon its conditions.
You’ll note the while each buy will be similar they won’t be Identical

Your results should be similar to the testing.

What you should also note is that there will be a reason for long strings of losses.
They WONT be random.

When you trade with a tried and proven discretionary method you won’t get this.
Unlike your systematic method you have discretion.
You understand how to increase your edge with the agility of a gazelle
And not an Elephant.

If you understand your expectations will alter.
If market conditions float all boats you’ll be able to use just about anything
80% of the rest of the time ———
Understand how these methods work (I’m not talking about the nuts and bolts— eg Bollinger Bands and M/As ) but when and why you’ll trade better in all styles.

Then and only then will you truely understand not only why things are happening in your trading but how to improve your trading.

You'll suffer less from fear and greed and more become more entrepreneurial.
It’s a business.


----------



## willoneau

Nameless_ said:


> Thanks Rsthree - will definitely continue to read Skate's thread (I'm halfway through since the beginning of the thread!)
> 
> It's definitely hard to swallow 12 losses, especially if this means it is a span over weeks due to the weekly system instead of daily... it seems like once you have a system (and you have to believe in the system), then you have to step up to the plate everyday and put the trades in.



Hi
example - 20k, 20 positions 12 losses in a row ( largest drawdown you think you will get ) and 20% ISL = $4000 plus commissions. Now ask yourself if you can really tolerate your account going down that much, if yes then there will be no fear putting the 13th trade on.


----------



## dpong

Greetings!  This is the thread that brought me here.  I'm a new member and enjoyed reading this thread before joining.

FWIW, I just  posted my version of the AmiBroker AFL code for the WTT strategy in the Dump it Here thread.   I tried to code it "pure" and true to my interpretation of Nick's book Weekend Trend Trader.  There are no bells and whistles, but it does what Nick said it should do. 

You are welcome to look it over or take it for a test drive.  Much credit to Skate for getting me started with his generous teachings.

Here:  https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/dump-it-here.34425/post-1106986


----------



## dpong

Now that I am able to test using AmiBroker I have discovered that a choice I made in the original code was causing severe underperformance compared to what is possible. 

I was trying to make sure this 20 week breakout was "new", which I interpreted that it was the first breakout in a possible series of breakouts.  I was trying to say that this is not the 2nd or 3rd or 4th breakout in a row. 

However, through testing over long and short timeframes I have found that removing this 8 week look-back greatly improves performance.  Coded this way, it is a much more aggressive and successful strategy.

I have attached it as WeekendTrendTrader_v5.6.afl.

If you were testing the earlier version, try giving this one a spin.  Like night and day.



		Code:
	

// Condition 1 is a *new* 20 week breakout, so look back 8 weeks.
Cond1 = Ref(DonchianUpper, -1) < C;
//Cond1 = Ref(DonchianUpper, -2) >= fuzzy(Ref(DonchianUpper, -1)) AND Cond1;
//Cond1 = Ref(DonchianUpper, -3) >= fuzzy(Ref(DonchianUpper, -2)) AND Cond1;
//Cond1 = Ref(DonchianUpper, -4) >= fuzzy(Ref(DonchianUpper, -3)) AND Cond1;
//Cond1 = Ref(DonchianUpper, -5) >= fuzzy(Ref(DonchianUpper, -4)) AND Cond1;
//Cond1 = Ref(DonchianUpper, -6) >= fuzzy(Ref(DonchianUpper, -5)) AND Cond1;
//Cond1 = Ref(DonchianUpper, -7) >= fuzzy(Ref(DonchianUpper, -6)) AND Cond1;
//Cond1 = Ref(DonchianUpper, -8) >= fuzzy(Ref(DonchianUpper, -7)) AND Cond1;


----------



## qldfrog

Nameless_ said:


> Thanks everyone for your input! I'll definitely introduce myself in the Beginner's thread too.
> 
> I've read Nick's unholy grails and his WTT book, and have read a number of books regarding systematic trading (e.g. turtle traders, market wizards, algorithmic trading, etc as well as the more traditional buy and hold books that people that want to live a FIRE life use (re: financial independence, retire early) - eg barefoot investor and peter thornhills motivated money). I did message Nick and he said 50K should be enough as long as I use a deep discount broker, but the small account size means I would have a lot of drag on my account.
> 
> *In terms of learning Amibroker and systematic trading: *
> I work full time (and even more overtime including weekends), so I understand I have time constraints when learning Amibroker AFL. I don't think I can be a discretionary trader due to emotions, so systematic trading seems to call out to me more. I have the trial version on my laptop and have been following youtube videos to learn. It seems you have to write it up in a way that ensures you only have the one signal (and not recurring buy signals) and hence there is room for error. Given the steep learning curve, I was thinking it may be easier to cough up the 990 bucks, though I am aware of the opportunity cost it costs me not to mention I don't learn anything on my part. (Cheapest norgate data is 270 bucks a year, and costs 600+ if you want historical delisted data from 1992 required if you were to test your system). The risk is that it takes me too long (e.g. years to learn and by the time I get the hand of it, might as well have started early in buy and hold ETFs or the turnkey code). Time is of the essence for compounding to work, so its hard to know which is the best step (read: cost effective, more bang for buck way) to start.
> 
> *In terms of brokers: *
> Selfwealth does have a flat fee of $9.50, and have no account maintenance costs. However, say with at 100K account at 20 positions, each trade would be $5000.
> 
> Selfwealth = $9.50 per trade
> IB = $6 per trade or maintenance fee of $15 bucks (10 USD) whichever is higher
> 
> I read somewhere someone said the WTT trade frequency is around 36 trades a year? I don't have the data to back it up so hard to tell so hard to know which is cheaper in the long run. In massive account sizes though, it seems like selfwealth would be the way to go if its just a flat fee... please let me know if my thinking is wrong.
> 
> I've also been following Skate's Dump it here thread - solid gold for beginners like me!



seriously, between $9.5 or $6 or even $29.95; it will not make much of a difference at the end of the year compared to you trading properly or not .This should NOT be your focus


----------



## dpong

I believe that paying attention to commission drag is important, and especially so with an account of that size.

Here is a book by Mr. Bandy that while a little dated, should still be very helpful for getting onboard AmiBroker:   

Also, see my latest code for WTT in this thread.  That could be a great starting place for you.  I believe it performs just as Nick's WTT would perform.  Concentrate on back-testing using that code.  Also, read the code and look up each instruction in the AmiBroker's help system to begin to slowly understand what is going on with the code. 

Best of luck!
dpong

[PS. I have been trading that code and earlier versions of that code through 2020, and being successful!]


----------



## czehoul

dpong said:


> I believe that paying attention to commission drag is important, and especially so with an account of that size.
> 
> Here is a book by Mr. Bandy that while a little dated, should still be very helpful for getting onboard AmiBroker:
> 
> Also, see my latest code for WTT in this thread.  That could be a great starting place for you.  I believe it performs just as Nick's WTT would perform.  Concentrate on back-testing using that code.  Also, read the code and look up each instruction in the AmiBroker's help system to begin to slowly understand what is going on with the code.
> 
> Best of luck!
> dpong
> 
> [PS. I have been trading that code and earlier versions of that code through 2020, and being successful!]




Hi dpong, have your tested the WTT system with delisted stock and historical index constituent? With delisted stock and index constituent setting, I couldn't replicate the performance of Nick Radge WTT book(it is far worse). I tested with my own code and the code you shared.


----------

