theasxgorilla
Problem solved... next bubble.
- Joined
- 7 December 2006
- Posts
- 2,343
- Reactions
- 1
.
Until I started making some really stupid moves, some panic selling and buying and with the maket so turbulent my reading seems to be off non stop. Accounts down 30% on principle and I am starting to wonder.
KNOW = know within the limits of reasonable due process.
The key hallmark of a profitable trading strategy is that you KNOW in advance what the strategy's performance parameters are.
You KNOW what the maximum expected drawdown is.
You KNOW how it performs in various market conditions.
You KNOW its expected run of losses.
In short, you KNOW in advance when the strategy will be declared not to be working any longer and what to do if this happens.
See, I don't think anyone can ever KNOW (in your terms) a lot of these things - unless you believe that markets are inherently predictable by way of analysing historical data, in which case, every system once profitable will always remain profitable.
I agree that having a plan doesn't automatically guarantee your profits. But it will assist you in the most important thing, that is to protect your capital and minimise your risk. Not having a plan at all will surely lead you to your doom.
How do you design or modify a profitable plan without using it?
What is the point of setting a plan or building rules, if continually neglect to act upon them?
True improve or modify them as situations change.
I would appreciate your input into what you consider makes a good blue print.
I was going to put a bracketed caveat in my post about knowing what kind of market we are in, and where we are in the cycle. The reality/truth/fact! is that we can really only know where we've been. We can only make a true statement which says, 'up until now and based on my analysis, since the peak in Nov 07, we have been in a noisy and down trending market'.
Of course, the next days trading might be the beginning of a different kind of market. My opinion is that no-one can predict.
See, I don't think anyone can ever KNOW (in your terms) a lot of these things - unless you believe that markets are inherently predictable by way of analysing historical data, in which case, every system once profitable will always remain profitable.
Having said that, it doesn't take all these fancy terms to know if something is not working. Long only at the moment, will not work, and a 30% peak to trough draw-down on a very short term system, to me, is not working.
I think a lot of people here, especially the mechanical traders, would do well to look into the history of the word, "expectation".
Sid
Provided that components of the plan actually do minimise risk.
Provided that the person designing the plan actually understands how best to apply risk mitigation. So in essence I agree.
You can certainly forward test by using it as you say but ultimately many I have found that this method is/can be very costly not to mention some cases emotionally draining.
There are very good software around for testing ideas,Amibroker/Metastock/Tradesim to name a few.Plus some very talented people who can code for you if your not up to speed. For forward testing ideas without code but you need lots of patience and time STATOR.
ASX
But we can anticipate.Many here have for a long time indicated 4700 ish. Many here are no longer trading long term long methodologies. Although we did for years. Many are doing very little and many are trading to the choppiness seen in this market and will I anticipate be with us for quite a few years. As for the next day---anticipation is for a rally towards 6000 now for a while.So shorter term long positions would be favored.
But you don't necessarily know what conditions are present. If you have a system designed long only, for a trending market, it may not work if the subset of conditions change within the larger market conditions. It's why I could never be a fully mechanical trader, because I just cannot agree with the underlying philosophy behind it.Chops
I agree in part to your points.While the market may not be finitely predictable the way a trading methodology is put together will determine how predictable its performance is/can be. It will vary in performance between the mean and the high and low of performance due to those unpredictable movements in the market. Any trading methodology can only be expected to remain profitable IF it is traded in conditions in which its been designed.
If those conditions change enough then it will cease to work.
Got nothing to do with that. It's much simpler. Just involves another word that people think they eliminate by doing all this testing.True,and some/most traders would upon failure and study into that failure realise that they had Unrealistic expectations of their plan.
Chops
Having a grounding in mechanical testing capability would in my view place you way way ahead of the crowd in developing a discretionary trading method (perhaps one that cannot be coded) which can have an EXPECTATION of profit well beyond a method designed by someone who hasn't.
Who says you need to be a mech analyst to anticipate?
But you don't necessarily know what conditions are present. If you have a system designed long only, for a trending market, it may not work if the subset of conditions change within the larger market conditions. It's why I could never be a fully mechanical trader, because I just cannot agree with the underlying philosophy behind it.
Take Niz for example. No offence to him, but it wouldn't have exactly taken Einstein to work out a long only long term trend following system would be shellacked in this market, especially since December. So my point would be you need a manual override (in my systems anyway) to stop you from defying COMMON SENSE in trading.
Got nothing to do with that. It's much simpler. Just involves another word that people think they eliminate by doing all this testing.
I don't disagree with that. My response would be to find out statistics on event criteria, or code something that induces a high frequency entry around said event criteria, to replicate an essentially "non-consistent" or inability to be consistent entry. At least that way you have some kind of "valid" belief (whoops, there's a clue) or at least justification for trading in that manner.
I don't believe there is much difference in trading based on a theoretical statistical advantage, as compared with a mechanical system. Because to me, trading based on a mechanical system, is essentially a more complicated way of establishing a statistical advantage.
Cheers.
But we have me to thank for the the highest birth rate in thirty years and the baby bonus. Amongst all those brains - cough , no one could figure out what to do with the aging populatiion , or why we even had one so it is not everything , far from it.
Or- Take our genuises in Cambera for instance they all write very nicely I'm sure.
Ahhh... I'm talking of the etymology of the word expectation. Nothing more, nothing less.Got everything to do with it.
If you are trading a flawed method/Plan you have an unrealistic expectation of it--to make a profit.
The thing is you don't know it!
Ok the you need to know when all the statistical criteria is placed within a plan how it performs overtime.
A singular set of statistics while true in itself may not when combined with others deliver a single positive result.Logic says they should however practice proves to us often that it doesn't.
I'm not saying you cant trade any other way than Systematically/Mechanically.
What I am saying is that you need to know WHY your plan has a chance to profit.
No good writing out all these logical conditions into a trading plan ---following it religiously for 12 mths and losing $20,000 and WORSE not knowing why!
Or having a perfectly sound plan which suffers a NORMAL draw-down only to be completely ruined with constant tweaking because your scared to death your plan doesn't work.
Other than trading constantly until failure or Riches the only way I know to fast track this learning experience is to become proficient in systems testing,even if you have no intention of trading a system and end up trading in a Discretionary manner.
We have kept T/T going as an evaluation process to see if it gets to a point of Failure V Blueprint---even if it does and the system stops it will show a very healthy return over the period traded.
Since you've diverted from the topic, I can't resist asking exactly how you are responsible for the highest birth rate in 30 years (will desist from making snide comments about the obvious!), and also exactly how you were responsible for the baby bonus (probably the silliest bit of government policy ever), and lastly, I'm fascinated that you have figured out how to manage the ageing population. Please tell us.
See, I don't think anyone can ever KNOW (in your terms) a lot of these things - unless you believe that markets are inherently predictable by way of analysing historical data, in which case, every system once profitable will always remain profitable.
Having said that, it doesn't take all these fancy terms to know if something is not working. Long only at the moment, will not work, and a 30% peak to trough drawdown on a very short term system, to me, is not working.
If I could not backtest/walk forward test a strategy to my satisfaction, I would not trade it.P.S. - what would you do with a trading strategy Michael, that has a theoretical statistical/ probability edge, but cannot be backtested adequately?
As happens with so many other threads, it appears this has turned into a mech vs non-mech traders.
Why does it matter??
Some people dont backtest, it does not mean they are not successful or that their system does not work.
I would argue that fundamental analysis cannot be backtested, or can only be done so through research, not a mechanical system.
I think people need to realise there is more than one way to invest in the market, and as a generalisation it seems funny how many mech traders think that their way is the one and only and that everyone should develop a mechanical system.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?