Skate made an explanation in Dollar terms between Skates exit and Willoneau exit for MGX - maybe Willoneau was implying Skate do the same for NEA which shows that perhaps a stale exit doesn't always maximise the profit outcome. . .
Skates Dollar outcome for NEA
1. A $25K position in NEA @ $0.745 buys 33,557 shares
2. 1st exit @ $0.655 results in capital of $21,980 (a loss of $3,020)
3. Using capital of $21,980, 2nd entry @ $0.92 buys 23,891 shares
4. 2nd exit @ $0.96 results in capital of $22,935 (a gain of $955)
5. Using capital of $22,935, 3rd entry @ $1.075 buys 21,334 shares
6. 3rd exit @ $1.665 results in capital of $35,521 (a gain of $12,587)
7. Using capital of $35,521, 4th entry @ $2.43 buys 14,617 shares
8. 4th exit @ $3.32 results in final capital of $48,528 (a gain of $13,009)
Skates result - $25K capital has grown to $48,528 a total gain of $23,528
Willonea Dollar outcome for NEA
1. A $25K position in NEA @0.745 buys 33,557 shares
2. No exits, his trade is still running @ $3.33 for capital of $111,744 (an unrealised gain of $86,744.
Willonea result - $25K capital has grown to $111,744 a total unrealised gain of $86,744
A difference of $63,216 and that is after only one trade.
We are all different and we all choose to trade according to different rules which produce different results.
@willy1111
Your comparison is a tad short of being valid as I would doubt that @Skate keeps his spare cash in his back pocket when he is not in a NEA trade.
I'm glad you took the time to look at it and hope to hear more of what you think.Skate provided an example of the difference in exits on MGX which one may read as implying a stale exit produces better profit.
Perhaps it was cherry picked to demonstrate this.
Willoneau raised NEA as another stock to do a comparison on.
I just did the calculation to demonstrate an alternative view and provide some perspective that a stale stop doesn’t always provide a better profit outcome.
Yes NEA was cherry picked...as was MGX
One trade does not make a system.
I'm not arguing for or against just attempting to provide balance/perspective for the reader.
The opportunity cost for Skate not staying with the trade all the way through may have been $63k, then again his capital may have been applied to another stock...so many variables so impossible to determine hence the comparison was done just on NEA for simplistic sake.
It is great people are willing to share their ideas as others may not have thought of it and can test it themselves on their own systems to see if it enhances their results.
I am very interested in your stale exit skate looking at both the positive and negative aspect of it. Finding a compromise between them can only improve the bottom line, any idea's how anyone?My example was to demonstrate a "Stale Exit" rather than debate the results of one position or infer my method of trading is better than anyone else, the 'Dump it here' thread is an educational thread for the betterment of others & everyone's input is valued.
I am looking for some ideas on how to approach finances to position myself and wife for retirement. Nothing anyone says will be construed as financial advice...I am just finding that accountants and financial advisers are limited and conservative in their offerings...at least the ones I come across.
Here's a threads that will help you. https://www.aussiestockforums.com/threads/dump-it-here.34425/ Probably keep you occupied for a while.
jog on
duc
Hmmm ,....
Well ... being a trader in many ways all my adult life, an observation is that less than 1% who try, succeed. I would NOT trade, nor risk capital.
Totally agree on this ,On the 1% trading making it, I mean day traders and very short term traders. Difference in terminology, sure now ... as market rises ... even a retard males money. What sorts them out, and this is of course an eventual outcome is a sideways market or god forbid downwards one.
Hi Sir Burr, I was refering to the actual process of pushing the button to buy the stock if i remember correctly not all the reasons I would use to press that button.Replying here because I saw your quote in the "Blunders" thread.
Just wanted to say that I find the above quote the reverse. Buying is harder - system trading.
Reason why and in my case a weekly system, it's so simple to place a trade after the market has closed on Friday and data has come in. Run a scan and enter the trade - done. No thinking at all and takes me a few minutes and don't ever look at it again.
On the other-hand a buy, I look at the list and start at #1. Open the ASX site and check for any announcements that might make me select the next one down ie: takeovers or anything that might make me bypass it.
Then, if I'm fully invested I need to wait (using IB) for a sell and capital becomes available to place the new buy between 10-10:10am. If I'm NOT fully invested then I can just place the trade any-time over the weekend.
In my case, I say buying is harder
Backtesting means JACK
I've stated before, backtest results mean "Jack" - but the backtest results do give an indication between test results using different parameters for evaluation.
Backtest Results
Are the backtest an accurate reflection of my trading results - no not really, they mean Jack - my actual trading results are a little better.
OOS Data
For others - "Out of sample data", is data that your strategy has not seen before.
Paper Trading
Running your strategy using (OOS) data (paper trading) is the only results you should take notice of when "your cash" is on the line. Paper trading measures the true worth of any strategy. All other trading results not using OOS data mean 'JACK ****' to me & I really mean this.
Skate.
This little exchange interested me.
The backtesting [and backtested results] are a hypothesis about the market. It is valuable because it is falsifiable [Popper].
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?