MichaelD
Not fooled by randomness
- Joined
- 7 December 2005
- Posts
- 912
- Reactions
- 2
bingk6 said:Hi Michael,
That is certainly a most interesting method of trading. What ever happened to the buy low and sell high philosophy ?? I suspect that Kerry Packer will be turning in his grave if James was using this investment technique.
BTW, I will be curious whether anybody has done extensive backtesting on this trading method to see what sort of results one would get.
Ultimately, you are correct in stating that the exit is much more important than entrance. With solid position sizing, money management, Stop Loss settings etc etc, one really could come up with a very solid strategy irrespective of where the entry is.
nizar said:Oh nice one...
Im studying Pharmacy
Good onya Nizar, I knew you sounded switched on for a "young fella" .
ps You shouldn't be staying up so late .... bad for your studyCheers, Barney.
barney said:Good onya Nizar, I knew you sounded switched on for a "young fella" .
ps You shouldn't be staying up so late .... bad for your studyCheers, Barney.
MichaelD said:In fact, I've just quickly done a backtest on the strategy up to close of trade Friday. Backtesting does have many caveats which are beyond the scope of this post, but the results are;
Universe: Current ASX300
Trading: From 1-Jan-1996
Starting Capital: $100,000
Reinvest All Profits
No pyramiding of trades
Entry: Close at all-time high
Exit: 6.5 ATR
Finishing Profit: $2,638,159.39
Win %: 53.86%
Drawdown %: 10.96%
I spend 1-2 hours per weeknight risk managing my open positions. It's a precise, written down routine that I go through every weeknight, over and over again.nizar said:Michael D - Can u please elaborate in what exactly the above entails ie. trading education and research? Thats a lot of hours a week, hopefully at the end u will find what you are looking for.
It doesn't work. You keep buying lower, and lower, and lower...and then the company's suddenly gone. At the very best, the company wallows in the doldrums for months/years before finally rallying. Buy high and sell higher works much better.
nizar said:tech/a - u say that 180ema is one of your exits. If u take a look at KZL, for example, its trading at about $6 on a massive uptrend but its way above its 180ema which is sitting at around $4. What would be your exit in this case? Obviously u wouldnt want to lose 66% before you were "stopped" out.
michael - what do u mean by "no pyramiding of trades" and "% drawdown"
BTW thats fairly impressive stats you have there. 2% of initial capital works if you are starting with 50,60k+. Anything less and your stop will be too narrow, though as tech/a has pointed out, such a technique can still work. A bullmarket would have helped as well. So there may be less opportunities in a bearmarket but i think there will still be opportunities. They'll just pop up less so u just trade less, yeh? Probably go on a holiday or something when that happens...
machi said:In my opinion totally incorrect. Some of the best investors in the world i.e. Buffet, Templeton to name a few have made it big time, buying low and selling high.
Obviously you have no other mechanism for buying a stock other than the fact that it is making new highs. How do you know it's not just a rally in a bear market? Simple you don't. Buying on breakouts to new highs is a poor strategy in my opinion. A breakout to new highs can lead to a false move. False moves can lead to fast moves in the opposite direction
As for saying its a poor strategy,I would love to see evidence to support a comparison of the 2. hypothesis and rhetoric dont qualify in my veiw as supporting evidence.
machi said:Take an example, look a stock that once for example traded at $100. It then falls to $1. From 1$ to $3 is a huge gain. Even though it nothing compared to $100. But $100-103. Well....
machi said:Positioning of stops is the hardest thing you can do in trading.
Totally agree with Tech/A here and disagree with you, machi. Buying on pullbacks may be profitable, but is it MORE profitable than buying at random or buying on breakout or buying on highest close ever?tech/a said:As for saying its a poor strategy,I would love to see evidence to support a comparison of the 2. hypothesis and rhetoric dont qualify in my veiw as supporting evidence.
No pyramiding = not adding to winning positions.nizar said:michael - what do u mean by "no pyramiding of trades" and "% drawdown
Long only. Long term shorting is not a profitable strategy.bingk6 said:Can you tell me whether these trades include both long and short positions ?
Secondly, would also like to see how pyramiding of trades affect the results.
Porper said:A bit of an extreme case don't you think machi.Who said they thought a stock going from $100 to $103 is a good trade ?
Why is it ?
It is very simple.Place an initial stop at entry.Then a breakeven stop (if this is how you trade) anyway there are several types of stops, too many to go into, you get the drift.But all have very exact specific rules.There is nothing difficult about it at all Machi.I am a beginner and if I can do it so can anybody.
Addendum to last post:
Position sizing: 2% of total capital risked per trade
It's a remarkably effective trading technique, but the vast majority of the unprofitable masses will reject it for purely psychological reasons. Their loss.
nizar said:michael - what do u mean by "no pyramiding of trades" and "% drawdown"
BTW thats fairly impressive stats you have there. 2% of initial capital works if you are starting with 50,60k+. Anything less and your stop will be too narrow, though as tech/a has pointed out, such a technique can still work. A bullmarket would have helped as well. So there may be less opportunities in a bearmarket but i think there will still be opportunities. They'll just pop up less so u just trade less, yeh? Probably go on a holiday or something when that happens...
It's Snake Pliskin said:MichaelD,
So at $100,000 total capital 2% is $2000.
10 losses at 2% = $20,000. You can see why I don`t like the arbitrary percentage determining how much I will risk.
I prefer something more like 0.5% or less = I don`t know but it is way less than 2%.
Nizar
Your stop determines your tradable risk, so the above is fallacious unless employing a percentage stop of say 2% as your tradable risk. (look above)
I want at least 3 to 1 reward to risk with not more than $300 loss per trade (yes this is arbitrary) sometimes $500. At, say $100,000 that is 0.3%; 10 losses = $3000, I still have plenty to recoup the losses with and IF getting some wins at, at least 3x, maintaining or improving the expectancy curve - the goal!
The only offset with this is sometimes my initial purchase is small until breakeven and then pyramided with more funds as it goes higher increasing brokerage. But you can`t have your cake and eat it too, as the saying goes.
Hello barney,barney said:Hi Guys, Have to go out shortly, but just a quick one regarding PMN below. Curious as to anyones opinion on a likely scenario for this stock. They are going to be bought out by Suncorp I believe hence the SP spike, but then a massive SP down turn on another up day for the Oz Stock Market. Interesting ........... Could have been seen as a long position 2 days ago ........... Now maybe a short? I don't know; just curious for more experienced opinions, Cheers Barney.
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?