Hey CanOz, could you disclose what markets/exchange data you get from eSignal?
I know what you mean. The way I can explain it is this. The processing of data [input] is more exact as evidenced in the results. Decision making is not wishy-washy. One can announce (to themselves so other organisms don't sabotage) the outcome before it happens. Like being in form with the cricket bat. The ball looks like a watermelon.I'm talking about being in a flow state (described by Csikszentmihalyi and others). I've had three striking moments in my career - twice with trading and once with a sports betting account. The flow state would appear as a result of total letting go, and the result was absolute certainty about what was going to happen next (hard to explain unless you've experienced it). The certainty that flooded in left me in no doubt about how things work. Trading is 100% a mind game.
Kay. Thanks.At the moment I'm just getting fx through esignal....it's $125 USD per month. Not really happy at the moment either, as it has some strange anomalies in some of the pairs
So, to test if there is an edge here, i want to use my Open Range Breakout strategy i had coded a long time ago.
If you have the coded strategy, easier to backtest it, surely? Trade-by-trade testing would take years to even estimate if you have an edge.
Yeah, that's exactly what i said i wanted to do....just testing some pairs and tabling the results.
The degree of fiddling around with peripheral stuff which has no bearing on anything has hit a new high. You know full well that "tabling results" will not yield anything useful.
Either:
1) buy or develop a backtestable system which you can start trading OR...
2) develop your confidence to the point of being able to trade using discretion.
If your chosen method doesn't return you an income after 1 month, then you've bought/developed a poor system and need to try again. Or you listened to the wrong person when it comes to developing trading confidence, and need to try again.
You're really clogging up my thread with your opinions, i don't find them helpful. Really annoying actually.
I would prefer to see if there is greater than 50/50 probability of the markets doing something giving a set of circumstances before i develop a trading idea. If i already have a statistical edge, then i want to know how my desecration can may be able to improve that.
Desecration... that's quite the Freudian slip.
A 50/50 probability of markets doing something...? You want to do this as a trade-by-trade manual process? You understand that takes many months? And then what... another few months of something else? A 50-50 win rate, even if you achieve it, means nothing! You have AB, but you're not prepared to run some simple backtests to save you years of manual testing? Doesn't that strike you as odd?
My help is so annoying because I'm being realistic. There's not a single trader in here who would confirm that your current approach is going to lead anywhere useful. You have to give away all the pretty charts, the ridiculous level of "preparation" and get honest with yourself.
Now if my calculations are correct, that should be enough for you to put me on ignore. Too real.
Desecration... that's quite the Freudian slip.
So, to test if there is an edge here, i want to use my Open Range Breakout strategy i had coded a long time ago.
The degree of fiddling around with peripheral stuff which has no bearing on anything has hit a new high. You know full well that "tabling results" will not yield anything useful.
You want to do this as a trade-by-trade manual process? You understand that takes many months? And then what... another few months of something else? A 50-50 win rate, even if you achieve it, means nothing! You have AB, but you're not prepared to run some simple backtests to save you years of manual testing? Doesn't that strike you as odd?
You used the word "tabling results" rather than "backtesting". Alright good. So you want to optimize with a optimization target of 'win%', yes? That's good too, but you need to make sure the win rate holds up with walk forward testing because high win rates are easy to generate and easy to curve fit to data. Profitability should be at least 'break even' if you're going to use this approach. Does it pass both these tests?
If it does, what methods are you going to use to optimize your discretionary decision making so that you choose more of the right trades than the wrong ones?
After all that, i don't even get an apology?
I plan on do some manual statistics on the successful trades, since there are not many of them. I'm going to look for a set of conditions that will involve hourly volatility and daily range of the setup session and the session before.
I can also do some (Back)tests on the most successful pair by tightening up the stop and going for larget targets. Obviously the win rate will drop, but the wins should get larger. This would indicate that i may be able to use a trailing stop.
Would you like to suggest anything else?
1) not many trades + 2) optimization = curve fitting. How many years of data are you backtesting on with an hourly time frame?
Curve fitting is ok, so long as it walks forward on unseen data, otherwise it's not a real edge.
Since you are overlaying a discretionary component, what method are you using to maximize the quality of your decision making?
1) not many trades + 2) optimization = curve fitting. How many years of data are you backtesting on with an hourly time frame?
Curve fitting is ok, so long as it walks forward on unseen data, otherwise it's not a real edge.
Since you are overlaying a discretionary component, what method are you using to maximize the quality of your decision making?
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?