|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Beat your wife ??? Are we missing aninside
joke ?
<BLOCKQUOTE
>
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
>From:
Steve
Karnish
To: <A title=amibroker@xxxxxxxxxx
href="">amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 9:22
AM
Subject: Re: [amibroker] Re:
QQQ/StoRSI
DT,> to point out a different perspective, the
StochRSI [8, 17, 83] system> is profitable for the 40% of the N100
stocks.I never, ever suggested that the indicator or system had any
value whenapplying it to N100 stocks. As I have stated: If you want
an approach thattrades the N100 with 100% profitability, I can designthe
system in a fewhours (a best fit, over optimized, piece of
crap).In the past, I've asked that you read my posts carefully and not
assumeanything. Saying that the StoRSI system doesn't work wellon
the N100 islike me saying that the TTM system sucks when appliedto pork
bellies and theMexican Peso. It's totally unfair to take thingsout
of context. By theway, do you still beat your wife? A simple
yes or no answer will suffice.Take care,Steve Karnish,
CTACedar Creek
Tradingwww.cedarcreektrading.com1-877-668-1125----- Original
Message -----From: dtsokakis <TSOKAKIS@xxxx>To:
<amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>Sent: Tuesday, July 23, 2002 6:11
AMSubject: [amibroker] Re: QQQ/StoRSI> Steve,> to
point out a different perspective, the StochRSI [8, 17, 83] system> is
profitable for the 40% of the N100 stocks.> A simple [for sure not
ideal] TTM system like the> <A
href="">http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/message/21404>
is profitable for the 80% of the stocks, with one universal> parameters
pair [11,64] for any stock you trade.> After that, it is a matter of
taste.> Day by day I am closer to TTM mentality and, frankly speaking,
not> because I designed it.> As for the Costello period, Elvis
was fine but I preferred Ian.> It was, again, a matter of
taste...> Dimitris> --- In amibroker@xxxx, "Steve Karnish"
<kernish@xxxx> wrote:> > Yuki,> >> > As
usual, you are very perceptive and wise. I was waiting for>
someone to> > comment on the last six months of buy signals.
Unfortunately, the> first> > comment I received was someone
noticing that the trading system> did "a> > really good job
picking the tops (sell signals), but not so good> with the>>
buy signals...can you tell me why that might be"? Sometimes you>
just have> > to smile. As Elvis sings (Costello, not the
King): "I used to be> > disgusted, now I just
amused..."> >> > Since you have hit the mark with your
comments, here's a little> filter for> > improving the QQQ
approach. Only take trades in the direction of> today's
21> > day SMA. If you trigger a "buy signal" (indicator closes
below the> StoRSI> > level of 17), then today's SMA mustbe
larger than yesterdays.> Exit rules> > are the same (sell the
following day the StoRSI closes above 83),> except> > when
the SMA has turned negative and then you simply reverse the>
position.> >> > Attached is the same StoRSI QQQ chartbut
with the 21 day> SMA "filter. It's> > profited on 9 of
the last 10 trades and has 17 winners in the last> 20> >
trades.> >> > Take care,> >> > Steve
Karnish, CTA> > Cedar Creek Trading> >
www.cedarcreektrading.com> > 1-877-668-1125> > -----
Original Message -----> > From: Yuki Taga
<yukitaga@xxxx>> > To: Steve Karnish
<amibroker@xxxx>> > Sent: Monday, July 22, 2002 4:29
PM> > Subject: Re: [amibroker] QQQ/StoRSI> >>
>> > > Hi Steve,> > >> > > Justto
add a couple of things to your fine comments:> > >> >
> Tuesday, July 23, 2002, 12:09:31 AM, you wrote:> > >>
> > SK> A couple general comments on the StoRSI/QQQ approach:>
> >> > > SK> Filter suggestions: Try only taking
an "opening" position in> the> > > SK> QQQ when the 13
(21, or your number of choice) SMA is> pointing in> > >
SK> the direction of your trade. Sounds too simple, right?
You> can> > > SK> apply the same approach by usingany
number of linear> regression> > > SK> tools. Pick
a "trend identifier" (and believe me, trend is> the> > >
SK> hardest thing to wrap your arms around), and only trade in the>
> > SK> direction of the trend. Yes, it's that easy.
Eliminate the> > > SK> "stinkin" trades that were initiated
against the trend. A 13> day> > > SK> SMA isa
starting point and with the ability to "optimize"> using> >
> SK> AB, you can identify many averages that should improve the>
> > SK> overall performance and keep you (most times) on the
right> side> > > SK> of the market.> >
>> > > Another simple idea for improving percentage winners
here is to> NOT> > > take signals where price doesn't
react to the signal itself. You> got> > > a buy
signal, but prices opened sharply lower the next morning,> and>
> > you took the signal anyway? Okay. It will work
sometimes, but> when> > > one does that one is sayingthat
one's market genie is now smarter> > > than the market as a
whole. And when one is trading a very short> > > term
system (as I like to do), one needs to be very sensitive to> > >
short term price, IMO. Maybe one of you coders out there could>
run> > > some tests and figure out the results for the
following:> > >> > > 1) what percentage of trades
went south (or had uncomfortably --> > > yeah, hard to agreeon
what that means for everyone -- large draw> > > downs before
coming back) when price failed to exceed the high of> the> >
> signal day on the day you were supposed to pull the trigger> >
>> > > 2) what is the optimal waiting period for price to
exceed the> high of> > > the signal day (next bar
only? two bars? four bars?) IOW, when> > >does
the signal become null and void when price fails to follow> > >
through, based on a back test> > >> > > Finally,
Steve and I both yearn for complete hands-off automation.> > >
But there's clearly a trade off. On the plus side, if you really>
> > have a good system, keeping hands off keeps you from mucking
it> up.> > > On the down side, you have to live with
situations from time to> time> > > that are probably
pretty easy to second guess. Specifically,> taking> >
> counter trend signals on a short term oscillator when there is no>
> > nearby reasonable price support (the place where you cut and
run> if> > > it fails) can lead to some pain. And the
obvious exit is, to me,> > > rather obvious. :)> >
>> > > A couple of comments on my attached cut of Steve's
gif.> > >> > > Best,> > >> >
> Yuki> > >> > > mailto:yukitaga@xxxx>
> >> > >> > >> > > Your use of
Yahoo! Groups is subject to> <A
href="">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>
> >> > >>>>>>>
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to <A
href="">http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/>>Your
use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <A
href="">Yahoo! Terms of Service.
|