|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
"I will not speak again for Stochastic RSI"
Thank God. For those that are interested:
Me and the boyz (and grrls) covered our short positions (QQQ) on the opening yesterday. In the worst market in recent memory, the system has now profited on ten out of the last eleven trades. The single loser was -.75, with the winners summing 27.16. Profits since 11/1/01 have exceeded the underlying price of the issue. The approach is traded by many, with real money. Nothing has been changed or tweaked for years. Over the years, many forum members have received this formula by "politlely" asking for it (see formula section of website). It continues to produce "out-of-sample" (and more importantly, in real accounts).
Again, the StoRSI is a tool to unlock profits in the QQQ. Used with a simple 21 period SMA, it continues "ring the register". It's hard to believethat anyone would "lobby" against an approach that continues to produce profits. If anyone decides to risk capital on this issue (or others), one must decide on an approach and then actually implement it. I do not have a new approach every week for this market. This is the one and only approach I have ever posted for this trading vehicle.
I am convinced that there are hundreds and maybe thousands of systems that will trade the Q's better. This is just one, simple approach that has been "public" and that has not changed for years. I have nothing to hide andnothing to sell. Please take the information and improve on it.
Take care,
Steve Karnish, CTA
Cedar Creek Trading
www.cedarcreektrading.com
1-877-668-1125
----- Original Message -----
From: Dimitris Tsokakis
To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 5:34 AM
Subject: [amibroker] Optimal solutions of the past and future profits
Last June 5, 2001, I posted to this list the Tushar Chande Stochastic RSI and my Stochastic CCI.
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/message/2394
I will not speak again for Stochastic RSI, we have seen a lot of details for this popular indicator, which
presents now an optimal solution [8-13-87] for QQQ, running at a +250% for the last 30 months.
Besides the difficult question of the selection of this [8-13-87] combination [although I read ...carefully
the messages, I have not seen any kind of explanation, serious or humorous, by the user of this combination]
I wrote that this +250% is not one of the best QQQ performances.
We have seen a lot of QQQ systems running between +500% and +600% or better.
I understand that it is not fair to compare different design approaches. It is very difficult for Stochastic RSI to
be competitive to D-ratio or RSIt or MeanRSI TTM.
So, let us compare the quite similar Stochastic RSI and Stochastic CCI.
Beginning from March 2000 till June 2001, there were two almost equal solutions for the respective
StochCCI system, [I follow symmetric triggering just for the comparisonunder equal terms, my personal opinion
for symmetric triggering is analytically expressed in other postings]running at +303% and +302%, with
equal # of 10 trades/9 winners/1 loser, as you may see in the StochCCI 1 gif .
You could select one of them or both of them.
Now, one year later, we may see the [7,13] at +405% and the [6,15] at +1199%.[StoCCI2 gif]
I do not believe that there were serious criteria on June 2001 to select the [7,13] or the [6,15].
CCI differentiation is almost invisible, if you change the period from 6 to 7.
You surely need a magnifier to separate BuyLevel=13 from BuyLevel=15 .
If we forget these details, a +1199% may sounds great.
It is up to you to decide if you prefer attractive calculations or positive trading techniques.
Anyway, if you are interested in this invividualistic trading style andif you prefer Stochastic oscillators, try
Stochastic CCI among the others. It is not popular but it is a bit smarter.
Dimitris Tsokakis
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
------=_NextPart_001_006A_01C233AE.4D6B5100
Content-Type: text/html;
charset="iso-8859-7"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-7" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3500" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>da chart</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A href="mailto:kernish@xxxx"; title=kernish@xxxx>Steve
Karnish</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, July 25, 2002 7:34
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: [amibroker] Optimal
solutions of the past and future profits</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT size=2>"I will not speak again for
Stochastic RSI"</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Thank God. For those that are
interested:</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Me and the boyz (and grrls) covered our short
positions (QQQ) on the opening yesterday. In the worst market in recent
memory, the system has now profited on ten out of the last eleven
trades. The single loser was -.75, with the winners summing 27.16.
Profits since 11/1/01 have exceeded the underlying price of the issue.
The approach is traded by many, with real money. Nothing has been
changed or tweaked for years. Over the years, many forum members have
received this formula by "politlely" asking for it (see formula section of
website). It continues to produce "out-of-sample" (and more importantly,
in real accounts).</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Again, the StoRSI is a tool to unlock profits in
the QQQ. Used with a simple 21 period SMA, it continues "ring the
register". It's hard to believe that anyone would "lobby" against an
approach that continues to produce profits. If anyone decides to risk
capital on this issue (or others), one must decide on an approach and then
actually implement it. I do not have a new approach every week for this
market. This is the one and only approach I have ever posted for this
trading vehicle.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I am convinced that there are hundreds and maybe
thousands of systems that will trade the Q's better. This is just one,
simple approach that has been "public" and that has not changed for
years. I have nothing to hide and nothing to sell. Please take the
information and improve on it.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Take care,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Steve Karnish, CTA<BR>Cedar Creek Trading<BR><A
href="http://www.cedarcreektrading.com";>www.cedarcreektrading.com</A><BR>1-877-668-1125</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
<A href="mailto:TSOKAKIS@xxxx"; title=TSOKAKIS@xxxx>Dimitris
Tsokakis</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Thursday, July 25, 2002 5:34
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> [amibroker] Optimal solutions
of the past and future profits</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Last June 5, 2001, I posted to this list the TusharChande
Stochastic RSI and my Stochastic CCI.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2><A
href="http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/message/2394";>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/message/2394</A></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I will not speak again for Stochastic RSI, we have seen a
lot of details for this popular indicator, which</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>presents now an optimal solution [8-13-87] for QQQ,
running at a +250% for the last 30 months.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Besides the difficult question of the selection of this
[8-13-87] combination [although I read ...carefully</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>the messages, I have not seen any kind of
explanation, serious or humorous, by the user of this
combination]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I wrote that this +250% is not one of the best QQQ
performances.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>We have seen a lot of QQQ systems running between +500%
and +600% or better.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I understand that it is not fair to compare different
design approaches. It is very difficult for Stochastic RSI to</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>be competitive to D-ratio or RSIt or MeanRSI
TTM.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>So, let us compare the quite similar Stochastic RSIand
Stochastic CCI.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Beginning from March 2000 till June 2001, there were
two almost equal solutions for the respective</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>StochCCI system, [I follow symmetric triggering just for
the comparison under equal terms, my personal opinion </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>for symmetric triggering is analytically expressed in
other postings]running at +303% and +302%, with </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>equal # of 10 trades/9 winners/1 loser, as you may see
in</FONT><FONT size=2> the StochCCI 1 gif</FONT> <FONT
size=2>.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>You could select one of them or both of them.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Now, one year later, we may see the [7,13] at +405%and
the [6,15] at +1199%.[StoCCI2 gif]</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>I do not believe that there were serious criteria on June
2001 to select the [7,13] or the [6,15].</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>CCI differentiation is almost invisible, if you change the
period from 6 to 7.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>You surely need a magnifier to separate BuyLevel=13 from
BuyLevel=15 .</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>If we forget these details, a +1199% may sounds
great.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>It is up to you to decide if you prefer attractive
calculations or positive trading techniques.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Anyway, if you are interested in this invividualistic
trading style and if you prefer Stochastic oscillators, try</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Stochastic CCI among the others. It is not popular but it
is a bit smarter.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=2>Dimitris Tsokakis</FONT></DIV><BR><BR><TT>Your use of
Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <A
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/";>Yahoo! Terms of Service</A>.</TT>
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE><BR><BR><TT>Your
use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <A
href="http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/";>Yahoo! Terms of Service</A>.</TT>
<BR></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
------=_NextPart_001_006A_01C233AE.4D6B5100--
Attachment:
gif00427.gif
Attachment:
Description: "Description: GIF image"
|