|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
On 5/14/02, the StoRSI closed at 87.34 (triggering a possible short sale).
The 21 day SMA closed at 31.89 (on 5/14/02) and was below the previous day's
21 day SMA which was 31.95. Since the "trend identifier" (the 21 day SMA)
was still negative, a short sell signal was confirmed and the trade was
initiated. The position was covered ten trading days later and since the 21
period SMA was not positive...the system moved to the "sidelines"...waiting
for the next signal.
I hope that clears it up. Never trust your eyeballs to distinguish
fractional numbers on charts... they can be a little deceiving.
Take care,
Steve Karnish, CTA
Cedar Creek Trading
www.cedarcreektrading.com
1-877-668-1125
----- Original Message -----
From: nurudinkaba <n.kaba@xxxx>
To: <amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, July 25, 2002 8:29 AM
Subject: [amibroker] Re: Optimal solutions of the past and future profits
> First let me say thank you for your contribution StochRSI and for
> that matter the CMO5...
>
> On your attached QQQ chart, the signal in May 2002 doesn't look like
> its confirmed by the 21 sma filter...is this correct or is it just
> the graphics...
>
> Thanks again.
>
> --- In amibroker@xxxx, "Steve Karnish" <kernish@xxxx> wrote:
> > "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 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.
> >
> > 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.
> >
> > Take care,
> >
> > Steve Karnish, CTA
> > Cedar Creek Trading
> > www.cedarcreektrading.com
> > 1-877-668-1125
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: Dimitris Tsokakis
> > To: amibroker@xxxx
> > 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
> comparison under 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 and if you prefer Stochastic oscillators, try
> > Stochastic CCI among the others. It is not popular but it is a
> bit smarter.
> > Dimitris Tsokakis
> >
> > Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
> > ADVERTISEMENT
> >
> >
> >
> > Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of
> Service.
>
>
>
>
>
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
>
>
|