[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Dynamic Money Management



PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links

If you use position sizing, generally you are risking a % of your 
EQUITY$, in your case 1%, then the $ amount of R changes often. As 
far as I know currently AB does NOT offer the EQUITY $ amount to be 
used in this kind of calculation.

Thomas


--- In amibroker@xxxx, "Avcinci" <avcinci@xxxx> wrote:
> Not any more Rick. When I took Tharp's Advanced Stock Market course 
last year, he made a point that the way he suggested calculating 
expectancy in his book is indeed very cumbersome. However, he said 
there is a much easier way. You simply calculate everything in terms 
of R-multiples (multiples of risk). For example, suppose you risk 1% 
of equity on each trade, and your initial equity is $100,000. So, the 
value of 1R is $1000. If your first trade makes $3000, you have made 
a 3R profit. If you lose $1500, you lose 1.5R, if you make $10,000, 
you make 10R, etc. The easiest way to calculate expectancy is simply 
to add up all your R-multiples, net them out by subtracting the 
negative R-multiples from the positive ones, then divide by the no. 
of trades. This gives you your expectancy per trade. Should be very 
simple to do in AB. 
> 
> Al V.
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: Rick Parsons 
> To: amibroker@xxxx 
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 7:43 PM
> Subject: RE: [amibroker] Re: Dynamic Money Management
> 
> 
> >>long enough to earn your EXPECTANCY returns<<
> 
> I am in the middle of Tharp's book, Trade Your Way to Financial 
Freedom, and just finished the chapter 6 on Expectancy. The idea of 
expectancy is an excellent way to pick the "best" system.
> 
> However if one wants to calculate Expectancy the way Tharp does, 
it appears to be VERY cumbersome when one has to group trades into 
profit ranges then calculate each group separately to get the overall 
expectancy number. (See pages 149 - 158)
> 
> So I would imagine if one wants all the MM and Dynamic Portfolio 
features, Amibroker should first calculate expectancy on each system 
to make sure we have a positive expectancy system.
> 
> Comments?
> 
> Rick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tchan95014 [mailto:tchan95014@x...]
> Sent: Wednesday, October 30, 2002 5:02 PM
> To: amibroker@xxxx
> Subject: [amibroker] Re: Dynamic Money Management
> 
> 
> I completely agree with the quoted message. 
> 
> TR is flexible enough to allow for almost any (risk) ideas you 
can 
> think of to do the position sizing: newrisk, volatility, 
margin, 
> market activities, group risk, group heat, portfolio risk / 
heat... 
> and yes, the portfolio level position sizing is the best 
feature. You 
> can even combine different systems each with different 
portfolio. It 
> is a DOS software but it is powerful.
> 
> Money management (or rather more accurately, position sizing or 
bet 
> sizing) is an area not very often discussed and not often 
appreciated.
> 
> I have posted some time ago, you can get some very detailed 
info from 
> TradingRecipes.com as well as traderclub.com by searching 
on "Mark 
> Johnson"
> 
> This gentleman was kind enough to post many of the ACTUAL works 
he 
> put in using TR.
> 1) He offered right there a very simple long term trend 
following 
> system that works for FREE.
> 2) He tested it using 1-contract with the worst possible 
fills you 
> can get
> 3) He test it using regular 1-contract test
> 4) He then tested it using TR with position sizing with a 
> portfolio of more than 10 or 15 futures contracts (You even get 
the 
> TR code for FREE too, it is so easy you can learn by reading it 
and 
> understand the logic behind it.)
> 5) He tested them over 10 or 20 years of history data.
> 
> It is an eye opening experience you do not want to miss.
> 
> He also listed his own trading results from actually following 
a 
> vendor system for 3 or 4 years, most people would agree it was 
> excellent results.
> 
> Go to both sites mentioned above and read as much as you can. 
If you 
> are interested in this subject, I have not found a better place 
for 
> education. All others only talk (including Tharp, although I 
have to 
> admit his book is OK), but you see hard numbers here.
> 
> While we are searching for a Holy grail system spending endless 
time 
> there, position sizing might offer a much easier path because 
it 
> optimizes the profit while controls the risk of your choice, 
you know 
> you can live long enough to earn your EXPECTANCY returns.
> 
> Wealth Lab is another software that claimed to have this 
capability 
> but again is never actually verified to be correct. (There was 
a long 
> debate, discussion and even tests on the trader club board 
about this 
> but was never actually confirmed whether it is working 
correctly.)
> 
> TR will cost you > $2000 while Athena, last heard, will cost 
you > 
> $40000 (that is right!) They were originated from the same idea 
and 
> might even be from the same group of persons (NOT Tharp though)
> 
> I think, AB even with its current capability is very close to 
be able 
> to do the portfolio level position sizing already. (with this 
> AddToComposit() for now. Do not quote me, it just came out of 
my 
> head.) I think Tomasz can do it in a very short time, the only 
issue 
> is to test it. It takes time to provide all the flexibility and 
iron 
> out all the bugs, it is a big challenge.
> 
> With current AB structure,I think it has paved ways for much 
more 
> flexibility than TR can ever provide. Monte Carlo, 2/3D surface 
chart 
> built in, any taker? ;-)
> 
> Bob from TR has promised a window version for years, but 
nothing has 
> come out yet.
> 
> 
> Thomas
> 
> 
> 
> --- In amibroker@xxxx, "Al Venosa" <avcinci@xxxx> wrote:
> > Tomasz:
> > 
> > Yesterday, I posted a message on Van Tharp's forum about your 
plans 
> > to incorporate innovative money management and pyramiding 
> techniques 
> > in a future version of AB. Below is a response from a user of 
> Trading 
> > Recipes, who claims that TR is the only software that handles 
MM 
> > corrrectly. Here is what he said:
> > 
> > "It DOES position sizing. the RIGHT way. I own the program 
and it 
> is 
> > GREAT. It took me about 5 minutes to get over the fact that 
it is 
> > still a DOS based app. But it's really the ONLY tool that 
does it 
> the 
> > correct way.
> > 
> > I talked to AmiBroker about 6 months ago, and they told me 
the same 
> > thing. Plus once they do release the program with position 
sizing, 
> it 
> > still has to be proven that they have done it right. 
> > 
> > There are three other companies that I know have that have 
tried to 
> > do position sizing. Two of them got it wrong. 
www.rinasystems.com 
> and 
> > www.bhld.com
> > 
> > The third is the athena program that is mentioned in Van's 
book. I 
> > haven't ever had the privilege of playing with that program, 
but I 
> > believe I read somewhere that it used output files from trade 
> > station. So, it would also fall into the category of a 
program that 
> > isn't truely implementing position sizing at the portfolio 
level 
> like 
> > Trading Recipes does."
> > 
> > To explain what he meant by doing it 'the right way', here is 
what 
> he 
> > said: 
> > 
> > "TRADING RECIPES' approach lets you combine trading signals 
and 
> trade 
> > sizing strategies into simulations which exactly mimic the 
way you 
> > would trade in real time. A core feature, which sets it apart 
from 
> > all other "money management" (or backtesting) software, is 
its 
> > ability to perform dynamic money management (DMM) and risk 
control 
> at 
> > the portfolio level. With DMM, position sizes are determined 
with 
> > full knowledge of what's going on at the portfolio level at 
the 
> > moment the sizing decision is made. Just like you do in 
reality. 
> > Other software packages simply sum individual pre-calculated 
equity 
> > curves. This way, position sizes are calculated with no 
knowledge 
> of 
> > what the current portfolio conditions are at the crucial 
moment 
> when 
> > a position sizing decision is to be made. This is not how you 
would 
> > make decisions in reality and therefore such simulations 
offer no 
> > useful information to the trader. DMM avoids this pitfall."
> > 
> > TJ, will your approach be able to do DMM as described above? 
> > Personally, I have no desire to use any program based on DOS. 
I 
> think 
> > the position sizing algorithm now included in AB does almost 
what 
> > this guy describes except for scaling in and out of trades 
and 
> basing 
> > one's decisions on the value of the entire portfolio of 
multiple 
> > stocks rather than a portfolio of one stock. 
> > 
> > Al V.
> 
> 
> 
> Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: amiquote@xxxx 
> (Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
> 
> Check group FAQ at: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of 
Service. 
> 
> 
> Yahoo! Groups Sponsor 
> ADVERTISEMENT
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Post AmiQuote-related messages ONLY to: amiquote@xxxx 
> (Web page: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amiquote/messages/)
> 
> Check group FAQ at: 
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/files/groupfaq.html 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of 
Service.