|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Likewise I will mull over Expectancy/Loss
thanks
brian_z
--- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, ChrisB <kris45mar@xxx> wrote:
>
> Brian:
>
> Thanks for all the insight. The basic trade metrics can clearly
> expressed in different ways.
> Like most others I would struggle with Turtles like metrics and
prefer a
> lower Loss Ratio, hence I currently use Expectancy/Loss ratio as my
> preferred personal metric: minimise risk of ruin and keeps one in
the game.
> Looks like I need to look into adding or combining this with CAR
somehow.
>
> Thanks for the interesting point of view: I will chew on these
awhile.
>
> Regards
>
> ChrisB
>
> brian_z111 wrote:
> >
> > Chris,
> >
> > Re Profit Factor and Expectancy
> >
> > I thought you might be interested since you focus on Expectancy as
> > the driver, which is similar to my focus on PF (it's the first
place
> > I look).
> >
> > ProfitFactor and Expectancy are kissing cousins, mathematically
and
> > conceptually.
> >
> > > Profitunity = Expectancy per trade * number of trades per time
> > period.
> > >
> >
> > Yes, I believe VanTharp first used the term Expectancy, although I
> > haven't read his book. That is what I meant (I picked the term up
> > from others who must have read him).
> >
> > AB's version of PF is correct so that:
> >
> > gross profit - gross loss = net profit
> > net profit/number of trades = expectancy in $ (on a per trade
basis)
> >
> > Another way to define ProfitFactor is:
> >
> > Number Wins/Number Losses * average % Win/average % Loss
> >
> > To standardize the backtests over time I am only interested in
the %
> > win or loss so that is how I first started using that definition
of
> > PF. Then later on I started to see what a useful evaluation
metric it
> > was.
> >
> > Since I start by looking at the PF, and then look at Expectancy or
> > PA% later on, I thought I would share my observations with you.
> >
> > When doing design work PF has the advantage of giving us two
metrics
> > that tell us a lot about the trade e.g. if the expectancy is OK
but
> > the W/L ratio is < 50% I don't like it - I am not comfortable with
> > long losing sequences followed by one big win (not only
> > temperamentally but also based on my rules for design).
> >
> > When I look at the ave%W/ave%L it tells me how much of the
positive
> > PF is due to the W/L ratio and how much is due to my stops e.g.
you
> > can leave your stops the same and change the signal to benchmark
> > signals against each other.
> >
> > These kinds of things are vitally related to the design process.
> >
> > After I think I have an interesting trade I look at
expectancy/PA% to
> > see if I it is profitable cf to costs (commissions etc - I don't
> > include commissions in backtests - I add them mentally later).
> >
> > Since ave%W/ave%L is only a ratio it is possible to have good PF
but
> > not have a paying system e.g. if your ave win is 0.2% and your ave
> > loss is 0.1% you have a good ratio but you dont actually win much
> > i.e. the expectancy is low.
> >
> > It also brings risk into the equation since if you increase the
risk
> > (move your stops) for the same PF the Expectancy goes up.
> >
> > Eventually you have to look at the %PA since that pays the annual
> > grocery bill.
> >
> > Obviously high frequency * high expectancy is a very exciting year
> > e.g. I consider turn around time for my systems - it is great to
have
> > a high powered trade but if you are in for two days and then have
to
> > wait 6 days for another trade to come along your frequency/PA%
comes
> > right down.
> >
> > There is a lot in what I am saying - I have spent 100 of hours in
> > theroretical and practical consideration of evaluation - I have
only
> > put a cryptic explanation here.
> >
> > (In my first post I also meant to add that variance in the equity
> > curve is derived from binomial probability of the W/L and
variance in
> > the distribution of the trades, where the trades are measured in %
> > +_ )
> >
> > I understand that is probably a bit more info than you wanted but
I
> > have talked about it a little in the past here and there and I
> > promised a couple of guys I would explain some more one day -
today
> > was the day.
> >
> > brian_z
> >
> > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxx ps.com
> > <mailto:amibroker%40yahoogroups.com>, ChrisB <kris45mar@ ..>
wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Brian
> > >
> > > Thanks for this extra comment.
> > >
> > > Your immediate prior post had me confused because by PF I
assumed
> > you
> > > meant Profit Factor and
> > > the nearest I can understand this, is that
> > >
> > > Profit Factor = Gross Profit / Gross Loss
> > > or as in the AB reports:
> > > Profit Factor = Total Profit / Total Loss.
> > >
> > > I didn't understand how this related to a time series or per
annum
> > gain.
> > >
> > > However reading between the lines of this last post, I think you
> > may be
> > > referring to van Tharp's (was it he who coined this phrase? )
> > > Profitunity factor?
> > >
> > > Where ....
> > >
> > > Profitunity = Expectancy per trade * number of trades per time
> > period.
> > >
> > > In which case it makes a little more sense to me.
> > >
> > > If not, I am happy to stand corrected.
> > >
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > ChrisB
> > > brian_z111 wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > I like PF (a derivation of it) and expectancy is really PF
> > > > translated
> > > > > in return over time (PA%).
> > > >
> > > > FTR - to explain further what I meant about PF (my take on
it).
> > > >
> > > > PF is the trades profile (a kind of quality measure)
comprising
> > two
> > > > components (W/L ratio and ave%W/ave%L ratio).
> > > > The W/L ratio tells us something about the buy signal whereas
the
> > %
> > > > W/L ratio tells us something about the exits (profit and loss
> > stops)
> > > > although they are interdependent.
> > > >
> > > > The W/L ratio is binomial and indicates the tendency towards
runs
> > > > (losing/winning streaks) and the %W/%L quantifies that e.g.
as an
> > > > equity curve.
> > > >
> > > > PF is the theoretical edge (as ratio).
> > > >
> > > > Looking at the two components of PF can tell us more about the
> > trade
> > > > than looking at PF alone.
> > > >
> > > > Expectancy standardises the edge (PF) to a per trade basis and
> > > > quantifies it (as %).
> > > >
> > > > Expectancy * trade frequency (trades per periods e.g. year)
> > > > quantifies the edge as return per period e.g. year.
> > > >
> > > > brian_z
> > > >
> > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxx ps.com
> > > > <mailto:amibroker% 40yahoogroups. com>, "brian_z111"
> > <brian_z111@ ...>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > Chris,
> > > > >
> > > > > > This won't help you much but I thought I would chip in
here,
> > > > anyway.
> > > > >
> > > > > On the contrary - I think it is very apt and insightful.
> > > > >
> > > > > > I used to spend *hours* every week manually updating data
etc
> > > > > > . What an agonising waste of time!.
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree with you.
> > > > > Efficient use of time (a.k.a what works?) and leaving risk
> > behind
> > > > are
> > > > > two major drivers behind the development of my style e.g.
> > > > fundamental
> > > > > analysis requires a constant renewal of information whereas
with
> > > > > technical analysis the acquisition phase diminishes with
time.
> > > > >
> > > > > > Support and resistance are
> > > > > > still at the same level, and is never tick precise.
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree S&R is not tick precise.
> > > > > In fact I am inclined to the view that it is generally a
little
> > > > > imprecise.
> > > > >
> > > > > Take a classical (theortical) example of support - one buyer
> > with
> > > > > enough clout to make a difference is buying at a target -
say
> > it is
> > > > a
> > > > > whole number $20.00. In real life he or she is a person with
> > > > emotion
> > > > > so 20 becomes 19.95. Also in real life the order has to be
> > > > physically
> > > > > filled so spreads and market movement around 20.00
means 'buy at
> > > > 20'
> > > > > becomes +- 0.20.
> > > > >
> > > > > I am not a long term intraday trader but my observations so
far
> > at
> > > > > that S&R are easily identified on intraday charts than EOD
> > charts.
> > > > >
> > > > > > The issue is: is the expectancy positive and can I
continue to
> > > > > >trade
> > > > > > this. All three maintained a positive expectancy and when
this
> > > > fell
> > > > > >away
> > > > > > this was the "stop trading this system" signal.
> > > > >
> > > > > I agree that expectancy is a significant metric.
> > > > > I like PF (a derivation of it) and expectancy is really PF
> > > > translated
> > > > > in return over time (PA%).
> > > > >
> > > > > PF is like the HP of an engine.
> > > > > The more grunt you have the less you are affected by the
little
> > > > bumps
> > > > > (data errors, slippage, variance etc).
> > > > >
> > > > > Even a coin with a strong bias will produce its run of outs.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > Thanks for your post,
> > > > >
> > > > > Good stuff.
> > > > >
> > > > > brian_z
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxx ps.com
> > > > <mailto:amibroker% 40yahoogroups. com>, ChrisB <kris45mar@>
wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Brian
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This won't help you much but I thought I would chip in
here,
> > > > anyway.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I used to spend *hours* every week manually updating data,
> > > > checking
> > > > > > splits consolidations rights issues etc every week with
data
> > from
> > > > > > Justdata comparing with ASX published data in the back of
the
> > old
> > > > > Shares
> > > > > > magazine. What an agonising waste of time!.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Now I only look at Fx. With this being retail broker
based the
> > > > data
> > > > > is
> > > > > > never clean.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Toward the end of last year I ran a simple once a day
system
> > on
> > > > > three
> > > > > > different (demo: yes I know) platforms, entering Limit
entries
> > > > for
> > > > > the
> > > > > > day in the morning and off to work for the day, as a kind
of
> > real
> > > > > time
> > > > > > walk forward test. Surprising how much time this took to
do.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > In the evening most times all three platforms had either
> > filled
> > > > my
> > > > > > orders or not, but it was surprising to see how many times
> > > > > Platform1 and
> > > > > > Platform2 would have filled my limit entry, and one of
them
> > had
> > > > got
> > > > > > stopped out, whereas the other had got to the Take
Profit. On
> > > > other
> > > > > days
> > > > > > Platform1 and Platform2 would have filled my entry order
but
> > > > > Platform3
> > > > > > ran without me: a missed trading opportunity.
> > > > > > At the end of the month all three platforms were in
profit,
> > just
> > > > by
> > > > > > different amounts.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Because I get my Fx data through MT3 plugin these are not
> > exactly
> > > > > the
> > > > > > same prices as my live trading account.
> > > > > > To be honest I don't think this matters. Support and
> > resistance
> > > > are
> > > > > > still at the same level, and is never tick precise.
> > > > > > Others may choose to disagree.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Just following three Fx data providers will show you by
how
> > much
> > > > > each
> > > > > > can differ, notwithstanding the different time zones and
> > > > therefore
> > > > > > differing candles we get. And that is not even talking
about
> > > > > economic
> > > > > > news times!
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The lesson for me was clear : the individual trade result
is
> > > > > irrelevant.
> > > > > > The issue is: is the expectancy positive and can I
continue to
> > > > > trade
> > > > > > this. All three maintained a positive expectancy and when
this
> > > > fell
> > > > > >away
> > > > > > this was the "stop trading this system" signal.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > That to me is one of the advantages of Fx : no database
> > hassles.
> > > > No
> > > > > > company reports, no shareholder statements, no Chess
holder
> > > > > statements
> > > > > > and the inevitable shareholder bits of paper coming
through
> > the
> > > > > mail
> > > > > > after I have long closed the trades.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The other way to think about it would be: well if
Provider1
> > has
> > > > > > different Ticks to Provider2, just backtest and optimize
for
> > each
> > > > > > respectively over the same time frame and the same
tickers. If
> > > > your
> > > > > > parameters and results differ widely this may be a message
> > that
> > > > > your
> > > > > > system is marginal. On the other hand, if all is well and
the
> > > > > results
> > > > > > are very similar, you have just done your own "should I
care
> > how
> > > > > clean
> > > > > > my data is?" test.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > > ChrisB
> > > > > >
> > > > > > brian_z111 wrote:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Steve,
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I would like to know how I can decide if EOD data is
clean
> > or if
> > > > > > > intraday data is up to the demands.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > It is a subject that I don't see much quality
discussion on.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For EOD data my best ideas so far are:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 1) Data includes raw data - I can compare raw data to
other
> > > > > providers
> > > > > > > raw data - I can't compare it to an absolute benchmark
> > because
> > > > > there
> > > > > > > isn't one.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 2) Data inlcudes a record of all split events and the
> > > > > corresponding
> > > > > > > split factor I can check the event records
independently and
> > > > check
> > > > > > > the math.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 3) I can apply the split factor or see the results of
it's
> > > > > > > application so I can check the math.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 4) The event calendar should inlcude non-trading days
for
> > the
> > > > > market
> > > > > > > and stand down trading days for companies.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > 5) Data can be padded or unpadded (optional).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I can't think of any other way to measure data quality.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I don't think any data provider meets the criteria -
maybe a
> > > > few.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > For intraday:
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > What could I possibly do?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Buy raw tick data from several providers, compare them
for a
> > > > > > > consensus and filter it myself ?
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > I am at a loss on that one.
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > Of course another option is to trade in such a way that
bad
> > > > ticks
> > > > > and
> > > > > > > unclean EOD data don't affect the outcomes very much
(that
> > > > could
> > > > > be a
> > > > > > > lot easier than the above).
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > brian_z
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxx ps.com
> > > > > > > <mailto:amibroker% 40yahoogroups. com>, "scourt2000"
> > > > > <stevehite@ ..> wrote:
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > Mark,
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > No successful intraday real-time trader who does this
> > full-
> > > > time
> > > > > > > would
> > > > > > > > ever drop eSignal for Gary's new real-time service.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > It's a pennywise and pound-foolish decision.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > He's fine for clean end-of-day data. But he's way out
of
> > his
> > > > > > > league
> > > > > > > > for the demands of intraday real-time trading.
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxx ps.com
> > > > > > > <mailto:amibroker% 40yahoogroups. com>, "MarkK"
<MailYahoo@>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > Brian,
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > So far I am very happy with the QP RT beta testing
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I believe that when it goes live they will be
taking a
> > lot
> > > > of
> > > > > > > > customers away
> > > > > > > > > from the other services
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > It is a much better value than other things out
there,
> > and
> > > > so
> > > > > far
> > > > > > > > the data
> > > > > > > > > has been accurate
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > MarkK
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > _____
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > From: amibroker@xxxxxxxxx ps.com <mailto:amibroker%
> > > > > 40yahoogroups. com>
> > > > > > > [mailto:amibroker@ yahoogrou ps.com <mailto:amibroker%
> > > > > 40yahoogroups. com>]
> > > > > > > > On Behalf
> > > > > > > > > Of brian_z111
> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 7:47 AM
> > > > > > > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxx ps.com <mailto:amibroker%
> > > > > 40yahoogroups. com>
> > > > > > > > > Subject: [amibroker] Re: AP's RT data feed - for
MarkK
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I am looking for an RT data provider. I used
eSignal
> > for a
> > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > > >of years, then quit and am ready to resart, but
don't
> > likr
> > > > > their
> > > > > > > > > >fees.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > QuoteTracker and LiveCharts have the $60 and $20
> > version of
> > > > > > > eSignal
> > > > > > > > > if you don't mind less backfill and fewer symbols.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > I have read of a few issues with LiveCharts but
surely
> > we
> > > > can
> > > > > > > make
> > > > > > > > it
> > > > > > > > > work (a lot of the problems also came about because
> > people
> > > > > still
> > > > > > > > > wanted it free after it changed to pay for play a
year
> > ago -
> > > >
> > > > > of
> > > > > > > > > course it doesn't work if ou don't pay).
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > A couple of users said it was slow - I don't know -
I
> > > > haven't
> > > > > > > tried
> > > > > > > > > it yet but I will.
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > brian_z
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > --- In amibroker@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:amibroker%
> > > > 40yahoogroups.
> > > > > com>
> > > > > > > > ps.com, "Ara
> > > > > > > > > Kaloustian" <ara1@> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Mark,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I am looking for an RT data provider. I used
eSignal
> > for a
> > > > > > > couple
> > > > > > > > > of years, then quit and am ready to resart, but
don't
> > likr
> > > > > their
> > > > > > > > fees.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Would you elaborate a bit on AP. Never heard of
them
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Tx
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Ara
> > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > > > > > > > > From: MarkK
> > > > > > > > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:amibroker%
> > 40yahoogroups.
> > > > > com>
> > > > > > > > ps.com
> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, February 15, 2008 3:36 AM
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: RE: [amibroker] New EOD data feed other
than
> > > > Quotes
> > > > > > > Plus
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Dan,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I use QP for EOD data, and am happy with the
> > fundamental
> > > > > data
> > > > > > > > > that they provide. Not sure there is another service
> > that
> > > > > offers
> > > > > > > as
> > > > > > > > > much in that area
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I also use Fast Track for EOD data. Some market
> > internal
> > > > > data,
> > > > > > > > > no fundamental data to speak of, however the data
has
> > been
> > > > > > > cleaner
> > > > > > > > > than QP EOD day data. For Mutual fund data not sure
> > there
> > > > is a
> > > > > > > > > better service out there.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Have been an e-signal subscriber for RT data now
for 4
> > > > > years. I
> > > > > > > > > cancelled my subscription since they kept raising
their
> > > > > prices,
> > > > > > > and
> > > > > > > > > went to IQ feed. Used them for a month then they
raised
> > > > their
> > > > > > > > > prices. Luckily I was abe to beta test AP's RT data
> > feed.
> > > > So
> > > > > far
> > > > > > > > > they have been very responsive on the changed
needed to
> > > > make
> > > > > it
> > > > > > > an
> > > > > > > > > excellent RT service, and at a reasonable price.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I would suggest you get hold of Gary at QP and
let him
> > > > know
> > > > > > > about
> > > > > > > > > your issue. I would think you will become a
satisfied
> > > > customer
> > > > > > > once
> > > > > > > > > again
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > MarkK
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > ------------ --------- --------- --------- -------
-- -
> > ----
> > > > --
> > > > > -- -
> > > > > > > > > ----------
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > From: amibroker@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:amibroker%
> > > > 40yahoogroups.
> > > > > com>
> > > > > > > > ps.com
> > > > > > > > > [mailto:amibroker@ yahoogrou <mailto:amibroker%
> > > > > 40yahoogroups. com>
> > > > > > > > ps.com] On
> > > > > > > > > Behalf Of Dan Clark
> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, February 14, 2008 11:56 PM
> > > > > > > > > > To: amibroker@xxxxxxxxx <mailto:amibroker%
> > 40yahoogroups.
> > > > > com>
> > > > > > > > ps.com
> > > > > > > > > > Subject: [amibroker] New EOD data feed other than
> > Quotes
> > > > > Plus
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I've been using Quotes Plus data for the last 2-
1/2
> > years.
> > > > > > > > > Overall, I've been very happy with Quotes Plus data
and
> > Gary
> > > > > > > > Lyben's
> > > > > > > > > (owner/president) responsiveness. That said.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > In the last few days, I've swapped several e-mails
> > about a
> > > > > > > minor
> > > > > > > > > billing issue (credit card renewed with different
> > number)
> > > > > with a
> > > > > > > > > woman in his billing department. What should have
been a
> > > > very
> > > > > > > minor
> > > > > > > > > clerical issue left me feeling EXTREMELY angry and
> > offended.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I vowed to switch my data feed from Quotes Plus to
> > > > another
> > > > > data
> > > > > > > > > feed as soon as possible. This is a major issue for
me
> > > > > because of
> > > > > > > > > the amount of AFL recoding involved, but I can no
> > longer do
> > > > > > > > business
> > > > > > > > > with Quotes Plus.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > I need some options for other EOD data feeds.
What EOD
> > > > > service
> > > > > > > > > are you using? What has your experience been? What
are
> > the
> > > > > > > > > alternatives now?
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Thanks and regards,
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > > > Dan.
> > > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > > >
> > > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Regards
> > > > > >
> > > > > > ChrisB
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Regards
> > >
> > > ChrisB
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Regards
>
> ChrisB
>
Please note that this group is for discussion between users only.
To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to
SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com
For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG:
http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/
For other support material please check also:
http://www.amibroker.com/support.html
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/amibroker/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:amibroker-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:amibroker-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
amibroker-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|