|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Jim
Oops! I screwed up here. Wish I could blame my brother, but I did it.
When I switched our system over to take advantage of the exceptional bull
move last year, everything worked fine. I even set up an Excel spreadsheet
to monitor the profitability of our original system versus the 'bull'
system. That worked great as well. Through 3/4/99, it showed that the
'bull' system was almost twice as profitable as our original.
A few months ago, when the market started fluctuating again, I moved us back
to our original system (the one we've traded for many years). Now here's
where I screwed up. When I switched back to the original trading system, I
still kept Bonds decoupled. The annualized totals reflected the numbers I
mentioned above. What I didn't do, was to keep track of what was happening
on a more recent basis. When I added another two controls (1/1/99 to date
and the last 30 days), it became very obvious that when I returned to our
original system, I should have coupled bonds back into our system.
The short should be either Sunday night or Monday at the Open.
Oh well! Maybe one of these days, we'll get it all together. I know this
tarnishes my 'walks on water' image, but got to be honest with these posts.
We will continue to monitor all three approaches to make sure we trade the
most appropriate one. The only differences between our systems are 1)
decoupling Bonds from the decision process and 2)slightly tailoring our
'contrary' to a bias for either a bull or bear move. We have only decoupled
the Bonds once in the last 16 years, and unfortunately I didn't get shifted
back to the original as soon as I should have.
Regards
Guy
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Jim Greening
Sent: Saturday, March 06, 1999 1:25 PM
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Short? Gag, gag
Guy,
Thanks for the explanation. Best of luck.
JimG
-----Original Message-----
From: Guy Tann <grt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Friday, March 05, 1999 4:02 PM
Subject: RE: Short? Gag, gag
>Jim
>
>Actually with the huge gap opening, the S&P is only down about 8.50 points
>for the day, as calculated by our system. Still a ways to go to our stop.
>Unfortunately we traded late last night and didn't get off to a good start
>(should have waited, I guess). Our stop position is basis the open, so
>we're still well below our stop. It's near 1284 basis the March S&P (the
>number that everybody seems to be watching).
>
>We've done a lot of research on trading at night or waiting for the
opening.
>With our system, we come out substantially further ahead trading at night
as
>opposed to on the Open. That's the approach we've used for years and just
>recently (last few years) have started trading at night.
>
>Guy
>
>
>
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>[mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On Behalf Of Jim Greening
>Sent: Friday, March 05, 1999 4:12 PM
>To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
>Subject: Re: Short? Gag, gag
>
>
>Guy,
> Hope you had a close stop <G>.
>
>JimG
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Guy Tann <grt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
>To: Metastock <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>Date: Friday, March 05, 1999 7:21 AM
>Subject: Short? Gag, gag
>
>
>>Well it's one of those days again. Out Intermediate term signal is still
>>bullish, but our short term signal went short.
>>
>>FWIW, into the jaws of death, short the S&P this morning. Probably a
>loser,
>>but we'll see.
>>
>>Guy
>>
>
>
>
>
|