|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Exactly. Since my fascination with pretty pictures of indicators is over,
I realized Metastock wouldn't cut it for serious MM system testing. Now I'm
looking at Excel and Ensign after returning several other software trials
(AIQ, TS2000i, Fibonacci Trader). Michael- if your writing code in Delhi
are you using Ensign as the graphic engine? I really don't like how limited
Ensign is for data suppliers amoung a few other things. If Mark Brown is
serious and gets some real software out we may have an open architecture
platform like AutoCAD in which case I'll begin to focus on VBA or C. Mark
also has the right ideas about data feed. I just hope he does it.
----- Original Message -----
From: TKruzel <TKruzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, April 23, 1999 7:42 AM
Subject: Re: Money management
> Unfortunately, the serious trader must "roll their own" in order to
> do the job correctly. I do not understand why Equis (or some other
> software company) has not focused on opening their architecture.
> That would allow the serious trader to construct "add on functions"
> using some standard language like VBA, C++ etc.
>
> I can only think that this would be a great advantage to the company
> that eventually does it. They would become the platform of choice and
> an industry standard (a model similar to AutoCAD).
>
> I also monitor the Omega discussion group. Many people are saying
> that they are very dissatisfied with the new release of TradeStation.
> Those folks are also talking about "rolling their own". It sounds
> like opportunity knocking...
>
> Regards,
> Tim
>
> "Samerski, Michael (Australia)" wrote:
> >
> > This is why I haven't used my Metastock (Upgrades paid for since 4.0
Ouch!)
> > for the last 4 months. I have decided to test MM strategies against a
random
> > entry indicator. The only way I can do this is to write my own software
from
> > scratch (in Delphi). This gives me "infinite" control over the next
trade
> > decision.
> >
> > Can Metastock scale -in/out. No it only trades the full whack!
> >
> > WBMOT (Without Blowing My Own Trumpet <g>) I CAN test:
> > legging in, legging out, moving stops, pyramiding, and betsize
> > relative to total equity.
> >
> > I can test things I haven't thought of yet like .... Oh yeah I haven't
> > thought of them yet.
> >
> > Anyway when I get the SW in a fit state, I intend to give it away. You
will
> > prob have to create DLLs for it to test.
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: TKruzel [mailto:TKruzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx]
> > Sent: 22 April 1999 12:09
> > To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> > Subject: Re: Money management
> >
> > In general I would recommend the book. How useful it is to any
> > given individual depends upon the mathematical background of that
> > person. I thought it was well written. IMHO would be traders spend
> > much too much time creating indicators. None of these indicators in
> > the long run will give you more than a 50:50 chance at making money.
> >
> > The real "holy grail" is managing money and risk. Those are the only
> > factors that you can control and the only way you can win in the long
> > run. It is unfortunate that the writers of trading software totally
> > ignore this aspect. Much more emphasis should be placed upon developing
> > a product that allows one to test more sophisticated money management
> > strategies (e.g. legging in, legging out, moving stops, pyramiding, and
> > betsize relative to total equity). But I suppose most people hate math
> > and like pretty pictures so that is the target market for so called
> > trading software.
> >
> > OK. Sorry for the rant. Yes I would recommend the book.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Tim
> >
> > Glen Wallace wrote:
> > >
> > > Has anyone read "The Mathematics of Money Management" by Ralph Vince?
It
> > > was recommended to me as an advanced, yet practical book on money
> > management
> > > and risk management.
> > >
> > > Any comments?
|