|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3401" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>John:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I agree with your interpretation, however I believe that formula applies
only where all wins and losses are for the same amount and where the entire
capital is risked on each trade. Where less than the entire capital is
risked, the formula is, for what it's worth:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>R = ((1-A)/(1+A))^J</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Where J = Total Capital / Percent of Total Capital Risked on Each
Trade</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Peter Griffin (The Theory of Blackjack) has a more complicated formula for
situations where wins and losses are not equal. If you or the others are
interested, we can talk more about this; I find this stuff fascinating.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
John Sellers </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> August 25, 1999 10:47</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: Off-topic C++</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=890165016-25081999>I
submit my findings from a text book "The Commodity Futures Game" 1969 edition
by Richard J. Teweles, Charles V. Harlow and Herbert L. Stone. It discusses
the probability of ruin. Basically the mathematics of probability imply that
the probability of ruin decreases as the employment of percentage of your
capital decreases in trading and for the number of trades
increases the ruin probability decreases. These figures are given fin
each table for a particular probability advantages to win.
</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=890165016-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=890165016-25081999>For
instance: N=number of trades, P=number of trades versus an advantage of 65%
the following numbers are taken from a table 10-3 page 260 of their book.
These figures are from a table constructed for a 65% advantage win
number.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=890165016-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=890165016-25081999>N=
0
10 20
30
40
50 60
70
80 90
100</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=890165016-25081999>P= .9865 .9140 .7384
.4862 .2485 .0949 .0262
.0048 .0005 .0000
.0000</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=890165016-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=890165016-25081999>P is
stated to be: Probability of more than p percent unsuccessful trades with an
probability of .65 of winning ((30% advantage). The table confirms
the employment percentage of your total capital (in my opinion) should less
than 5% of ones capital. My interpolation is as you increase the parameters
for success using smaller percentage capital and increasing the number of
trades, you approach 100 % success but the probability of ruin always is
present to some extent thus the level of money management is determined by
each trader's to fit his own comfort range.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=890165016-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=890165016-25081999>The
formula used is: R= ((1-A)/(1+A)). R is probability of ruin and A is the
trading advantage.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=890165016-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=890165016-25081999>The
book has included a reference William F. Feller, An Introduction to
Probability Theory and its Applications, John Wiley & Sons, New York,
1957. A good source of probability theory is Samuel Goldberg, Probability: An
Introduction, Prentice-Hall, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1960.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=890165016-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=890165016-25081999>I am
not trading commodities so can not submit experience with this approach, have
only studied this subject. Obviously it should be a consideration in ones
trading or investing approach in general.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]<B>On
Behalf Of</B> Guy Tann<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, August 24, 1999 5:49
PM<BR><B>To:</B> metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<BR><B>Subject:</B> RE: Off-topic
C++<BR><BR></DIV></FONT>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=440451500-25081999>An
overly long reply to Dan and I would have sent it off the newsgroup but
didn't have his address...... so my apologizes to the
group.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999>Dan</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=440451500-25081999>I
started trading futures when I was in my teens. My dad has been a
trader for over 60 years now. My first job after graduating from
college was with IBM as a systems engineer, so I recognized the
applicability of computers to the kind of trading we did. I originally
programmed our systems in COBOL on a mainframe in 1963-4. Also used
time-sharing and Basic. Moved over to micros about 1973 I think
(before Apple and before IBM got into PCs).</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999>Have been running on microcomputers ever
since.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999>Our systems have constantly evolved over the
years. Years ago, before everybody had a computer, our stuff worked
for longer periods of time. We're just trading the S&P futures now
and are using a system that has worked for the last 15 years, so we feel
pretty confident with it. Unfortunately, we were late getting into
money management and were constantly going broke since we did a lot of
reinvesting profits (read that pyramiding). Even with a system that's
90% right, the way we traded we had a 100% certainty of going
broke.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999>Our system is strictly statistical
(mathematical). All home grown over the last 40 to 50 years.
Right now, we're trying to apply money management techniques to our trading
and being a lot more cautious in our approach. Better to be slow but
sure than to take a quick role of the dice and then have to start
over.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=440451500-25081999>We
have our own indicators that we use and since we don't really use any of the
indicators in MetaStock it's hard to relate what we do, other than to say
that we tie everything back to price action and don't use volumes or open
interest. That's just us, as I know there are a lot of good systems
out there that do use these other inputs.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999>With regard to the number of decimal places we
carry, the answer is 4 for the most part. In certain instances where
it doesn't make any sense to carry decimals, we don't. You recommended
copying a MS calculation result over to Excel. How would you do
this? Can I just highlight it in the data window, do a copy and then a
paste into an Excel spreadsheet? I'm going to have to try to figure
this out, but right now feel very uncomfortable being unable to duplicate my
results in 3 other languages. TAS, by the way, is not a Microsoft
language. It's a DOS based language available over the Internet.
Clipper is also DOS based (at least the version I use is) and is now owned
by Computer Associates. I don't know whether they've ever made the
transition over to a Windows environment or not. </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=440451500-25081999>As
to whether it makes money or not, I have to answer yes with a comment.
The system works great. It's the turkeys trading it that lose
money. Now we're doing fairly well, but that's just since we started
this money management stuff. We usually average about 20 to 30% return
per month and under our old trading methodology, in about the 6th to 8th
month give it all back and started over. <G> Now we start
with an opening position of just 25% of our capital and if the trade goes
against us, add to our position to average out our costs. This has
worked quite well lately and we have eliminated using stops.
Occasionally, we make a mistake, like my brother just made, where we have
too many contracts because we over bought on the way down and had to take a
loss on some of them (or make a margin call which we try never to do).
Since then, the market has corrected, so we have an even bigger profit
(than the aforementioned loss) on our existing positions. He just got
a little to ambitious.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999>Anyway, that's what we do. Our system is
quite good at picking market tops and bottoms (even though we don't know it
at the time) but lately we're experiencing large drawdowns due to market
volatility. In our last 3 series of trades, we had unusually large
drawdowns, but in all three cases the market turned around and came back to
make a profit. We're currently long, but our Intermediate Signal went
bearish several days ago while our short term signal stayed bullish.
We stayed with the long side and sat out the drop and now the climb.
When they both turn in the same direction, watch
out.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999>Regards</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999>Guy</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]<B>On
Behalf Of</B> Daniel Martinez<BR><B>Sent:</B> Tuesday, August 24, 1999 2:22
PM<BR><B>To:</B> metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx<BR><B>Subject:</B> Re: Off-topic
C++<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>Guy, <BR>not sure what you are referencing when you
mention +/- 10 or 8 indicator. Do you mean 10 or 8 digits of
accuracy? Looked in MicroSoft's BookShelf 99 for "TAS" and searched
the Net but couldn't find any reference.
<P>It sound like you have been programming stock database routines for some
time. If you don't mind my asking, have you made profits using this
type of programming? It seems like it would take a long time to set
up.
<P>Just for your info, that EBAY page you gave is also for the Academic
version. As for me, I'm not sure I want to go beyond the
MetaStock/Excel combo. Maybe later I'll get VC++ or Builder, after I
become an expert at TA. More likely I'll build a tradestation (no pun
intended) here with 4 monitors, perhaps L2, and trade short-term
moves. Have already decided on the hardware to use.
<P>Daniel. <BR> <BR>
<P>Guy Tann wrote:
<BLOCKQUOTE TYPE="CITE"><SPAN class=540412402-24081999><FONT
face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=-1>My problem is that MetaStock,
while now able to perform all of my calculations, does it with less
precision than other languages. For the most part, everything looks
fine until we get to a +/- 10 indicator in our original
calculations. MS only calculated a value of + or - 8 (two out of the
last three occurrences), which has a material impact on our system.
Because of some of MS' limited computational capabilities, some of us are
evaluating other programming languages.</FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN><SPAN
class=540412402-24081999></SPAN><SPAN class=540412402-24081999><FONT
face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=-1>I'm looking at buying Visual
Studio 6.0 Professional over eBay which will provide me with VB 6.0
Professional as well as Visual FoxPro as well as a bunch of other
languages (C++ being one of them) that I won't use. Since system
currently runs under TAS, MetaStock, Clipper, and Excel, I have to convert
it over to a Y2K compliant environment. I had hoped that MS for
Windows would have been able to handle my
requirements.</FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN><SPAN
class=540412402-24081999></SPAN><SPAN class=540412402-24081999><FONT
face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=-1>My old Clipper and TAS
programs are not Y2K compliant and MetaStock doesn't provide me with
accurate calculations. That leaves me with Excel and other
languages. I have everything currently programmed in Excel except
the MS File Library link. </FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN><SPAN
class=540412402-24081999></SPAN><SPAN class=540412402-24081999><FONT
face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=-1>With regards to Borland
Builder Pro v4, you need to make sure that you can use it with the MS
Library DLL that provides you access to Equis'
database. </FONT></FONT></FONT></SPAN><SPAN
class=540412402-24081999></SPAN><SPAN class=540412402-24081999><FONT
face=Arial><FONT color=#0000ff><FONT size=-1>Walter and I were discussing
VB and VBA which does support the MS DLL. Walter has done a lot of
work with Excel and VBA and has posted a ton of information here in that
regard. I, unfortunately, haven't had time to look at it, but will
as soon as the kid starts back to school. Right now, I've settled on
VB, Excel using VBA or Visual FoxPro(since our Clipper is a xBase
system). I'm trying to figure out how to use Excel with VBA because
that will minimize any coding I have to do. On the other hand, this
will limit systems testing as I won't have all of my intermediate
calculations readily available in the
database.</FONT></FONT></FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></SPAN></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Wed Aug 25 19:30:54 1999
Return-Path: <majordom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from listserv.equis.com (listserv.equis.com [204.246.137.2])
by purebytes.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id TAA08560
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 25 Aug 1999 19:15:43 -0700
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id JAA14935
for metastock-outgoing; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 09:42:50 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: listserv.equis.com: majordom set sender to owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx using -f
Received: from freeze.metastock.com (freeze.metastock.com [204.246.137.5])
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14931
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 09:42:45 -0600
Received: from mail.rdc1.bc.home.com (imail@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [24.2.10.66])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA04291
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 25 Aug 1999 19:33:15 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from cs819150a ([24.65.28.95]) by mail.rdc1.bc.home.com
(InterMail v4.01.01.07 201-229-111-110) with SMTP
id <19990826011955.FPNP9566.mail.rdc1.bc.home.com@xxxxxxxxx>
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 25 Aug 1999 18:19:55 -0700
Message-ID: <009901beef61$1049f0e0$5f1c4118@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
From: "Glen Wallace" <gcwallace@xxxxxxxx>
To: "MetaStock listserver" <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <002301beef2f$86262220$256d75ce@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Money management (was Re: Off-topic C++)
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 18:11:01 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
boundary="----=_NextPart_000_007D_01BEEF25.300C6660"
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2314.1300
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2314.1300
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Status:
<x-html><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" http-equiv=Content-Type>
<META content="MSHTML 5.00.2614.3401" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV>Guy:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>You are essentially combining an antimartingale system (risking a fixed
perecentage of your equity to open the trade) and a martingale system
(increasing the position if/as the trade turns against you). You probably
aren't noticing too much of the negative from the martingale because of your
high win ratio, but I believe your total profit over the long term could be
much greater and your risk of ruin the same or less with a pure antimartingale
money management system.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I guess it's kind of like the difference between earning 4% in a money
market account and 4.5% in T-bills. The money market account may be easier
and the difference may not seem like a lot in a month, but compound it over
20 years.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>I'm beginning to tread in the areas of personal preference and privacy now,
so I'll stop harping. You might want to investigate further, though.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Glen</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: black"><B>From:</B>
Guy Tann </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A
href="mailto:metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx";
title=metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> August 25, 1999 12:25</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> RE: Money management (was Re:
Off-topic C++)</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=790005618-25081999>Glen</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=790005618-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=790005618-25081999>I
probably wasn't too clear on our money management approach. Our futures
trading accounts represent about 10 to 15% of available capital. In the
futures account, for an initial trade, we never invest more than 25%
of the capital in that account (according to the charts and our profitability
ratio, this keeps our risk of going broke to under 1%). If the trade
goes against us, we will add to the position, usually at 20
points and then at 40 points. We never, ever, overinvest
anymore!</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=790005618-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=790005618-25081999>On
my brother's trade, the total value in the futures trading account
represents less than 10% of available capital. The margin call was
for only $4,600 and was caused by the rather dramatic drop in the S&P
(over 70 points against us, which is highly unusual with our system but the
market is acting squirrelly lately). In actual fact, he should have met
the margin call but was too lazy to go to the bank and wire the funds.
That bit of laziness cost him approximately $37,000 on this trade so far (as
of yesterday's close). Regardless of that opportunity loss, he's still
ahead on the trade, just would have been a lot more ahead. In the
account I trade, I decided not to overextend and buy more S&P contracts at
1300. That was just a financial decision on my part. My brother is
a little more aggressive (he's 6 years younger). Bottom line, we ended
making about the same amount of money on the trade so far and I didn't have
the stress. <G></SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=790005618-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=790005618-25081999>Each
one of our trades stands alone and has no relationship with the trade(s)
before it. Our probability of success on the current trade doesn't
change based on prior trades; and win or lose, we don't change our percentage
of initial investment.</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=790005618-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=790005618-25081999>What
we've discovered in the past year, is that our system is actually a lot better
than the approximately 75% profitable trades we've made in the past
15 years, if we do the averaging I mentioned above. We used to use
visual stops, basis close, and I can't tell you how many times we lost money
on a trade when, in fact, we were right. Now, we average down (or up as
the case may be) and have turned a lot of those losers into
winners. Our last 3 trades, for example, under our old money management
system (for what it was worth) would all have lost money. With
the new technique, they were (the last two) or are (the current one)
profitable. </SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=790005618-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN class=790005618-25081999>This
does require starting each trade with a smaller position, but it also means
that you always have to ability to stick out a severe drawdown (like the
current one). It gets a little hairy swinging without a net, but except
for one major loss in the past two years, it appears that this is the way to
trade our system. Even with that major loss, we still wouldn't have
wiped out the trading account necessitating a new beginning (like we've done
too many times in the past).</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=790005618-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=790005618-25081999>Regards</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=790005618-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=790005618-25081999>Guy</SPAN></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=790005618-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=790005618-25081999></SPAN></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV class=OutlookMessageHeader><FONT face="Times New Roman"
size=2>-----Original Message-----<BR><B>From:</B>
owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]<B>On
Behalf Of</B> Glen Wallace<BR><B>Sent:</B> Wednesday, August 25, 1999 9:54
AM<BR><B>To:</B> MetaStock listserver<BR><B>Subject:</B> Money management (was
Re: Off-topic C++)<BR><BR></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>Guy:</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Couldn't help but stick my nose into a semi-private discussion;
sorry. Your money management system is like the martingale
style systems often used in negative expectation games like
roulette. The general theory is, every time a person suffers a loss,
they double up (or some smaller ratio) on the next trade because eventually
there <EM>will </EM>be a win and they come out ahead.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>The problem with martingales is precisely what your brother
experienced. A loss or series of losses is a mathematical
certainty, and the amount risked will eventually reach the ceiling -- be
it the "house limit", the extent of the investor's capital, or the investor's
psychological threshold. As soon as the investor reaches this
ceiling, the system collapses and they suffer a catastrophic loss. With
a martingale, the investor will <EM>always </EM>eventually go bust
-- even with a positive mathematical expectation trading system.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>For a positive expectation system like your trading system (90%
expectancy of a win), a small antimartingale system might be more
appropriate. That is, risk more after a win and less after a
loss. As long as you risk less than 100% (with some trading systems,
much less) of your capital on each trade, you will recover from a large loss
or series of losses.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV>Regards.</DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; PADDING-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV><FONT color=#0000ff face=Arial size=2><SPAN
class=440451500-25081999>Now we start with an opening position of just 25%
of our capital and if the trade goes against us, add to our position to
average out our costs. This has worked quite well lately and we have
eliminated using stops. Occasionally, we make a mistake, like my
brother just made, where we have too many contracts because we over bought
on the way down and had to take a loss on some of them (or make a margin
call which we try never to
do</SPAN></FONT></DIV></BLOCKQUOTE></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Wed Aug 25 19:10:56 1999
Return-Path: <majordom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from listserv.equis.com (listserv.equis.com [204.246.137.2])
by purebytes.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id SAA08267
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 25 Aug 1999 18:54:35 -0700
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id JAA14925
for metastock-outgoing; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 09:42:29 -0600
X-Authentication-Warning: listserv.equis.com: majordom set sender to owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx using -f
Received: from freeze.metastock.com (freeze.metastock.com [204.246.137.5])
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) with ESMTP id JAA14922
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Thu, 26 Aug 1999 09:42:26 -0600
Received: from basecamp1.netquest.net (netquest.net [204.140.219.1])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA04283
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 25 Aug 1999 19:32:56 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from p400 (dsl0037.netquest.net [206.117.109.37]) by basecamp1.netquest.net (8.8.8/8.8.6) with SMTP id SAA05996 for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Wed, 25 Aug 1999 18:19:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Guy Tann" <grt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: Off-topic C++ and TAS
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 18:19:30 -0700
Message-ID: <000801beef61$0bff4ee0$256d75ce@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3 (Normal)
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 8.5, Build 4.71.2377.0
Importance: Normal
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
In-reply-to: <000601beef2e$bab96980$17f6490c@xxxxxx>
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Status:
Lionel
Even I could figure out TAS. It, at least, acted like a programming
language as opposed to the Polish Notation they were using in MetaStock (and
on my old TI Programmable Calculator). <G>
With the new MetaStock and the ability to reference the previous result, and
the change in nomenclature, I found it a lot easier to work with, albeit
still missing a few features, like giving us the ability to pick when to do
our own rounding, etc.
I'm sorry to hear that Martin and Equis had a falling out as this was, IMHO,
the only thing Equis had going for it without making the users do their own
programming. TAS still took me a while to understand, insofar as you really
didn't have control of the straight line logic you have in other languages.
Regards
Guy
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Lionel Issen
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 1999 12:18 PM
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: Off-topic C++ and TAS
Alain:
I have the same problem as you. The TFP formula language is difficult to
apply and to check. the TAS language is very easy, and Moore distributed
any new scripts (formulas) that were sent to him.
Apparently Moore and Equis had a falling out a few years ago and Equis will
not have anything to do with him. Its a pity bcause this kind of program,
TAS, would make Metastock a serious competitor for higher end (more
expensive) programs. The scans in Quotes Plus are not as easy to use or to
develop as the scripts in TAS. I have also found that many of the scans in
QP give poor results and lack adequate explanations.
Regards
Lionel
----- Original Message -----
From: Alain Jossart <Alain.Jossart@xxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Wednesday, August 25, 1999 5:22 AM
Subject: Re: Off-topic C++
>
> They can hardly compared today (TAS hasn't be updated for years and was
> never ported to Windows). At that time (years ago) I tested both and
> decided for TAS, both tools were available in Dos versions only.
>
> TAS is a real programming language offering a TA library. It's that and
> just that. Who cannot program cannot use TAS, so simple. Hence the
learning
> curve and... the outstanding power.
>
> TFP on the other hand offered more prebuilt functions. It was the
efficient
> scanner of my club's TA labs. The reason it never passed my own selection
> process is my brain showed a severe allergy to the formula language below
:
>
((V/VX19)*(((H+L+2*C)>=TY1)+((H+L+2*C)<TY1)/(.375*((H+L+2*C)+TY1)/((M2-LN2)
X
> 19))*((H+L+2*C)Y1-(H+L+2*C))/(H+L+2*C))U10))X19
>
> Therefore, I would argue that TFP wasn't and ins't a good alternative to
> TAS. The closest (offer) IMHO is a real programming language (like
VB/VBA)
> + a TA programming library.
>
> Alain
>
> At 12:06 25/08/99 +0007, bspark@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >I second Craigs suggestion Technifilter is an outstanding program
> >with much power in the system testing, and reporting facilities
> >
> >Regards
> >
> >Benzie
> >
> >> Tas was (is?) a dos-based program that would run rings around
MetaStock in
> >> System testing (it actually tested across multiple stocks) and
> >> explorations at the time. Martin Moore of Dublin, CA was the software
> >> writer and owner. Used to have a website www.flexsoft.com. Don't know
if
> >> it's still there. Warning - it did take some learning to get to know
to
> >> use the language. These days a better choice is likely TechniFilter
Plus.
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> From: Daniel Martinez
> >> To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >> Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 1999 4:22 PM
> >> Subject: Re: Off-topic C++
> >>
> >>
> >> Guy,
> >> not sure what you are referencing when you mention +/- 10 or 8
> >> indicator. Do you mean 10 or 8 digits of accuracy? Looked in
> >> MicroSoft's BookShelf 99 for "TAS" and searched the Net but couldn't
> >> find any reference. It sound like you have been programming stock
> >> database routines for some time. If you don't mind my asking, have
you
> >> made profits using this type of programming? It seems like it would
> >> take a long time to set up.
> >>
> >> Just for your info, that EBAY page you gave is also for the Academic
> >> version. As for me, I'm not sure I want to go beyond the
> >> MetaStock/Excel combo. Maybe later I'll get VC++ or Builder, after
I
> >> become an expert at TA. More likely I'll build a tradestation (no
pun
> >> intended) here with 4 monitors, perhaps L2, and trade short-term
moves.
> >> Have already decided on the hardware to use.
> >>
> >> Daniel.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Guy Tann wrote:
> >>
> >> My problem is that MetaStock, while now able to perform all of my
> >> calculations, does it with less precision than other languages.
For
> >> the most part, everything looks fine until we get to a +/- 10
> >> indicator in our original calculations. MS only calculated a
value of
> >> + or - 8 (two out of the last three occurrences), which has a
material
> >> impact on our system. Because of some of MS' limited
computational
> >> capabilities, some of us are evaluating other programming
> >> languages.I'm looking at buying Visual Studio 6.0 Professional
over
> >> eBay which will provide me with VB 6.0 Professional as well as
Visual
> >> FoxPro as well as a bunch of other languages (C++ being one of
them)
> >> that I won't use. Since system currently runs under TAS,
MetaStock,
> >> Clipper, and Excel, I have to convert it over to a Y2K compliant
> >> environment. I had hoped that MS for Windows would have been able
to
> >> handle my requirements.My old Clipper and TAS programs are not Y2K
> >> compliant and MetaStock doesn't provide me with accurate
calculations.
> >> That leaves me with Excel and other languages. I have everything
> >> currently programmed in Excel except the MS File Library link.
With
> >> regards to Borland Builder Pro v4, you need to make sure that you
can
> >> use it with the MS Library DLL that provides you access to Equis'
> >> database. Walter and I were discussing VB and VBA which does
support
> >> the MS DLL. Walter has done a lot of work with Excel and VBA and
has
> >> posted a ton of information here in that regard. I,
unfortunately,
> >> haven't had time to look at it, but will as soon as the kid starts
> >> back to school. Right now, I've settled on VB, Excel using VBA or
> >> Visual FoxPro(since our Clipper is a xBase system). I'm trying to
> >> figure out how to use Excel with VBA because that will minimize
any
> >> coding I have to do. On the other hand, this will limit systems
> >> testing as I won't have all of my intermediate calculations
readily
> >> available in the database.
> >>
> >
> >
> >************************
> >Brightspark
> >sales@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Voice: +61 9 375-1178
> >Fax: +61 9 375-1668
> >Unit 7, 11-13 Marchant Way
> >Morley WA 6062 Australia
> >Visit our WEB Page
> >http://www.bspark.com.au
> >************************
>
|