|
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 5.00.2722.2800" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#c0c0c0>
<DIV><FONT size=1><FONT face=Arial size=2>Ton,</FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=1><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'm working on putting something
together, but until I have something that I would consider trading, I don't feel
that the mob wants to be bothered. *IF* (right now it look like a BIG if)
I ever get to that point, yes, I'll gladly share it as many here have
provided support and ideas to help make it happen.</FONT></FONT><FONT face=Arial
size=2><FONT size=1><FONT face=Arial size=2> I'd bet many here have at one
time worked at "trying to find some rythum in the madness" but never got to the
point where they felt they could trade that mechanical system.
The thing is, if it were that easy, everyone would be doing
it.</FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Being an engineer by trade, it's tough to work on a
"system" that is somewhat driven by politics, psychology, and just plain
manipulation (fed and all). It seems that unless the market knows about those
factors and it is hidden in the chaos somewhere, then we are at the mercy of
elements that are out of our comprehension. One thing I do know, is that
one must rely on something other than their feeling, ( which are no more than
hope) to trade. Reading the charts is the only thing that I currently use
for trading decisions.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>But trying to put that *head knowledge*
into a mechanical system is quite a different thing.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>I'm rambling, so you can problably hear
my frustration leaking out.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><FONT size=1><FONT face=Arial size=2>I really,
really, appreaciate those that do share ideas and techniques, so don't think it
is for naught. </FONT></FONT></FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Hopefully it will all fall together
someday.</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Thanks,</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2> </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>James Wolf</FONT></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT size=1> </DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT face=Arial size=2>- Better, why isn't anyone else on the List
posting his/her's signals?</FONT></EM></DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT face=Arial size=2>Come forward with it, eg get cut, combed &
shaven (as this seems to be usual manner</FONT></EM></DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT face=Arial size=2>on a List, but then again "who cares") and let
the Risk of Welfare silent the stupid endless</FONT></EM></DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT face=Arial size=2>Risk of Ruin mails. TA is suppose to be, no is
able to protect welfare, thus start using the</FONT></EM></DIV>
<DIV><EM><FONT face=Arial size=2>better halve of the program, Chart(ing).
</FONT></EM></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2><EM>Ton Maas</EM></FONT></DIV>
<DIV>
<P> </P></FONT></DIV></BODY></HTML>
</x-html>From ???@??? Sat Jul 15 21:35:10 2000
Return-Path: <majordom@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Received: from listserv.equis.com (listserv.equis.com [204.246.137.2])
by purebytes.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id RAA32623
for <neal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 17:55:41 -0700
Received: (from majordom@xxxxxxxxx)
by listserv.equis.com (8.8.7/8.8.7) id SAA27912
for metastock-outgoing; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 18:15:14 -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 SAA27909
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 18:15:06 -0600
Received: from bazillion.com (mail1-sea.bazillion.com [206.129.83.102])
by freeze.metastock.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id SAA29343
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 18:37:35 -0600 (MDT)
Received: from mikelu1 (dyn-dial1-83-sea.bazillion.com [216.88.199.83])
by bazillion.com (8.10.0/8.10.0/1.2) with SMTP id e6G0JqW12914
for <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>; Sat, 15 Jul 2000 17:19:52 -0700 (PDT)
Message-ID: <000601bfeebb$4e0c7ec0$3264fea9@xxxxxxx>
From: "Mike Lucero" <mikelu@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
References: <NDBBJINBMLFPEGGKKJEKIEKMDCAA.OnWingsOfEagles@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: Re: Gap risk = critical?
Date: Sat, 15 Jul 2000 17:17:57 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4133.2400
Sender: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Status:
I'm not using really tight stops, which I think you're assuming. Initial
stops are under approximately 5-day lows, and trailing stops at 10-12 day
lows. So, I'm risking 15-25% on an individual stock, but using position
sizing to keep that risk to only 0.5% of my portfolio/trading account.
I use Schwab, so my commissions are relatively high, but still only 0.1-0.2%
of the trade for me. I ignore commissions when calculating the position
size.
I've been trading for only 3 years, the first two of which I lost money. I
attribute keeping some of my profits this last year to using position sizing
to normalize the risk on each trade and trailing hard sell stops.
Mike
----- Original Message -----
From: "Gitanshu Buch" <OnWingsOfEagles@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Saturday, July 15, 2000 5:51 AM
Subject: RE: Gap risk = critical?
>For myself, risking .5% on each lets me buy 25 stocks with total initial
>risk of around 12.5%, and lets me be between 100% and 200% "invested"/at
>risk. (I'm not sure how to say it in terms of margin, is that 0% to 50%
>margined?)
a/ 100% invested = 0% margin
b/ 200% invested = 100% margin + 100% invested
where "invested" refers to your own capital put to work.
Some people substitute "invested" with being 100% long or 200% long or 50%
long 25% short (etc) - the 200% is the max one can go in an equity account.
Risk = amount presumed lost if market moves against position, stopping you
out automatically or manually.
Thus capital put to work (invested + margin) = a multiple of risk amount.
Questions:
a/ With a half % stop on positions, how frequently does the strategy stop
you out?
b/ Are transaction costs part of the half % or extra?
Thanks
Gitanshu
|