|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Paul
Actually, the numbers are for a ten month period. We started trading this
revised rule set the end of June and the profit figures are through April,
2000. The only reason I remember the numbers is they came up at a family
dinner last night and the one example we had to give my middle son was that
we started a new account the end of June or the first of July, 1999 with
$50k. As of the end of April, 2000 it was worth $83k (before withdrawals).
These numbers also include every mistake we made (like getting nervous and
taking our profits too early and before the rule set revision). These are
the real numbers, now you have to remember that 2/3 of the money is always
invested in bonds and just sits there. Only 1/3 is invested in S&P futures.
That translates to an initial investment of $14,064 returning $33,000 in 10
months. The other $36,000 stayed in bonds. That's just our money
management technique to protect us from any bad trade.
Guy
Paranoia...you only have to be right once to make it all worthwhile!
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
Behalf Of Paul Louie
Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 2:20 PM
To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: RE: Bear Market
Guy,
Are the profit factors annualized?
pwl
--- Guy Tann <grt@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> The missing profit factor is 65% return on total
> capital or 200% return on
> margin, depending upon how you want to calculate it.
>
> Guy
>
> Paranoia...you only have to be right once to make it
> all worthwhile!
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> [mailto:owner-metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]On
> Behalf Of Macromnt@xxxxxxx
> Sent: Thursday, May 11, 2000 12:20 PM
> To: metastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Bear Market
>
> Hi to all:
>
> Sorry I don't have always time to read all very
> interesting posts. I just
> noticed that I was part of some of some the last
> ones.
>
> Furst I must apologize : maybe may English sometimes
> do not express well my
> thought. I guess that you understood that this is
> not my native language.
>
> Nevertheless I stick with the word BEAR to
> caraterize the stock market. I
> recognize that my definition of a bear market may be
> simplistic: it's a
> market that makes lower high and lower lows. The
> Euro is for instance in a
> strong bear market and you could safely sell the
> rebound this morning. The
> S&P and the Nasdaq are clearly in a bear market as
> well. I have no idea when
> it will end (even if I think that it will not be
> before the uncertainty
> about
> interest rates is over, but that is of no help) and
> I don't care very much.
> BEAR is not a four letters word to me and I don't
> see why it should be. The
> day the Euro will reverse course I will lose money
> but it's very likely that
> I will not give back the money that I have made
> since I started to short the
> Euro. The point that I wanted to make is that It's
> much more conformable to
> trade with the trend. I am in this business since
> 1972 and trading with the
> trend allows you some mistake while trading against
> the general trend does
> not leave any room for mistake.
>
> I guess that I also missed an another post because
> when I read about 70%
> successful trades I wander what's the profit factor.
> One number without the
> other is not a useful information.
>
> Good trading to all.
>
> Jean Jacques
>
>
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Send instant messages & get email alerts with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com/
|