|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Hi ,
Just wonder if it works on MS 7.2 or MS
8.0
Please let me know.
<BLOCKQUOTE
>
----- Original Message -----
<DIV
>From:
<A title=no_reply@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="">manohohman
To: <A
title=equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
href="">equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2003 8:27
AM
Subject: [EquisMetaStock Group] New MS
Add-on Reviewed
I just got an early release copy of a new MS add-on called
ICE. Before reviewing the product, here's a disclaimer for all the
conspiracy theory compulsives out there. I have no involvement with
either Equis or Adaptick, the company who produces the program. I'm
not married to the sister of someone who works for either one of them,
and nobody there is my cousin. They don't send me birthday cards with
money inside, and so far neither of company has even bought me a hot
dog.The product's name is ICE, which tells you absolutely nothing
about the program. I will say this: I REALLY LIKE THIS ONE!I
haven't said that often about any add-on but this time, I really got my
money's worth out of it. ICE is a specialized system tester program
that takes 72 indicators and divides them into four relatively
uncorrelated categories. The indicators in each category can be tested on
and optimized for, any group of stocks in any time frame. What
this product does is save huge amounts of time and energy when building
and testing trading systems. All trading systems need some kind of
indicators. However, if you are going use two, three or four indicators,
each indicator should be measuring something different. For example, if
you like RSI and Stochastics, fine. Just don't put both of them in your
system because you are essentially measuring the same thing with both
indicators. Both are momentum indicators. RSI measures closing price
relative to the previous close, and Stoch measures closing price relative
to the range. This might sound different, but they're too closely
correlated to be very effective when used together. In the ICE
program both of these are considered velocity indicators. The point of
having different indicators is to increase the probability of a good trade
by increasing the amount of NEW information provided by each indicator. If
the indicators are too similar—measuring essentially the same thing—the
combination only marginally increases the probability of making a better
trade. If the indicators are sufficiently different, then the new
information makes a larger and more important contribution to the increase
in probability of a good entry or exit point.However, that's not
the end of the story. Even if you have indicators that have very little
colinearity (okay, take deep breathes—it means they're measuring the same
things—i.e. Points on a straight line.) there is still the issue of how
well any given indicator works on a group of stocks. In a good
trading system all the indicators give good signals on the stocks being
traded, and they are distinct enough to provide sound entries and exits
when used together.(I need to pause for a moment to make a small point
outside of ICE. With indicators, more is not merrier. The best trading
systems keep it simple. As you add more and more indicators to a system,
the law of diminishing returns sets in and JO's law of paralysis takes
over. If you use more then 3 or 4 indicators, it gets progressively harder
to make decisions based on what you're seeing. Half the time you won't
even know what you're seeing, much less what to do about it. So
basically---KEEP IT SIMPLE!!!!)After installation, ICE is fully
integrated with the systems tester. You pick a couple of indicators in a
category, test the indicators on your stocks to see which ones perform the
best, and then optimize them. The optimizations are also fully integrated,
so you don't have to do any programming at all.Once you have the
optimized indicators, you set them up on chart with a stock and play
around a bit with the settings. This how I like to customize. My eyeball
tells me things that a mechanical optimization program can't even deal
with. Once that's complete, you move to the next indicator in the next
category.After awhile you will have three or four indicators, one from
each category, that fit you, your stocks and your system. They will
have little colinearity, they will have excellent probability of
generating good entry and exit points and you will be well on your way
to having a really good trading system.No, the program doesn't test
chaos theory, Elliot cycles, fractals, or hypocycloids of four cusps. This
is a good thing because it has been proven over and over, the best systems
use the simple time tested indicators--and that's it. Two moving averages
and some common sense will out perform the stuff I just mentioned. Okay,
don't email me about how good Elliot cycles are and how much you love
them, etc, etc. Elliot was stranger than Elvis, and Elvis didn't know
anything about trading stocks. That's all I need to know about Elliot and
Gann. This program won't help you write rap music, or find exotic
patterns in the futures markets, but it will save you tons of time and
money trying to come with a system that works. Here's a real life
example—mine. I have written and developed two really, really good
systems. (No, I won't give them to you. No, I won't sell them to you.
Don't bother!) But like all Americans (and the Chinese too), I'm never
happy with what I have, so I wanted a third one that did something that my
first two didn't. My original systems gave very accurate entry and exits
signals but they didn't tell when I should be piling more money into what
looked like a good trend. While it's not possible to tell how long a trend
will last, it is definitely possible to tell when a particular trend is
stronger or weaker. In other words, when should I risk more or risk less.
I started working on the system a couple of weeks ago, and went about
solving the problem of when to increase my trade risk first. After
that was solved, the indicators that I added initially to the system
seemed to perform only so, so. After getting ICE, I read the manual
(which is still a work in progress, but since none of you seem to read
manuals anyway that shouldn't be a problem), sat down at the computer and
in less than two hours finished the system. I've set it up, traded with
it, and I'm pleased to say---I LOVE THIS SYSTEM, I REALLY LOVE THIS
SYSTEM. Next week I'm going to buy it a three stone diamond ring, I love
it so much. Now, if it could only tell me it loved me back!If I
had had this product a few years ago, it would have saved me hundreds of
hours in system development and testing time. That was such grinding work,
I had days when I thought I saw Elvis—sorry I mean Gann.You know
the only thing that could be better than this is if I could tell you it
was FREE, FREE, FREE! That is, after all, your favorite word. Alias, it's
not. BUT ALMOST.If you buy it before the official release date, it's
only $99 instead of $299. Well, hold my hand, I can't believe it. It's
true, and I will tell you I would have paid many times that amount for all
the time and energy it would have saved me when I first started
developing my own systems.You can read about it at
www.adpatick.com. I guess before I finish I need to confess. No I'm
not John Slauson, the guy who wrote ICE. Yeah, I know JO is really similar
to JS—at least to some of you Sherlock Holmes want-ta-be's. Given the
millions of possible name combinations JO and JS aren't even remotely
related. My confession is about cycles. I do rely on
some cycle information. You can find it at <A
href="">http://www.fourpillars.net/finance/predic.html.
This is the most accurate cycle information I've ever seen. If you
don't believe me, use it for awhile. You'll see. I've named my dog
Yang.JOPS Some of you know I recommend John Clayburg's
book Four Steps to Trading Success. John has developed a very
sophisticated, effective, yet easy to use set of indicators based on the
RSI, Stoch and %R. It would seem that these have too much colinearity to
be effective. Doc Clayburg has solved that problem through the use of time
frames. Time frame combinations can over come colinearity problems, but
it's too sophisticated for most system developers to deal with so I won't
go there, except to say Clayburg's system does not suffer from the
problems I have described above. To
unsubscribe from this group, send an email
to:equismetastock-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxYour
use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the <A
href="">Yahoo! Terms of Service.
Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
ADVERTISEMENT
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
equismetastock-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.
|