|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Cameron, this is not a "personal matter". Jose Silva is warning us about
the
hidden agenda of a member of this group. He is only trying to help us.
He isn't tarnishing his reputation by doing so, on the contrary ! He's been
very
clear and made sound arguments. I didn't see any name call.
John
On 3/4/07, Jose Silva <josesilva22@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Cameron, I appreciate your candor, but the issue here is not exactly a
> personal one for me.
>
> My general aim has been to make so-called "newies" aware of the underhand
> methods utilized by an anonymous poster with the gift of the gab, who
> constantly promotes goods and services with which he has an undisclosed
> financial connection with.
>
> Perhaps you may not be aware of the full circumstances, and perhaps I may
> not be able to divulge private details in an open forum, but not all is as
>
> it seems here - altruism is definitely not the driving force behind this
> anonymous poster's motives.
>
> So what if he sells his wares to the unaware? After all, there are plenty
> of sharks everywhere in this industry, right?
>
> Well, there is something much more precious than money, and that is time.
> A wasted life chasing rainbows is ultimately a regrettable one.
>
> We've all wasted our hard-earned money on questionable goods and services
> at one time or another, but that's just money - it comes and goes.
> However, when we are cajoled and steered into wasting precious years of
> our lives on useless dead-ends, then this ultimately has a lot more
> potential for pain.
>
> In the anonymous poster's case, he often rambles on about how poor
> indicators and addons perform in 'professional testing', and then attempts
>
> to cajole the inexperienced trader into believing that unproven and
> untestable methods (such as buying high, as in high-ranking stocks) are
> the way forward.
>
> Well, I guess that if I also boasted about being a big trader and being
> the repository of all trading wisdom (without an ounce of proof to
> substantiate these extravagant claims), and consistently and ignorantly
> put down Technical Analysis as a waste of time, and at the same time
> hypocritically promoted TA-based products and services in TA-based forums,
>
> and hid behind multiple nicks for cross-promotional purposes, then I would
>
> also expect some heavy flak to come my way.
>
> As for my reputation being tarnished, I guess that is the price I'm
> willing to pay for being the sole voice against a scammer. I sleep well
> at nights.
>
> Enough said about this matter from me. Buyer beware.
>
> jose '-)
> http://www.metastocktools.com
>
> --- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>,
> Cameron Reid <creid.mba2001@xxx>
>
> wrote:
> >
> > Jose,
> >
> > Obviously you and Jim have some regrettable personal history. This is
> unfortunate. But, I can see no advantage for you or any other member of
> this community in your admittedly personal attacks.
> >
> > I hope you can read my comments with a friendly perspective. I have
> purchased both your URSC Kit and the MACD Divergence Kit and I have not
> been disappointed with products themselves or the service that followed.
> I also see you as being very generous in your willingness to help others
> write MS code. As an aside, I want to suggest that the Filter DLL that is
> included in the URSC Kit is an exceptional value as it can be used to
> accomplish many other tasks outside of the original design. All in all,
> you are a credit to this community.
> >
> > Where we all lose is in the deterioration of the etiquette of this
> community. In my opinion, Jim's comments are far from insidious and
> vacuous. He has made very meaningful contributions to my education as a
> trader and an investor and I am very grateful for this. I believe that
> there are others who also appreciate Jim's comments. Because of your
> animosity towards Jim we are all missing a moderated, thoughtful
> discussion on the points of difference. Perhaps, the harsh tone of this
> discussion is also discouraging others making thoughtful posts.
> >
> > Jose, I also want to call you out for making a number of, what I see
> as, exaggerated claims. For example: Snake Oil Sales Man, Hidden Agenda,
> Shady Character. From what I have read, you have made no attempt to
> substantiate these claims. This makes it appear that you have fallen to
> the level of name calling and in doing so you have risked tarnishing your
> reputation for little or no apparent gain. It's a little silly, don't you
> think?
> >
> > Other than a few books, I have never seen Jim attempt to sell anything.
> In my opinion, Jim supports a select few of MetaStock add-on because he
> genuinely believes that they can add value and because he has demonstrable
>
> evidence to support these claims. Jim's support for the SpyGlass / Fire
> product was presented with a very meaningful amount of evidence and
> economically significant results over two issues of MSTT. Jim has also
> made comments in support of ICE, I can't see a problem with this. If I
> made a comment is support of John Slauson or ICE would you attack me?
> >
> > I'm getting to the point where I am beginning to ramble to I'll stop. I
> hope you can see the intent of my comments and I hope understand that my
> comments are not meant to be a person attack.
> >
> > Cheers,
> >
> > Cameron
> >
> >
> > To: equismetastock@xxx: josesilva22@xxx: Fri, 2 Mar 2007 18:42:38
> +0000Subject: [EquisMetaStock Group] Re: RSC isn't the issue
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > Rvalue, you are absolutely right - I am "thrashing" Super/Jim/ValLine,
> and I strongly believe that I have not only a good reason, but a duty to
> our usergroup to keep shady characters in check.I find it difficult to
> stay idle by the sidelines when someone with a gift of the gab and hidden
> agenda keeps pushing nothing more than snake-oil to "newies" (as he's fond
>
> of calling them). > Having multiple names is not a crime on the internet,
> particularly when> you aren't selling software..Well, Rv, you'd be
> surprised at finding out who is selling what. ;)Caveat emptor.jose
> '-)http://www.metastocktools.com--- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>,
>
> "rvalue1" <rvalue1@> wrote:>> I get the impression that Super is hardly
> trashing Jose; rather that > Jose is trashing Super. In any case Super has
>
> a right to his > opinions and if they don't track Jose's or heap
> superlatives on his > software - its not a valid reason to trash him. > I
> have used many add-ons; but do not own Jose's. I can say that I've >
> certainly bought some usless ones and Jose's would certainly be > much,
> much better, I am sure. But after buying MS10 and Ehler's add-> on, I am
> laying off buying more right now. I did pick up a very good > idea from
> the RMO - I have incorporated it into my own system. RMO > was of great
> value to me.> Also, I have learned a lot from Super's posts and
> suggestions - > probably the most - some were very basic concepts but for
> whatever > reasons, they had eluded me for a while. I don't thing Super >
> deserves trashing from Jose, so I hope Jose would get off it and > stick
> to Metastock posts and quality support he continues to provide > many.
> Providing positive opinions on add-ons that deserve it or > negative ones
> on those that don't is useful ... Having multiple > names is not a crime
> on the internet, particularly when you aren't > selling software..> As
> for strategies - I prefer hedged system trading, biased to long > or
> short
> side based on the trading systems I apply. On the day the > DJ dropped
> 416, my account went up - and its for reasons like that I > like to keep
> an open bias to up or down, based on stock behavior. > Last several months
>
> I have been working on an aggressive return > system using options and
> directional trading, tuning it and adding > position sizing methods to get
>
> much more from it. Manual walk > backtested results were unbelievable -
> which is why I am cautious > and don't fully believe it. But I am ready
> for real money testing - > and thats what I am doing - with my own money.
> Don't plan to toot my > horn or sell it. If it makes me a good money; I
> will be richer for > it.. and will keep it. > If you get me real upset, I
> might share a couple of well-known money > making services that totally
> bombed for me, not that anyone would > realize it from there constant ads
> and emails. But even that would > get them unnecessary attention I'd
> rather not give them.> >> --- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>,
> "Jose
> Silva" > <josesilva22@> wrote:> >> > > I think there's a miss
> understanding I need to correct. I'm not> > > trashing Jose. > > > > No
> problem - I care little about personal attacks anyway.> > What matters to
> me ultimately is truth, specially if it can help > those of > > us that
> are open to it, and those that don't have any hidden > agendas.> > > > >
> >
> > My point about testing indicators is really simple. In every > test run>
>
> > > by professional systems developers like Stridsman where I have > seen>
>
> > > the data, favorites like relative strength and stochastics have> > >
> produced erratic, inconsistent results. > > > > There is little point in
> harping about testing indicators to see > if they > > are profitable or
> not, because there are an infinite number of > variables/> > combinations/
> permutations involved in backtesting each one.> > > > For example, let's
> take the Simple Moving Average:> > > > > > 1) Should we test it on a
> simple price/crossover strategy?> > Cross(C,Mov(C,periods,S))> > > >
> Well, if one wants to be safe and part of the crowd, and watch > one's >
> > capital slowly bleed to nothing, the answer is YES.> > Changing
> periodicities, MA types, data arrays, will result in an > > impossibly-
> large combination of permutations. No one lives long > enough to > > be
> able to backtest all of them.> > > > > > 2) Should we use it in a
> contrarian way then?> > Cross(Mov(C,periods,S),C)> > > > Yes, provided
> the fundamental strength of the market is known, and > we are > > prepared
>
> for the inevitable drawdowns that betting against the > market > > brings.
>
> Again, the myriad of permutations is akin to looking for > a needle > > in
>
> a haystack.> > > > > > 3) And what about the other infinite number of
> strategies using > the SMA, > > other than crossovers?> > > > > > As one
> can see, "testing indicators for profitability" is a > totally > >
> meaningless concept - it couldn't be done objectively even if the > whole
> > > Human Genome Project team were assigned to it for the next 1000 >
> years.> > > > Throw in the fact that the markets are constantly evolving
> and > dynamic, > > and it soon becomes clear that making a career out of
> backtesting > > indicators is a path to a meaningless existence.> > > > >
> > > I didn't want to write my own DLLs.> > > > Shure - as if Mr
> superfragalist had the option.> > Playing around with some ancient
> mainframe back in college does > not offer > > one much in the way of
> programming skills. I'll bet my reputation > that Mr > > superfragalist
> couldn't put any meaningful MetaStock code together > if his > > life
> depended on it, much less put together a useful DLL.> > > > > > > If Jose
> had something that helped me, I would use it.> > > > Well, Jose did have
> something to help you, but not in the way you > intended,> > Mr
> superfragalist/valuelinetrader/Jim/Bob/John/Bill/William/Stan.> > > >
> Cutting deals with Equis behind my back to sell my valuable > software for
>
> > > 20% "royalties", and attempting to get a large kickback from Equis >
> as the > > middleman, is definitely not my idea of helping anyone.> > > >
> There are words that come to mind whenever I stumble on Mr >
> superfragalist's > > insidious and vacuous posts, but etiquette prevents
> me from > writing more.> > > > > > Caveat emptor.> > > > > > jose '-)> >
> http://www.metastocktools.com> > > > > > > > > > > > --- In
> equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>,
> superfragalist <no_reply@> > > wrote:> >
> >> > > I think there's a miss understanding I need to correct. I'm not> >
> > trashing Jose. > > > > > > I should have errased the heading RSC. > > >
> > > > The point I was making didn't involve the RSC. I was refering to >
> all> > > of the plug-ins and the lack of specific information that gives
> a> > > buyer any way to evaluate what they are getting. It's not just a>
> >
> > problem in MS. Every TA program has the same issues.> > > > > > The RMO
> is a good example. Right now there is only antidotal> > > information on
> it. It's practically impossible to test, but it's> > > touted as being a
> great performing system by Rahul Mohindar. > > > > > > There will be
> people who say it works great for them. And there > will> > > be others
> who say it doesn't. Both opinions are subjective. I > like> > > objective
> data. > > > > > > I've used parts of the RMO in a few systems I put
> together to > see if> > > any of it was useful. Mostly I used the Rainbow
> portion. I used > it as> > > an potential trade flag, and then used other
> criteria to > determine if> > > the signal was a good trade. In that form
> it work pretty good.> > > However, a lot of other things would have worked
>
> just as well. (I> > > substituted a few.)> > > > > > My point about
> testing indicators is really simple. In every > test run> > > by
> professional systems developers like Stridsman where I have > seen> > >
> the data, favorites like relative strength and stochastics have> > >
> produced erratic, inconsistent results. > > > > > > I mentioned I had
> tested all kinds of momentum formulas and the> > > results were marginal
> with the exception of a couple of things. I> > > mentioned the slope of
> the price curve and the external relative > > strength.> > > > > >
> Basically the reason I posted what I had seen in the tests was > to give>
> > > anyone interested in momentum indicators a direction they might >
> want> > > to look in to do their own tests. > > > > > > I really don't
> care what formulas someone uses to figure out the > slope> > > of the
> price curve or to calculate external relative strength. I > use> > >
> SpyGlass because it's the only method I've found for external > relative>
> > > strength that is easy, works consistently and is cheap. I didn't >
> want> > > to write my own DLLs.> > > > > > May be someone else can do a
> search and find another way to do > the> > > same thing in MS with another
>
> tool. If there is something else, I> > > would like to know. I will
> probably buy it and test it. (For > those who> > > care, I don't use
> Fire.) > > > > > > Using Relative Strength Comparatives has been around a
> long time.> > > There are many ways to get the RSC results. I've heard
> using RSC> > > works. It seems logical, but I haven't seen anything but >
> antidotal> > > evidence. > > > > > > In my own trading I used a variety of
>
> sources for the relative> > > strength calculations. I used my own
> formulas, and I subscribed > to> > > vendors who provided the rankings.
> It
> worked so, so for me. It > didn't> > > provide the consistency I was
> looking for. However, I certainly > didn't> > > try all of the ways to
> use RSC values. I'm sure there are 1000s > of> > > other trading methods
> that can be used with the RSC rankings. > > > > > > I'm always looking for
>
> ways to improve what I do. If Jose had> > > something that helped me, I
> would use it. No quesiton. I would > base> > > what I was willing to pay
> on how much it helped me. How would I > know> > > if it helped me. First
> I would test it, and if the test results > were> > > good according to my
> criteria, I would incorporate into my > trading and> > > then see what
> happened in real time. > > > > > > To me, it doesn't matter about the
> skills of the tool provider. > It> > > doesn't matter about the cost. It
> doesn't matter how much free > stuff I> > > get. It doesn't matter how
> much support the vendor provides. I > care> > > about the objective data
> on performance and how well it works in > live> > > trading.> > > > > >
> My
> point in the post was no one provides objective data. If they > did> > >
> it would either kill the sales of their product or give it a > real boost.
>
> > > > > > > Rahul Mohindar appears on the financial news occasionally in >
>
> India. If> > > someone runs across him, they should ask about the test
> results > from> > > the RMO, since it is his system.> > > > > > Back in
> the late 1990's a lot of traders were commenting on all > kinds> > > of
> things that were making them big money. Then in 2000, they > were> > >
> posting about how the tools had failed them and they lost most > of the> >
>
> > the money they made in the 1990's. > > > > > > Consistency is really
> hard to achieve. Finding something that > works> > > sometimes isn't. > >
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>,
>
> "Scott and Sarah Gorman"> > > <TradingFloor@> wrote:> > > >> > > > I
> agree! Although I'm in the background of the discussions, I > read> > >
> each one.> > > > It's getting to a point that a great number of postings
> are not> > > related to> > > > learning and applying Metastock formulae.
> Also, trashing Jose > is highly> > > > inappropriate. Afterall, he's
> giving his time and expertise > to the> > > group.> > > > We should all
> appreciate Jose's efforts and show him nothing > but> > > respect. > > >
> > > > > > Scott> > > > > > > > (On the Trading Floor) > > > > > > > >
> "Don't let the market make a monkey out of you" > > > > > > > > Dr. Scott
> Gorman> > > > 6340 NE 19th Avenue> > > > Fort Lauderdale, FL 33308> > > >
> Tel: (954) 202-3536> > > > Fax: (954) 337-0704> > > > Cell: (954) 288-
> 2020> > > > > > > > PLEASE NOTE: Any attachments to this message have been
>
> > scanned by> > > Norton> > > > AntiVirus and have been found to be free
> from infection. Virus> > > definitions> > > > are updated daily.> > > > >
> > > > IMPORTANT NOTE: This e-mail, including any attachments, is >
> intended> > > for the> > > > use of the person to whom it is addressed and
>
> may contain> > > information that> > > > is privileged and confidential.
> If the reader of this e-mail > is not the> > > > intended recipient, or
> the employee or agent responsible to > deliver> > > it to> > > > the
> intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any > dissemination,> > >
>
> > distribution or copying of this information is STRICTLY > PROHIBITED.> >
>
> > If you> > > > have received this e-mail message in error, please notify
> us> > > immediately and> > > > delete the related e-mail and any
> attachments.> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >
> ________________________________> > > > > > > > From:
> equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>> > >
> [mailto:equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>]>
> > > > On Behalf Of Lionel Issen>
> > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 8:38 AM> > > > To:
> equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>> > > >
> Subject: RE: [EquisMetaStock Group]
> Re: RSC-Price?> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > This thread is getting too
> personal.> > > > > > > > Perhaps the participants could continue this via
> private > emails.> > > > > > > > Lionel> > > > > > > > From:
> equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>> > > >
> <mailto:equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>> > > >
> [mailto:equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>>
> > > >
> <mailto:equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com> ]> > > > On Behalf Of Eduardo
> Gontan Pulgarin> > > > Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 4:25 AM> > > >
> To: equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx <equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>> > >
>
> <mailto:equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re:
> [EquisMetaStock Group] Re: RSC-Price?> > > > > > > > No, I cannot tell in
> % or otherwise; I have also got TradeSim: > I sent > > an> > > > e-mail
> about a problem, and never received an answer; luckily > I was> > > able
> to> > > > sort the matter out myself. They do offer a forum like this >
> one, > > though,> > > > where you can get feedback from other users.> > >
> > I have got AlphOmega; don't use it anymore, though, as I lost > faith
> in> > > > Elliott Wave, but I keep it as sometimes studying the code >
> helps me> > > getting> > > > answers to my questions.> > > > I still think
>
> that "Get lost" is the answer you deserve; there > is a> > > price> > > >
> for a good/product, take it or leave it. I can live with that, > why > >
> can't> > > > you?> > > > As for seeing the goods on display, how do you
> know you are > going to> > > like> > > > the taste of it? Not all beef
> taste the same, you see; some > contains> > > more> > > > water due to
> type of the feed, or has been frozen; so to sell > it, it> > > must,> > >
> > per force, be cheaper! Not all cows are fed on grassland!> > > > There
> is a lot going on about add-ons, and there is a lot of > > information> >
> > > about them, too, as much by satisfied as by unsatisfied users -> just>
>
> > > search> > > > for the posts, for Goodness sake, or ask about it, and
> people > will> > > reply.> > > > So far I haven't seen a complain about
> Jose's products, while > there is> > > > plenty about others.> > > > What
> incenses me is, who do you think you are to tell others > how to> > >
> price> > > > their goods? Have you got any idea of the work involved? My
> >
> (now> > > retired)> > > > father-in-law, along with my brother-in-law,
> own a sewing > machine > > shop,> > > > selling sewing machines and, when
> possible, repairing them, to > keep> > > their> > > > custom satisfied;
> occasionally they may make deals, but if > somebody > > came> > > > into
> the shop telling them what you have posted earlier, the > answer> > >
> would be> > > > a clear "get lost" - and so it should! Perhaps you might
> want > to try> > > all the> > > > sewing machines on display, too? To
> make sure that they do some> > > sewing, who> > > > knows...> > > > Speak
> your mind by all means, but then, don't get too upset by > the> > >
> answers> > > > you'll receive when others do the same!> > > > Eduardo.> >
> > > > > > > a a <swptec@ <mailto:swptec% <swptec%25>40yahoo.com>> > > >
> <mailto:swptec% <swptec%25>40yahoo.com> > wrote:> > > > Hi Eduardo,> > > >
> > > > > I
> was merely voicing my opinion, I don't think it merits a > comment> > >
> such as> > > > "Get Lost".> > > > > > > > Your analogy of a butcher and
> supermarket is not correct. > There you> > > can see> > > > beforehand the
>
> stuff you are buying. In any case the cost is > low and> > > you can> > >
> > try both before settling down into a preference.> > > > > > > > With so
> many add ons available claiming to achieve all sorts of> > > wonderful> >
> > > things, one has to shoot "blind" i.e buy something first for $ >
> 1000> > > and then> > > > try it and maybe lose some money trying it. So
> the the awards > and the> > > > relative cost become important.> > > > > >
>
> > > Maybe you could tell me what kind of money (in percentage > terms per>
>
> > > annum> > > > and over how many years) you manage to make from URSC to
> help > me> > > make up my> > > > mind. Also how many other add ons you
> have tried (and perhaps)> > > abandoned and> > > > how much money you lost
>
> trying them.> > > > > > > > You have the benefit of experience, I don't.>
> > > > > > > > Thanks.> > > > > > > > Eduardo Gontan Pulgarin
> <con051204@> > > > <mailto:con051204% <con051204%25>40yahoo.co.uk> > > > >
>
> <mailto:con051204% <con051204%25>40yahoo.co.uk> > wrote:> > > > What a
> strange post; so,
> if I went, say, to my butcher, and > told him> > > to set> > > > his
> prices to what the supermarket charges, on the ground that > his> > > beef
>
> is> > > > not an award winner, and that increase in sales will make up >
> for the> > > > diffference in price, what answer should I expect?> > > >
> You have got a funny way of looking at life, mate; if you can't> > >
> afford it,> > > > then do as I have done for a long time - don't buy
> it!> > > > When I bought Jose's URSC kit, I couldn't care less about how >
>
> much > > other> > > > add-ons cost, or if it was an award winning one; I
> cannot > speak for> > > other> > > > users, of course, but I would be
> surprised if they didn't feel > like> > > I do!> > > > The kit does what
> it says it does; Jose's support is terrific -> > > sometimes I> > > > get
> an answer to my e-mail within minutes, I live in UK and > Jose in> > > >
> Thailand; that's the other side of the world, for you! Any > coding> > >
> query is> > > > dealt with swiftly, at no charge; and I have seen some
> silly > ones! No> > > > matter, they are answered, and promptly!> > > >
> Do you find this is the case with other add-ons suppliers?> > > > People
> find Jose a dependable developper, and his products > work; as a> > > >
> result, I think that Jose is well entitled to charge what he > sees> > >
> fit, don't> > > > you think?> > > > I am not Jose, but quite frankly, if
> I was, I would tell you > to get> > > lost!> > > > > > > > Eduardo.> > >
> > > > > > a a <swptec@ <mailto:swptec% <swptec%25>40yahoo.com>> > > >
> <mailto:swptec% <swptec%25>40yahoo.com> > wrote:> > > > Hi Jose,> > > > >
> > > > URSC
> kit + MACDH kit will set a person back US $ 1040, more > than the> > >
> cost of> > > > Metastock 10 EOD. A lot of people, myself included, simply
> > cannot> > > even think> > > > of such an expensive add on. Kindly re-
> look your prices and > bring> > > them at> > > > par with other add-ons.
> Increased sales will offset reduction > in> > > price. Let> > > > us not
> forget that your stuff is not even a nominee in TASC > awards, let> > > >
> alone being an award winner.> > > > > > > > Thanks.> > > > > > > > Jose
> Silva <josesilva22@ <mailto:josesilva22%40yahoo.com>> > > >
> <mailto:josesilva22%40yahoo.com> > wrote:> > > > Eric, price for the URSC
> tool-kit is Eur 395.> > > > See here for price in other currencies:> > > >
>
> http://www.metastocktools.com/URSC/URSC.htm> > > > <http://
> www.metastocktools.com/URSC/URSC.htm> > > > > > > > > The URSC kit has
> many useful tools, but does not come with the> > > Long/Short > > > >
> SmartStop Initial/Trailing stop found in the Divergence kit:> > > >
> http://
> www.metastocktools.com/MACDH/MACDHdiverg.htm> > > > <http://
> www.metastocktools.com/MACDH/MACDHdiverg.htm> > > > > > > > > For risk-
> normalized backtesting tools found with the URSC kit, > see > > this > > >
>
> > article on Trading System Evaluation/Development Tools:> > > > > > > >
> http://www.metastocktools.com/URSC/sysdev.htm> > > > <http://
> www.metastocktools.com/URSC/sysdev.htm> > > > > http://
> www.metastocktools.com/URSC/sysdev2.htm> > > > <http://
> www.metastocktools.com/URSC/sysdev2.htm> > > > > > > > > jose '-)> > > >
> http://www.metastocktools.com <http://www.metastocktools.com> > > > > > >
> > > --- In equismetastock@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx<equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com>>
> > > >
> <mailto:equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com> > > > >
> <mailto:equismetastock%40yahoogroups.com> , "erc90" <erc90@> > wrote:> >
> > > >> > > > > Jose, > > > > > > > > > > What is the price? Are we able
> to set stop loss orders using > the > > URSC > > > > > DDLs? I wish to
> back test using the explorer or the system > tester.> > > > > > > > > >
> Eric
>
>
>
[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Transfer from your equities account.
Receive up to $1,000 from GFT. Click here to learn more.
http://us.click.yahoo.com/aZttyC/X_xQAA/cosFAA/BefplB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/equismetastock/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/equismetastock/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:equismetastock-digest@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
mailto:equismetastock-fullfeatured@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
equismetastock-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
|