|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Or maybe it is that it is designed to catch longer term moves, where
fundamental economics are driving the move, (like for example, the Yen
slide of a few years ago) as opposed to the short term thimble-rigging
of
speculators.
According to Aberration's website, it is long since November 24 with
about
$31,000 open profit, long the NYSE since March 16, 1999 with about
$8,000
open profit and long the Nikkei since March 11 with $4,225 open profit.
Right now they are claiming 34 markets with open equity profits and 7
losing markets, with a net open profit of $136,898.
Mark Johnson claims that the fact that the same system, same parameters
give excellent results over a broad selection of markets is strong
evidence
that it is not curve fit. Why is that incorrect? If I understood
Mark's
report correctly, he ran many tests over more than 15 years of data,
looking for specific characteristics with respect to drawdown, risk,
etc.,
and proved (to his satisfaction, anyway) that just about any long-term
trading scheme would give excellent results provided proper bet-size,
money
mangement techniques were observed. He put his money on his
conclusions,
and apparently has reaped a very satisfactory reward for his risks.
Jim Allen
tj wrote:
> if what you say is true about aberration and the s&p's (i have no
> reason to doubt you), then that explains why mark johnson doesn't
trade
> the damn thing on the stock indices. it appears to blow up when it
> encounters excessive volatility. but i'm confused. isn't aberration's
> supposedly strongest asset is that it catches the volatile, explosive
> moves in a commodity mix? or maybe that's the gotcha, in that you've
> got to have a mix or basket of commodities to minimize the drawdowns
> from the individual commodities. and it also sounds like that not only
> is the system itself is curve fit, but the basket of commodities is
> curve fit too.
>> SNIP <<
|