|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I could not agree more fully with the below. Tradestation has a superb
programming ability, but so much is "locked" out from you. It more or less
forces you to run all runs in interactive mode, which is a waste of time if
the job at hand is repetitive.
My Typical day in old TAS looked like: Get the end of day data, run all
index/indicator calculations, store the data in metastock, print the
findings, go into interactive mode (this starts after almost 55 minutes).
Running the combination of TAS as input and Tradestation as analyser, I can
still do exactly the same.
If I would switch over to Tradestation only, it would look more like: Get
the data into metastock. Run workspace assistant on the workspaces doing
index calculations. Run the downloader on the outputs to get indexes into
Tradestation readable format. Run workspace assistant on the workspaces
comparing indicators to my own indexes, calculating some data similar to new
high/new low, ... Run workspace assistant on the workspaces containing
multichart data based on own indexes and special indicators. Create from the
last output a list of stocks to look more specifically into. Probably also
takes 55 minutes, but locks me to the workstation most of the time.
There is no good way to create your own indexes, there is no good way to
start own runs in "sequences" there is no good way to interact with file
data (for example creating your own ticker list based on indicators and then
acting further on that one). There is no good way to manipulate parameters
to systems running batches to test systems over many stocks with different
parameter settings.
I am aware that all of the above can be done, but I do not see why Omega so
forcefully demands that you will have to be seated att the workstation to
run batch runs. Tradestation allows controlling other window programs, for
example Excel, but the other way around is awkward.
A well, nice to blow out some steam when you get frustrated...
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Larry Wright [mailto:lwright@xxxxxxxxxx]
> Sent: Tuesday, November 23, 1999 6:32 PM
> To: Omega List
> Subject: Re: Rollover workarounds for TS?
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, 23 Nov 1999, Val Clancy wrote:
>
> > the best you can do is:
>
> Unfortunately, I agree with you. If this is the best one can do with
> TS/Omega, we're in trouble. Data manipulation should NOT have to be as
> hard as you describe! It would NOT be this hard if TS would
> allow easier
> data access in/out, especially for ***tick data***.
>
> I forsee the Historybank as another you-will-do-it-our-way approach by
> Omega. It will have only the most 'vanilla' data, and will
> not take into
> account the *many* ways traders like to manipulate data.
> IMHO, a terrible
> alternative to opening up TS *tick* data access.
>
> > Build your historical testing ascii database:
> > - pick a bar interval for your database, 1 min for instance.
>
> This is a *lot* more work if you use tick charts...
>
> > - merge individual contracts manually ( cut/paste ) or use
> fileappend for
> > automatic
> > operation.
> > - when back adjusting data you can use different contract merging
> > techniques.
>
> It IS very important to provide several ways to merge
> contracts, and very
> unlikely to happen with Omega's you-will-do-it-our-way
> approach to things.
> Different traders have different needs. 'Merge contarcts' is
> easy to say,
> much more work to do :-).
>
> > your system code could contain rollover exit / reentry signals, no
> > backadjusting necessary
>
> Some of us like continuous contracts (but not all :-)...
>
> > in this case or you can set up "ave tick volume match"
> rollover fairly
> > easily by using
> > data1, data2, dataN setup and dumping into a file from
> multiple data
> > streams.
>
> A good approach...
>
> > - keep your "SP rollover" workspace saved and ready to be
> used at any time
> > - if you get holes in data, write it down in your database
> log, patch data
> > and append it
> > to your ascii database. same thing for bad ticks.
>
> With the difficulty in working with TS, this is a real pain -
> also, I'd
> rather not have to maintain two (or more) different data
> bases and try to
> keep them in sync and up to date.
>
> > - use ascii database for historical testing and real time
> data for trading
> > and appending
> > to your database.
>
> This *still* does not leave us with an easy way to use
> rollover data in
> *real time* for new contracts (a workaround has been
> suggested, though).
>
> *Please* don't misinterpret this as an attack on what you
> said. Don't get
> me wrong - I really do appreciate your detailed suggestion
> for the best
> way to deal with this. It is, indeed, about the best one can
> do now. I do
> believe this is a major area of concern for many traders, and
> has been for
> MANY years, with NO adequate response from Omega despite
> years of asking.
>
> Omega seems to stress how "easy" it is to use TS. For such a
> basic thing
> as *tick* data input, output, or contract manipulation, I don't think
> so...
>
> Larry
>
|