|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
Yes, I think we understand each other now. Like I said earlier and as it
seems you are saying now. Most real traders don't use strict systems per
say, and don't need to build software from nothing to make money. The tools
available now, wheter TradeStation or pencil and paper do just fine. I
actualy know a few traders and as far as I know none have ever built
software from nothing and the ones I know probably never will. I know I
won't.
It seems you are targeting your software to as you say, hedge funds with
big pockets. That is fine and good. I can tell you are not and never will
target it to traders. That is also fine. We already have too must stuff
advertised to us.
I also agree that your software is not meant for me and most traders. I
have easily seen that. Backtesting is mainly for gurus who optimise
something over and over in the past. Trading is doing today. I don't
backtest period anymore.
As far as bugs in everybody elses software but yours. You may be right.
But, as a trader, as long as this swiggily line and this angle, and that
curved line etc. makes me money year in, year out. The bugs won't bother
me much.
Also glad to see you don't have and never have had any bugs in your
software. It's a first for software. No bugs at all is, great.
And for the record. I realy don't like TradeStation. If I didn't have it,
I would probably look around to see what others are available. But, I have
it, use it, and do OK with it. And ain't planning on getting other stuff.
I still use TradeStation 4 and TradeStation 2000i and will probably never
upgrade as long as I can get end of day data easily and the software I have
keeps working.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Ivan Figueredo" <ivanf1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 9:47 PM
Subject: Re: QuantStudio
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "RB" <rhodes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> To: <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> Sent: Saturday, February 28, 2004 1:17 AM
> Subject: Re: QuantStudio
>
>
> >
> > Kevin,
> >
> > You are probably right about the ones you are talking about. I was
> mainly
> > talking about traders. It really doesn't matter what software a good
> > trader uses.
>
> That would be true if you were comparing softwares that both accurately
did
> their work. The fact of the matter is that Tradestation is so full of bugs
> that it actually misleads traders, good or bad.
>
> > They can use pencil and paper and do OK.
>
> It would be INFINITELY better to use pencil and paper, assuming the
analysis
> was done with care, than to use buggy software. If I had a buggy
stethoscope
> and that was my only tool, and I needed to find out if the patient was
> healthy or not, I would be better off using traditional methods to asses
the
> health of my patient than something that was going to give me bogus
answer.
> But no doctor would dispute the use of a working stethoscope over less
high
> tech means.
>
> >For myself and most
> > traders that I personaly know, they have there system, methods etc. and
> > could use any (easy to use trading software ;-) and trade.
>
> You keep mising the point. You are FAR better off not using a tool if what
> it is telling you is innacurate. Tradestation can be used for charting,
> drawing trendlines, finding support and resistance, and many many other
> wonderful things. It is when you start using it as a SYSTEM TESTING
Platform
> does it become a danger to your pocket book.
>
> > Most good traders can even do OK with the simple web charts on the net.
>
> Again, not listening to the message. No one is debating the charting
> capabilities of TS, or that good traders can make money without any
> software, for example, floor traders do it day in and day out. The
question
> is, IF you are going to use software, are you better off using one that
> gives you accurate representation of what is happening in realtime, or one
> that isn't.
>
> > I
> > myself use TradeStation 2000i and basicly use the same method I used
over
> 15
> > years ago
> > I am sure I could just as easily use metastock, or many of the others,
but
> I
> > will probably never change, because what I have now handles my stuff
just
> > fine so there is no need to learn new software to use and old method.
:)
> > I don't really know or use the full capacity of TradeStation.
> > Don't get me wrong. We need new ideas, new software etc. And I would
> even
> > possibly try some new software if I could use my easy language stuff
with
> > it. Not that easy language is greatest or that TradeStation is the
> greatest.
> > It is because that is what I have and use. :)
>
> Tools like QuantStudio is not meant for you, at least not in their current
> form. I have yet to see BACKTESTING sofware written for the "masses" that
> does a good job. I have seen lots of proprietary good ones.
>
> Like I said in a previous post. If QS ever gets it's act together, perhaps
> in the first time in the history of commercial software will there be
> something as powerful as what Hedge Funds with big pocket books have
access
> to.
>
>
> > ----- Original Message -----
> > From: "Kevin Sven Berg" <ksberg@xxxxxxxxx>
> > To: <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > Sent: Friday, February 27, 2004 5:48 PM
> > Subject: Re: QuantStudio
> >
> >
> > > RB,
> > >
> > > I think the auto analogy is a poor one, unless you're willing to admit
> > that
> > > instead a car, you're riding a bicycle.
> > >
> > > There is a market for traders and firms that demand much more than
> offered
> > > by TradeStation (the GM equivalent). Where is the interchangeable,
> > > integrated portfolio management? Where is the interchangeable,
> integrated
> > > position sizing? Where is the interchangeable, integrated,
> cross-portfolio
> > > risk management? Can I do deep, multi-market quantitative analysis?
Can
> I
> > > intermix multiple, dissimilar data sources and vendors? Does it route
my
> > > trades into an accounting system? Does it do trade aggregation and
> > > separation for unitized accounting? Can I automatically route orders
to
> > the
> > > broker of my choice? And on, and on, and on ...
> > >
> > > While there are a number of after-market bolt-ons for TradeStation,
the
> > > level of integration is often clumsy. The whole PushPop or
global-access
> > > DLL route is an example of trying to work around platform limitations.
> At
> > a
> > > certain point, it makes sense to examine alternatives.
> > >
> > > Excellent traders wield an edge. There is a whole market catering to
> > > traders who seek and create an edge using advanced tools. There are
also
> > > trading firms that demand more out of a trading engine. For all these
> > > traders, most of the popular trading packages just don't cut it.
> > >
> > > Actually, I'm very encouraged by the recent direction in trading
> > platforms.
> > > WealthLab starts to incorporate many of the items I mentioned above,
and
> > > VeriTrader 2.0 looks to be a very exciting product as well.
> > >
> > > Still, there's nothing like having a custom tool set that can actually
> do
> > > what I need :-)
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > >
> > > Kevin
> > >
> > > ps. This is NOT an endorsement for QuantStudio, only a consideration
for
> > > QS-like tools.
> > >
> > >
> > > At 03:37 PM 2/27/2004 -0800, you wrote:
> > > >Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2004 18:34:35 -0800
> > > >From: "RB" <rhodes@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >To: <omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >Subject: Re: Re[5]: QuantStudio demo available
> > > >Message-ID: <009701c3fda3$6955c0b0$482d730a@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> > > >Content-Type: text/plain;
> > > > charset="iso-8859-1"
> > > >Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
> > > >
> > > > Why put a company in that position?
> > > > Nobody would build a car that they use everyday from parts!
> Everybody
> > will
> > > >buy a car ready to go.
> > > > Having and selling parts is big bussiness if you have parts to fit
> > Fords,
> > > >GM, Dodge, Toyota, Honda etc. But having and selling parts to fit
> > nothing,
> > > >or something you have to build in the first place, seems to be a very
> > poor
> > > >bussiness model.
> > > > If a company wants to sell trading parts? Why not sell parts that
> fut
> > and
> > > >go with all the trading software that is now available and used
> everyday?
> > > > Why sell parts for something, that you have to build yourself?
May
> be
> > OK
> > > >and you may end up with a great trading package that everyone will
> want.
> > It
> > > >just seems that it is the wrong model and way to get things that most
> > > >traders will want and use.
> > > > In other words. I ain't going to build no car from nothing with
> parts.
> > > >And if you look around, you won't find many cars built that way.
> > > > Maybe, you were explaining your trading software wrong with the
> > building it
> > > >with parts email. At least I hope so.
> >
> >
>
>
|