[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: Switch between systems : Yes, we can !


  • Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2009 15:33:45 +0200
  • From: "Pierre Orphelin" <pierre.orphelin@xxxxxxx>
  • Subject: RE: Switch between systems : Yes, we can !

PureBytes Links

Trading Reference Links

Hi,

Yes,you are  absolutely  right.

The software  runs up to  1,000 neurofuzzy  systems  in real time ( each  of
them having thousands of  rules).
To  be more precise,  we  run up to 1000 equity  curves in real time, any
equity curve  could be obtained  by same  or different  systems applied to
the same or  different instruments, same  or different  timeframe ( any
combination  of  these in  fact)

These  candidates  will allow  to  build a  dynamic  managed  portfolio of a
smaller  size ( or different  sub portfolios).

These  candidates are then  chosen by a  money management scheme  based  on
the permanent  sorting of  the  candidate results.
The  best  one is chosen every time that a  trade  close in the managed
portfolio.
So,  the  composition of  the managed  portfolio  may evolve for  every  new
trade ( it will depend  on  the  performance of the selected  and
unselected systems over time).

Because  the perfect  system cannot exist,  the swapping between  candidates
seldom  bring the same  system/instrument/timeframe twice or  more in a row.

Until  now, it's  the best solution that I have  found  for  performance and
stability.
The  results are  naturally  improved  by the multiple line  effect ( a 10
line portfolio will  show a  lowed  MIDD  than  10  contracts  on one
similar  system), and the   permanent swapping  is  a  fairly good
insurance against  failing  systems as  well as  a  valid improvement  of
the multiple  line smoothing effect.

Depending  on  the   composition of  the candidate  pool, the dynamic
management scheme, and the  portfolio  size  one  may easily  expect results
al least similar  to a big  portfolio (100  lines  or  more) without  having
to  invest in  100  lines.

The other  factor  is  the decorrelation of  the  unmanaged equity  curves.
The  higher    decorrelation will produce the  best improvements.

Sincerely,
 
Pierre Orphelin
www.sirtrade.com

 

 

-----Message d'origine-----
De : David Pyle [mailto:dpevergreen@xxxxxxxxx] 
Envoyé : dimanche 23 août 2009 08:07
À : Pierre Orphelin; omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
Objet : [english 100%] RE: : Switch between systems : Yes, we can !

Pierre,

Are you saying that you software runs 100 or more systems at a time in real
time and switches between them in real time?

Dave Pyle

--- On Sat, 8/22/09, Pierre Orphelin <pierre.orphelin@xxxxxxx> wrote:

> From: Pierre Orphelin <pierre.orphelin@xxxxxxx>
> Subject: RE: : Switch between systems : Yes,  we  can !
> To: omega-list@xxxxxxxxxx
> Date: Saturday, August 22, 2009, 5:02 PM
> Hi,
> 
> It seems  to  me that you  are 
> starting   to  discover 
> fuzzy  logic  with
> you  knob example.
> You  just  need  to implement a 
> valid  solution ( the  answer is  not with
> two  systems,  by  far).
> Well, this is a well  known  path to 
> us  for  15  years.
> 
> FYI  the  latest  version of  the
> Safir-Xp2 software  does  dynamic
> switching  of  neurofuzzy  systems in real
> time.
> Up to  1000  trading systems 
> monitored  real time   that 
> would  be swapped
> at any time to  build a  managed  portfolio
> among  these  1000  candidates (
> usually 100 are  enough).
> Allows  daily  intraday  range 
> bars  swapping at the same  time.
> 
> More  to  see  on  the  new 
> temporary pages  of  the web  site:
> www.sirtrade.com
> 
> There are several   animated  tutorials
> that  explain  the new thing.
> 
> Does  it  work ?
> See  by  yourself...Zero programming 
> needed.
> Even  Not a  single  line of  EL
> to  write from  the  systems 
> development
> (done while you sleep) to  to automated orders.
> And  of  course,  it's  back testable.
> 
> We  will  publish  real time  results
> within a  few  weeks.
> I  know,  I  said  the same 4 
> years ago...
> But  we  needed   more than 
> 4  years  to complete  this  project.
> 
> Just  let  we  know  if you already had
> seen  something similar.
> I  bet  you will  not...
> 
> 
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Pierre Orphelin.
> 
> 
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Mark Johnson [mailto:janitor@xxxxxxxxxxxx]
> 
> 
> 
> Here's a fourth suggestion: replace the word "switch"
> by the word "knob".  Instead of restricting yourself
> to only two possibilities:
>    (100% of system A, 0% of system B)
>    (0% of system A, 100% of system B)
> 
> allow yourself to imagine trading X% of system A and
> (100-X)% of system B.  Imagine a "knob" that you can
> smoothly rotate, from (A=100, B=0) to (A=0, B=100).
> 
> Now imagine using technical analysis indicators to
> choose an appropriate value of X%.
> 
> 
> 
>