|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
I am trying to program a system using the software called investigator.
So far, it seems kind of buggy. It is not so simple to design a
profitable system in my opinion. It is probably easier to buy one. But
who knows, you just might stumble onto something. I think a way to do
it is to look at systems that are already designed and then try to
personalize it and see if it performs well enough. There is a really
nice simple system in the February issue of stocks and commodities. It
is using gann trend and breakouts. I think it is soooo simple, good and
right. check it out. It is by Robert Krausz of market wizard fame. You
might note that he reveals the gann trend line which this guy:
http://homepage.netspaceonline.com/~sgier7/ is trying to sell for 150
like it is the holy grail. Well, the invetigator has gann trend
indicator as well. So far, it tests out great for a stop exit. I am
pursuing designing a system based on this gann trend stuff from S&C. I
think it is simple, mechanical and profitable. Krausz shows it
profitable for 1997 on bonds. I believe he sticks with the bonds. You
can do it on your graph paper by hand, no stooochastix, no relatives
strengths, some mooooving averages and voila, simple system. with a
three day calculation of the highs or lows. FWIW, you can also put in
the infamous P&L dot (tm) that is a three day moving average of the one
day pivot moved forward in time by one day. I happen to know that when
the dot intersects the price bar, you gonna get a bang! Well, I am
going to play with this stuff. If you like it too, let me know, maybe
we can together draft up a system that is simple and kicks butt.
cheers
Paul Cote
yorker@xxxxxxx wrote:
>
> RT's
>
> Has anyone tried testing simple trading systems of "their own" which would
> help John or anyone else interested in trading mechanically.
>
> As I read the results of the systems that one can purchase it seams to me
> that there are many very simple systems, for example buyng every MACD
> crossover with lets say some simple filters, which would perhaps give
> results just as good.
>
> Maybe the fact that you have to pay $l,000 or more gives one reason to use
> it and perhaps make money, while if you come up with something simple you
> say - well that's too easy and you forget about it.
>
> My guess is that with todays computer technology that we all have, anyone
> of us could make a system and it would probably be as good as the "store
> variety". Let me repeat this is just a guess. Since I myself haven't
> tried any systems like this I can't give any results of home made
> varieties.
>
> Can those of you who have tried some Personal Systems share with us what
> you have tried and your "paper" or real results. Perhaps as a group we
> could build on each others work to everyones benifit.
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Yorker
|