|
PureBytes Links
Trading Reference Links
|
There are trends in every time frame. You just need a system that identifies them
and allows you to act upon them. The percentage can be maintained if the system
works in every time frame, as it should. Ira.
Kevin Morgan wrote:
> Rich said:
>
> "Analyzing my trades, I once again realized how
> hard it is to follow a trend. Much easier to hit and get out, hit and get
> out."
>
> Yes, and I've found that to be true in system development also! Which is
> ironic given the constant propoganda to "follow the trend". I like the
> equity smoothing that comes with >70% winners. Hard to build trend
> following systems with that characteristic (LeBeau got some like that
> for sale, debating with myself if I'll learn enough to pop for $250 but
> it is tempting.)
>
> And Edward said:
>
> "Indeed, I find it easier and more profitable too in the system development
> arena. Getting consistency of winners (>50 or 60%), having reasonably
> low average loss sizes, and good overall profitability I find to NOT be
> easy to achieve with trend following approaches. And I hate systems that
> only win 30% of the time, because of the greater equity fluctuation."
>
> Oh man, were truer words every spoken? How many traders have NO CLUE what
> the expectation of their approach/technique/system is? (Remember, absolute
> minimum is a need for 30 trades worth of history.) Most discretionary
> traders, and that's most traders. We think it _should_ be a winner system,
> so whats the need to measure our approach? My experience: my best ideas are
> losers, only alot of work and study and refinement and try again work produces
> winners, and few of those win alot. My conclusion: by far most traders are
> trading what, if studied, are certifiably negative expectation systems. Which
> means the longer they trade it, the more certain they will lose every cent they
> own.
>
> I hope everyone gets this, because its just so darn incredibly important,
> IMO. Measure it before you trade it! Any only trade it if it proves
> itself a money winner! I'm a zealot on this point.
>
> -Kevin
|