| Allende |
|
Gold User, Member, TeleChart
|
| Registered User |
|
|
|
|
| Unsure |
|
| Thursday, October 7, 2004 |
| Friday, November 15, 2013 9:18:21 AM |
35
[0.01% of all post / 0.00 posts per day] |
|
|
In an older version of TC2000, i was able to place a "percent true" in a pain. How do I do it (I assume this is the custom condition in the new version) in the latest version?
Allende
|
QUOTE (owilson05) Hello, as you can see this is my first post but I have been lurking here for quite some time.
I have been paper trading Sir 9 Day's method since May 1 with little to no success. Out of 185 trades, 93 are positive with 92 negative. The positive trades usually trigger on day 10 with little gain (barely covering commisions) and the negative trades go to day 19 with large losses. On a mythical $25K account, I have lost $2654, slightly over 10%.
I've used S&P 500 stocks and also some lower priced stocks ($10-$30) with no concernable difference in results.
I have also modified Sir 9 Day's method with Sir Welcome Back's (Worden report 4/16) suggestions, again to no avail. All but the stop loss obviously.
These are not the typical results Sir 9 Day posted. Is it just the condition of the current market? Has anyone else been trying this method? Any input would be appreciated.
Thanks,
owilson05
Orville, ,
I received your email via Worden. In that email you gave me two trades that you did. Both were handled properly by you. Also in that email you said that you had lost 10% in paper trading from May 1st. to July 11th. and had allocated 1.1% to each trade. However, you then went on to say that " I am allocating 1.1% to each trade which is $ 275 and with margin =$ 550.
If you used margin, you didn't allocate 1.1% to each trade and your loss would have been 5% if you had not used margin, not 10% as you stated. Furthermore, the S&P was off almost 14% in the same period.
As I said in the first forum set up, there will be drawdowns and this works only over a long period of time. A long period of time is not a little more than two months when the maret happened to be down substantially. This is not a miracle trading system. It is based on probability and only works on hundreds, if not thousands of trades.
Best,
Sam
|
John,
Using the discretion you are referring to, will not void the system. This system is predicated on a large number of entries. That is the key, not which entry or entries. One entry is as good as another. That being said, however, I have made a conscious effort to do the same thing as you implied... why buy a stock in the same group (as another stock already bought,) IF there is still another stock in another group which meets the MOS. Why take the risk?!
Look... not all of this is written in stone. The only hard and fast rules that I used were these three: the set-up, the entry and the exits. There were many times when I went over my daily limit in terms of number of stocks used (e.g. if I didn't use many stocks in the previous days) and there were a few times when I didn't use as many as my limit called for. Use whatever you feel comfortable with, within bounds.
It sounds like you have the right ideas about this system All you have to do, is do enough entries, over a long period of time and watch your money management carefully. It's that simple.
Sam
|
|
Jim,
Perfectly put.
Sam
|
jas0501
Very interesting results. Many, many thanks.
Would it be possible to prevail upon you to do a few more? If so,
1. Using 9&18 day tick exit only, do a backtest using a 2.25% MOS. Do it for a trade size of 4% of equity as well as a 12,500 fixed trade size. Use max three entries and the same tie breaker as you did before.
2. Do the same thing except for my formula use c<c1 and c1<c2. Do not use the last part of the formula ...c2>c3. This, of course, will show all "triggers."
Again, thanks for all the info you've provided.
Sam
my email in case you want to contact me on anything is allende62@comcast.net
|
|
jas0501
Very good and interesting post. The only thing I would caution you on re Kelly, is what I've experienced in real time over a number of years (and in other ways, not using the formula, during my professional investment career). There have been periods using the formula, where there is day after day and week after week of poor (in fact very poor) performance. I think 4 1/2 percent of available equity is very high for position size.
Go for somewhat lower returns, which are still excellent, and cut back on the position size.
As Maynard Keynes said... "the market can remain irrational, longer than you can remain solvent.
Sam
|
QUOTE (ashberry) Sam,
Thanks for taking the time to respond to my query and for your guidance. I must say that this is the only strategy I have ever communicated about in these forums. It is thoght provoking.
It would be interesting to see that out of the losing 36% trades in how many there is an open higher than the trigger price on days other than the 10th or the 18th within the 2 next 9 day periods. Can money management in those cases drive up the profit numbers eg selling 50% of the position when that happens and holding the other 50% till the 10th or the 18th day? Lets see if I can run some tests on this.
Thanks.
An interesting idea and It would be interesting to see the numbers.
Sam
|
jas0501
Thanks for the interesting numbers.
You might try running them again using this approach. Each day that there are entries, use only 10 of them with a set amount each, so that you are putting a maximum amount for any one day and the same amount for each entry. Sort by average c34/c or some other tiebreaker (alphabetical by symbol?) to decide which ten to use. See what the return on allocated capital is, relative to the S&P. I think you will find it much higher, even though you won't be in the market every day for the maximum amount (or even in the market for any amount). The risk adjusted returns are substantially great than the S&P... again, this is based on real time over a number of years.
Best,
Sam
ps Ashberry. You were supposed to hold it until the opening of the 10th. day. That being said, I think you'll get into trouble if you are using this system "for a stock here and a stock there." This only works over a large number of entries. As jas0501 shows, his numbers show wins only 64% of the time.
|
QUOTE (jmsimm) O Experienced Ones,
On the the MOS entry of Sam's technique: Is it based on a close or a low of 2% below the set-up stock price? The first case implies a buy order on the following day, and the second case implies a buy order the same day. I'm guessing the technique is based on buying the same day when the MOS is hit.
My thought is that the least ambiguous approach is correct. Waiting for next day's open means that there could be the situation on day 9 where the stock closes below 2% and the order is executed on day 10 which is outside the first 9 day range.
Thanks,
John the Neophyte
John,
the MOS is based on 2% below the set up price. If the set up is 20 (c<c1 and c1<c2 and c2>c3, on a 9 day basis), any time, in the subsequent 9 days, if the stock gets to 19.60, you buy ... at 19.60.
Sam
|
|
jojo,
I think a while back I made the correction to what had been incorrectly published, so I just want to make sure that everyone is looking visually at what I am when you wrote (what I said)
"The logic behind this is the following. The probability is very high, that after the initial two 9 day periods which are down, there will not be two more 9 day periods which are down (subscribers can see this easily; if using percent true, just put in C>C1 and C1 ... there will be more times when there are not at least four consecutive down periods, than when there are).:"
That should be C<c1 and c1<c2.
If you put that into % true, you can quickly visually see my logic. I hope this is clear to everyone and that it is helpful. On top of seeing it visually, just picture it with an MOS of 2% and you can seewhat this is all about.
Sam
|
|