Search results

I think people who think brokers have no interests in clients' trades except commissions simply confuse broker firm and the employees' working for the broker firm. I somehow feel easy about the broker firm, but not trust the individual employees who have access to my account. I totally agree...

which broker are you using?

I think you have a chance, that, a trader taking very little risk. the only way you can achieve this is to have a proven strategy. I am speaking of this from my own experience. I have a phd in science, and bored with my previous job seeing glass ceilings. I decided to pursue trading in 2003...

copy and paste everything onto your google blog.

I am looking for a firm that I can colocate server to collect market data from all exchanges around the world. If esignal offers colocation, that would be the best solution. I do not prefer prime broker, since i do not like to data collection and trade via the same place.

Is there a firm that can host my server for real-time market data from all exchanges including equities, future, forex, etc?

those underground money can be verified, thus not listed in forbes. sure, there are lots of riches unknown to the public.

i guess you did not understand the question. what extra information you need?

the purpose of this thread is to demonstrate the importance of signal confirmation from uncorrelated sources. For two methods of 60% correctness, the combination has a winning rate of 70%. for two methods of 70% correctness, the winning rate of combination is as high as 84%. then does holy...

After more thoughts, I believe the answer is 69%. A few posts earlier correctly gave the answer. Here is my reasoning, which I wish to make it easier for people to understand how 69% is derived. 1) suppose there is a large pool of red and blue balls. red indicates for winning ball, blue...

I do not think this is a correct answer. think in this way: if the system B is random, ie., 50% winning rate, Applying B to the signals from A will not change the winning rate of A. thus A+random = A. now B is a 60% winning rate, A+random will less than A+B.

I am only talking about the winning rate, not profit. this is a hypothetical case for sure.

In my original post, I did not mention stop and amount of profit for each trade. I am only interested in entries. in case the original post is unclear, now let us reformulate about this, suppose we only consider long trades: 1) system A generates its own signals to enter the market at the...

it is clearly wrong. re-read the previous posts about one system 100% right, the other is, say, 30%, right. the two system combined will still have a winning rate of 100%.

correct. though RSI and MACD are not good example since they are somewhat correlated.

I guess you misunderstood the problem. The problem is that the trading signal from method A must be confirmed by method B so that the signal is valid.

Congratulations you found the holy grail. with 4 systems confirmed with each other, you have 100% losing strategy:).

doomed with the trading-signal-confirmation strategy.

that the two methods have no correlation means the two methods are independent. it does not mean one is long the other must be short.

when you have two methods, the result is 0.86; with three, the result is 0.72? do not you think it is incorrect?