Search results

Same methodology as far as I'm concerned. The difference is that DCA is for buy-and-holders, those who have faith their investment will eventually rise ever higher. But for traders, DCA makes no sense. We buy when the trend is up and sell/short-sell when the trend is down.

Are you kidding? It took me years --literally years-- to develop my current trading strategy. If you're ready to give up after mere months, then trading is not for you. I am not a professional and that may be an advantage. I didn't come to trading with any preconceived ideas from the...

Some people have a death wish. It is often subconscious but you can see it in their actions that they hope to fail. I have never understood the impulse to average down. Unless the averager wants to fail for some reason. Only you can explain why you did this to yourself. Only losers average...

Price Action (PA), as Handle described it, is one way to go. Another way is using technical indicators. Neither will be a cake walk. Either one requires dedicated study. In particular, most indicators are worthless or close to worthless. That includes MA crossovers. So get experienced with...

Why not do it mathematically? For example, there are those who feel strongly that volatility should play a role in position sizing. Not me, I'm just saying. I believe the usual assumption is that the position size is proportional to 1/volatility, however you chose to measure volatility. Then...

Kelly properly done doesn't blow up trading accounts.

Not the point. The trend is your friend precisely because it does make you money. What the OP is complaining about is something completely different. He says the trend is not his friend because it's not around 100% of the time. He's upset because the trend is not constantly at his beck and...

Just to clarify my first post: I never meant to imply that lag is a good thing or even an inconsequential thing. Too much lag is a very bad thing. But there is an attitude prevalent among the indicator haters that even the slightest lag is detrimental. This is nonsense. If you are a trend...

Lagging, schmagging. This is such a tired and lame canard. Guess what? All analysis is based on past data. Why? Because There Is Nothing Else!! What, you think there's some special cache of future data that's available to traders who turn their noses up at indicators? Seriously? Even the...

Pick the stocks that give you the highest System Achievement Scores (SAS). SAS == 4*k*max[ 0, E ]*PF , where k is the Kelly fraction aka the solution to the optimal geometric growth equation (see below), E is the expectation (%/100), PF is the profit factor (see below), N is the number of...

Too simple. That article doesn't actually explain optimal f and ends up saying the same thing they've all said before : "read Ralph Vince's book". Fortunately we can now bypass the book. I wonder if Ralph Vince paid the For Dummies people for that nice little plug.

You're kidding, right? WTF does the OP know about training other people to discover their inner traders? Meanwhile he gets 100 newbie wannabes to reveal their newly discovered trading systems to him for free. Last time he got lucky two times out of 100. Not bad for doing nothing but passing...

He is not teaching a method. Look to the post by Frederick Foresight to see what his scam is.

Given that he's not teaching anything useful (i.e., an actual trading plan), I don't see the "something for nothing". It's more like nothing for nothing. I don't need some "mentor" to teach me how to think for myself and I feel sorry for anybody who does.

It's clear you're a discretionary trader. I can teach my mechanical system to a computer or a bright child and they'd both be successful. It's cookbook stuff once a valid systematic plan is laid out. Whenever the necessity of discipline comes up, it's a dead giveaway the trading plan being...

Here's what I don't get. In the OP you say some kind soul taught you how to trade and you're obligated to pay it forward. Well, why not just teach the method you're using instead of expecting your students to develop their own, which we all know has a high failure rate? 98% in the case of...

Optimal f and the Kelly Criterion Article by Ralph Vince begins on page 21. Optimal f is even more ridiculous than I believed. How this bullshit gained traction is a mystery to me.

OP doesn't realize what it means to overbet the Kelly fraction. Better yet, here's the expectation when betting 60%: ((1 + .6*.03)^.98)*((1 - .6)^.02) = 0.99915766. IOW, a return of −0.084234% on average. Not good.

The new Kelly formula is Bayesian. http://www.elitetrader.com/et/index.php?threads/a-new-kelly-formula.291307/

The problem is in your game, the player has to risk everything to get something. That's not trading, that's gambling. The Kelly fraction for this system is considerably less than one. I never bet more than the Kelly fraction.