Search results

Is there a way to make a conditional order that kicks in only if some other trade is made? For example, I have an order to buy security ABC at $10. If that fills, then and only then an order is placed automatically to sell security XYC at $18 or market or whatever? Thanks!

So, did anything draw those big, black guiding lines in real time, or was this just something fitted, looking back? Thanks.

Ah, got it 2FT. Thanks!

Thanks, maybe some others can take advantage of working for a hedge fund or whatever, but I don't need that, have plenty of money, really just focus on winning in my own account and helping you guys out. Love this place.

What do you mean by balanced equities portfolio 2FT? Thanks!

In that scenario I would have still likely vastly outperformed buy and hold haha. Maybe not made a ton, or none, but STILL better than buy and hold, probably much more so.

I think you misread my post Handle123. I would have puts with strike 30%ish below market, so very cheap, and they would protect me even in that scenario (heck, might come out ahead if I do it right).

So, the problem is so many people think they can find an edge by NOT buying and holding. But, as has been proven time and time again, it is EXTREMELY hard to beat buy and hold over any meaningful time period (several years plus). So, why fight it? Why not just incorporate buy and hold? So...

Come on man, Simons didn't send the IRS after the own people investing in his fund, that is only a bad thing for him and his peeps. Get outta here with that!!!

I think 'fifty rode the market all the way up, now he wants to protect himself just a bit. Good on him.

Agreed, they are very low. Insane how low and expense ratio you can get these days...

I have NO DOUBT a principle of quantum mechanics, the basic laws of the universe at the smallest scales, much smaller than an atom, just being its natural principle, applies to the trading decisions of human beings with millions, billions or even more atoms trying to make a buck.

Exactly. Thank you dozu!!!

Sorry, that makes absolutely NO SENSE, and is manifestly wrong. The only "edge" that could get stronger is some edge based on momentum that never stops moving in one direction. Everyone knows that does not happen, and cannot happen in any regular trading market.

I'm not sure your post was responsive, I am not talking about yo-yoing, I am talking about trying to find an edge. My suggestion is that, just maybe, an edge lies in going back to long forgotten edges from long ago. Back-testing THOSE, not the newest "edges" on the street, to see if there is...

Does that mean that maybe some edges from "long ago", which previously lost their edge, might come back into edgyness? There has been like a billion trading methods, secrets, systems, etc. over many decades (or more). Can they really ALL lose their edge? Can that many people be watching each...

I've seen results of studies of selling options all the time. But what if one sold options when premiums were big, bought them when premiums were small? Rather than going all one way or the other all the time. Are there any studies on this? Seems that might be the best way to make money off...

Don't think I've seen him post in a good while. Sweet one, are you out there? Still profiting a-la Karen the Super-Trader, but better?!

No. Saying X beats Y is far from implying an edge, as it say nothing about whether X beats Z, Z being a basic buy SPY in 1993 and holding to present. I suspect Z would crush X, certainly on an absolute return basis. On some kind of risk adjusted return basis, who knows.

Just curious, why are huge retirement systems doing quant type mega-trading? Should they not just be invested in some wide array of diversified stocks and bonds and basically let it ride, just rebalancing every so often or what not? Seems weird to me. Thanks!