Possible? Yes
Consistently? Not very likely, but some outliers could achieve it through a statistical freak
Consistently? Not very likely, but some outliers could achieve it through a statistical freak
Quote from spike500:
Futures are always traded on margin. Even the biggest idiot knows that you cannot take 20% a day in the S&P without leverage.
99.99% of the daily moves in the S&P are smaller than 20%.
Romik says that his 20% went to 12.8% due to bad execution. If that would be without leverage it would mean the execution took days. It is clear he meant margin trading.
Quote from romik:
Automated trading perhaps can not reach high return levels, because it is an automated process, machines don't think they simply execute. I do not need a maching to tell me when and what to do. How can the machine know what's happening in the real world? I am a strong believer in the principle to keep it simple in trading, the more one involves a computer program to decide when to enter/exit trades is making a mistake in my opinion. When I look at my trading strategy I realize that there is no way to automate it and be perhaps profitable.
Quote from Bitstream:
By marginable trades I meant returns on margins. Not marginable trades returns are %gains based on full contract value. It is not the first time someone comes here with 3 posts under their handle and states he can squeeze 10-20% a day, yes, full return on full contract, on futures.
Quote from spike500:
Returns for funds are always calculated as returns on invested capital. Check the rules that have to be followed by CTA's to comply with NFA and CFTC and you will see what i mean (VAMI). Risc is also mesured on invested capital.
For Romik it was clear that he meant on invested capital as i already mentioned earlier. So no need to discuss this return on full contract.
To be clear about my opinion: i never said that all these returns that are posted are real, but the arguments used to proof that the returns are fake are sometimes fake too. I reacted mostly against the so called waterproof system of coumpounding. It is more often used in a abusive way than in a correct way.
Quote from spike500:
The logic of your math sucks and you have apparently no knowledge about the futures markets ( Romik talks about the ES).
To calculate the ending equity you need at least the following elements to make a realistic calculation:
-margin per contract
-maximum position that can be absorbed by the market
-starting capital
I will give 2 examples just to show that your calculation is based on simplicity and lack of knowledge about trading:
first example:
starting capital 5000 $
net profit per day 600$ ( equals 12 %)
maximum number of positions unlimited
margin per contract 1000$
We start trading 5 contracts, we trade 21 days.
You cannot simple compound at 12% a day because you need 500$ to add a new contract. This lowers the effect of compounding. The ending equity for the month will be 49640 $.
second example:
starting capital 100000 $
net profit per day 12000$ ( equals 12 %)
maximum number of positions unlimited
margin per contract 1000$
We start trading 100 contracts, we trade 21 days.
The last day we will theoretically trade 961 contracts. But the question is: how big can we grow before the position is too big to be executed in a normal way?
That is the point where ALL the compounding calculations go wrong. They all calculate simply by compounding without taking the limitations of real trading in account. That's how they want to proof that, at the disputed returns, you should own the whole world.
If Romik is smart he would stop posting about these things because all he can get is negative reactions and unbelief. I have been bashed also before, so i decided not to tell anything anymore. Keep the stupid stupid and the smart smart. And as the stupids always think they are smart, everybody will be happy.
Quote from winter:
Amazing progress
romik
01-29-06 08:26 PM