This is a priceless thread! Keep up the entertainment, botpro!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
A free Trading System that guarantees at least 180% p.a.
- Thread starter botpro
- Start date
- Status
- Not open for further replies.
https://www.hedgeco.net/service-providers/92/hedge-fund-information-providers/albourne-village/
Albourne Village, a virtual hedge fund community with over 14,000 active residents, is a free and independent website for anyone interested in alternative investments. It incorporates a virtual pub and library to exchange news and IP, a job centre, conference centre and School. The Data Farm offers a daily update on key hedge fund indices alongside Albourne Partners’ ‘Weather Forecasts’, which estimate how conducive the prevailing underlying market environment is for a variety of hedge fund trading strategies. The site was recently voted number 26 in The Online Finance 30 featured in the international edition of Institutional Investor. Don\'t just join the Village, be the Village.
Some people are challenged and don't get the maths and the facts right.
To clarify I'll make the following statement to make things clear:
1) It is not me personally who gives the 180+% p.a. guarantee (or the correction of it (201%), or the 658% of the combo-system).
It's the system itself who gives the guarantee! And it is even always the same one fixed percentage, because this is a precalculable mathematical system.
It's simple maths everybody can verify by him/herself.
2) I can only repeat what was already said: if the system can be applied 1:1 in the market then the guarantee holds for sure! It's simple maths.
3) The correct application of the system is the responsibility of the trader, as was many times clearly stated.
4) The text gives the PnL and below it it clearly states that commission and possible interest (for margin and/or loan) has to substracted from the PnL.
If the few challenged id*ots still don't get these basic facts right, then it is clearly their own fault! I think nobody can help them.
And some more facts:
- Some people or institutions have the possibility to trade for free or very cheap
- Some people or institutions have the infrastructure to emulate a gap-free 24/7 market
Think about that... So, for them the system works for sure, and they make the stated profit definitely!...
And: I'm just a researcher and author of these free systems. Why on hell should I give, besides what the system itself guarantees, any additional, ie. personal, guarantees?
Has anybody else ever done such? Have they ever?
Everybody studying the system will see that the stated PnL numbers really are true, if one only can apply the system in a gap-free continuous market.
To clarify I'll make the following statement to make things clear:
1) It is not me personally who gives the 180+% p.a. guarantee (or the correction of it (201%), or the 658% of the combo-system).
It's the system itself who gives the guarantee! And it is even always the same one fixed percentage, because this is a precalculable mathematical system.
It's simple maths everybody can verify by him/herself.
2) I can only repeat what was already said: if the system can be applied 1:1 in the market then the guarantee holds for sure! It's simple maths.
3) The correct application of the system is the responsibility of the trader, as was many times clearly stated.
4) The text gives the PnL and below it it clearly states that commission and possible interest (for margin and/or loan) has to substracted from the PnL.
If the few challenged id*ots still don't get these basic facts right, then it is clearly their own fault! I think nobody can help them.
And some more facts:
- Some people or institutions have the possibility to trade for free or very cheap
- Some people or institutions have the infrastructure to emulate a gap-free 24/7 market
Think about that... So, for them the system works for sure, and they make the stated profit definitely!...
And: I'm just a researcher and author of these free systems. Why on hell should I give, besides what the system itself guarantees, any additional, ie. personal, guarantees?
Has anybody else ever done such? Have they ever?
Everybody studying the system will see that the stated PnL numbers really are true, if one only can apply the system in a gap-free continuous market.
Last edited:
ironchef, with due respect, but I think you must have done something gravely wrong: 13 crosses means 13 trades, and for 1 contract and its 100 shares of the stock the commission would be just 13 * 1.00 = $13 in total (at IB $0.005 per share, minimum $1). So, subtracting that from the $300 credit leaves you still $287 of the credit... Therefore I don't understand when you above say this:I tried backtested you system using one month's SPY history, 1 one month call contract, the ATM premium was ~$300, there were 13 crossing of trades, 5 with gapped up of ~$1.00-2.00, so in real life selling 1 month ATM option, I lost money. Even without the gaps (continuous 24/7 market), transaction costs exceeded the premium. At the end, SPY>SPY at start so buy and take no action was actually profitable while your system lost money.
Can you please clarify this, thx.Even without the gaps (continuous 24/7 market), transaction costs exceeded the premium. At the end, SPY>SPY at start so buy and take no action was actually profitable while your system lost money.
A tradelist would be helpful too...
Last edited:
It is OK OddTrader. We all learn together. I benefited from asking questions and you folks were kind enough to answer and allowed me to learn from your collective wisdoms.He could be also one of the smartest one day, considering his smart/stealth approach of presenting/asking/exchanging various questions by pretending what he knows/offers in order to learn from others through the kind/volume of stimulation/feedback generated!
Regards,
It is OK OddTrader. We all learn together. I benefited from asking questions and you folks were kind enough to answer and allowed me to learn from your collective wisdoms.
Regards,
I actually like his threads very much, learning a lot from my own brain teasers!
A typical big brokerage house charges ~$15 for 1 options contract in a margin account, ~$10 for stocks. 13 round trips stocks ~ $260 + taxes, initial trade ~ $25 + taxes. Anyway, it is just 1 data point to demonstrate one could lose $. If I select more carefully, there could be less round trips and showed a profit. The killer is actually the gaps, each $1 gap = $100.
Hmm. these commission numbers are IMO very far fetched. IMO no option seller would use such a broker, because the option seller deals with relatively minimal profits at full risk, so he would look for very cheap commissions, esp. since he usually also has to make hedging trades like in this case. At least I would do so...A typical big brokerage house charges ~$15 for 1 options contract in a margin account, ~$10 for stocks. 13 round trips stocks ~ $260 + taxes, initial trade ~ $25 + taxes. Anyway, it is just 1 data point to demonstrate one could lose $. If I select more carefully, there could be less round trips and showed a profit. The killer is actually the gaps, each $1 gap = $100.
The comparison of our calculations shows the difference very clearly: in your case a loss, in my case keeping nearly the full credit... That's a difference like night and day...
So, then I think I don't need to reply to your other posting, because it wouldn't make any sense as we simply use very different rates for commission.
BTW: if you do any further public analysis of this system, then please use only the IB commission rate.
Otherwise the result would not be accepted. Thanks.
And: if possible post the result of your analysis of today again, but this time with the IB commission rate. That would be much more informative and valuable for the public here...
Last edited:
I have some very good news for everybody:
The US indices (for example SPY) do use the European Style, and are IMO sufficient for this system.
And: indices usually don't gap much, unlike stocks do. This is of course very good for this system.
Then, this system can indeed be applied at the US exchanges alone...
Since indices are not that much volatile, it follows that the options premium (ie. the credit for the options seller) is somewhat lower, but it still is sufficient, IMO.
I'll do some calcs...
Update:
With current SPY levels only a PnL of +40.1% p.a. is possible.
I'll try to find better ones...
The US indices (for example SPY) do use the European Style, and are IMO sufficient for this system.
And: indices usually don't gap much, unlike stocks do. This is of course very good for this system.
Then, this system can indeed be applied at the US exchanges alone...
Since indices are not that much volatile, it follows that the options premium (ie. the credit for the options seller) is somewhat lower, but it still is sufficient, IMO.
I'll do some calcs...
Update:
With current SPY levels only a PnL of +40.1% p.a. is possible.
I'll try to find better ones...
Last edited:
The US indices (for example SPY) do use the European Style
wrong again
http://www.cboe.com/micro/spdr/introduction.aspx
"The SPDR options contract specifications are similar to the contract specifications for most other U.S. options on ETFs. However, SPDR options have some key differences when compared to S&P 500 (SPX) options -- SPDR options: (1) have a smaller contract size, (2) have American-style exercise,"
- Status
- Not open for further replies.