Here's what he wrote:Quote from JimmyJam:
Actually as Raystonn and Fletch2 have both already made mention (and other experienced traders have discoverd for themselves) the key to increasing your profit factor is not tweaking/massaging your entry/exit signals, but rather by using non-constant position sizing.
You might think they are BSing, but they are actually doing the readers a service by even bringing the concept to their attention.
Best Regards,
JJ
That's not what he was doing in that post. While it's true that PF can be improved through position sizing, Raystonn's system is a lousy one to do it with because it trades too infrequently... and for that reason even if those numbers did add up, I wouldn't trade it. So in reality, Raystonn's definition of what makes a good system is more skewed than the OP's. FYI, TRULY experienced traders know that there are ways to improve PF (and Sharpe) above and beyond entries, exits and position sizing. And that those ways should be applied first, before position sizing.Quote from Raystonn:
Honestly, one of my better systems (3.80 profit factor, 75.61% of trades profitable, 0.86 Avg Win:Avg Loss ratio, about 26 round trip trades per year, about $570 profit per trade per contract) would need to be traded for 76 years before it hit approximately 2000 trades. Your definition of what makes a good system is a bit skewed.
Quote from swtrader:
what % of threads on ET are p*ssing matches leading nowhere?
I'll be that's a pretty high number
Quote from tacmot:
I have a mechanical FX trading system built in Tradestation that has done 270 trades (not 2000) over 4 years with a profit factor of 302.50, 92.78% profitable,Return on Initial Capital 18:09,Sharpe Ratio 0.44,tacmot