No, you are really wrong.
But please feel free to prove me wrong. I am not saying that it is out of realistic bounds.
Backtesting and Strategy Validation - How Much is Enough?
- Thread starter bhause
- Start date
No, you are really wrong.
But please feel free to prove me wrong. I am not saying that it is out of realistic bounds.
I'm just telling you what I have learned after many years of trying my hardest and dedicating all my time to this effort.
Maybe I am an idiot. Could very well be so. There are many more people much more intelligent than I am. Hopefully it works out for you. I really do.
That's a tautological definition.
The poster was kind enough to share actual experience.
All you're doing is complaining.
If you have something substantive to add, I'm sure we'd all love to hear about it.
No, it was because the results were flawed from the backtest. This misrepresented my past and soon to be future results.
It is because I invested ALL MY TIME AND MONEY into the operation in the first place. It was only going to go two ways for me. It didn't go the optimal way.
It isn't because my program hypothesis and risk management was flawed. Never did I risk over 1.5% on a trade. Usually never more than .7%
Quit being dumb. I don't think you have any experience at all and are just generally being an asshole. You can continue with your charade if you like. I am just trying to save others the shit I personally went through.
Certainly it was! There would be no way to be in debt if you were risking 1.5% per trade.---Unless of course you were calculating 1.5% on borrowed money to begin with! I think your posts are being helpful to others as a testament to not borrow money to trade--ever. Your calculation of 1.5% risk should have been made upon your total liquid net worth, then you would have never gone into debt. If that had been the case, then we could examine why you were unable to develop a winning system with backtesting.
The most reasonable way to begin is by papertrading your ideas. Once you have established enough confidence, then try 1 lots and go from there.
It wasn't my money that was lost. Maybe I am not making myself clear.
I invested all of my time and money into research. Not the market.
I don't think you understand what an upside down system looks like. It just leaks money consistently. Not too fast, but fast enough for the people contributing capital to pull out. Since I only get paid when I win + high watermark you will find out that you have no money.
That leaves me worthless. Not the trades. It was venture capital lost, not my own.
I backtest occasionally. The software environments themselves are fraught with dangers. You need to be a very thorough person to master backtesting sometimes.
The whole autotrading thingy is a really big task. You wind up being your own programmer, security expert, computer bundler, researcher, brain nutrition expert maybe, and CEO of a cottage industry small business... plus you are surrounded by people that think it cannot be done. If your significant other is not fully supportive you will have a major handicap.
What is entertaining and encouraging is when some experts come on this site [which is owned by people that made a hundred million from trading] and assert that it cannot be done!! They have lots of proof that it cannot be done of course!! They have lots of experts lined up with lots of data and conclusions
The whole autotrading thingy is a really big task. You wind up being your own programmer, security expert, computer bundler, researcher, brain nutrition expert maybe, and CEO of a cottage industry small business... plus you are surrounded by people that think it cannot be done. If your significant other is not fully supportive you will have a major handicap.
What is entertaining and encouraging is when some experts come on this site [which is owned by people that made a hundred million from trading] and assert that it cannot be done!! They have lots of proof that it cannot be done of course!! They have lots of experts lined up with lots of data and conclusions