BWolinsky Trading

Cutten · Jun 29, 2009

Quote from bwolinsky:

Exactly, that's what backtesting is for. It's to help see how much you might lose, but as to blowing out an account, not likely, especially on ETFs, and in line with backtested norms.

And, to even better answer your question, I knew a quantitative finance manager of the hilliard lyons senbanc fund. He didn't believe in backtesting, but had he done it would have seen his model lose nearly everything every ten years. That ticker is SENBX. Backtesting hasn't been available to professionals till recently. It's gaining acceptance, especially for pairs trading and fundamental models.

I'm just saying, you seem to be bragging a little. Usually that hinders rather than helps performance. Best to just focus on the work and if you are good, let the results speak for themselves.

SideShowBob · Jun 30, 2009

Quote from Cutten:

I'm just saying, you seem to be bragging a little. Usually that hinders rather than helps performance. Best to just focus on the work and if you are good, let the results speak for themselves.

Bragging is Beau's thing. If he spent as much time testing/trading as he spent spouting off about what a wonderful trader he was he'd probably do a lot better. It's tough to trade when you're writing "I'm the best pairs trader ever" posts 24/7.

bwolinsky · Jun 30, 2009

Quote from SideShowBob:

Bragging is Beau's thing. If he spent as much time testing/trading as he spent spouting off about what a wonderful trader he was he'd probably do a lot better. It's tough to trade when you're writing "I'm the best pairs trader ever" posts 24/7.

Seriously, SSB, how long do you think it takes to compose a post? I type 70+WPM. This is not hard to write a lot.

And, on c2 and elsewhere, I've not seen a more profitable application of pair trading methodology.

SideShowBob · Jun 30, 2009

Quote from bwolinsky:

Seriously, SSB, how long do you think it takes to compose a post? I type 70+WPM. This is not hard to write a lot.

And, on c2 and elsewhere, I've not seen a more profitable application of pair trading methodology.

So in response to a post saying you brag too much, you brag about how fast you type?

Seriously Beau, tone it down a little bit and you'll get more respect. There are traders on this board who make $100K+ every year, but do you see them talking about what wonderful traders they are (OK a few do)? Chill out and let your results speak for themselves.

bwolinsky · Jun 30, 2009

Well, I seem to be having some problems placing trades out of WL5 onto C2.

The first trade on a forward basis for Cash Cow was to buy SDS at 10:45 at 55.37 and sell at 12:45 at 55.73. EST.

I'm working with WL5 to determine why these orders weren't placed on c2.

atticus · Jun 30, 2009

Quote from bwolinsky:

Seriously, SSB, how long do you think it takes to compose a post? I type 70+WPM. This is not hard to write a lot.

And, on c2 and elsewhere, I've not seen a more profitable application of pair trading methodology.

By your absurd definition of pairs trading, perhaps. There are 100s of systems on C2 doing better than yours.

bwolinsky · Jun 30, 2009

Quote from atticus:

By your absurd definition of pairs trading, perhaps. There are 100s of systems on C2 doing better than yours.

Have another look at the c2 grid. There's definitely not 100's.

bwolinsky · Jun 30, 2009

Quote from bwolinsky:

Well, I seem to be having some problems placing trades out of WL5 onto C2.

The first trade on a forward basis for Cash Cow was to buy SDS at 10:45 at 55.37 and sell at 12:45 at 55.73. EST.

I'm working with WL5 to determine why these orders weren't placed on c2.

I'll chalk this as a missed trade. Apparently the way I was doing with Strategy Monitor does not actually monitor real time streaming data.... Great.

So I've opened the trades back up on its own chart, and I don't anticipate this problem again.

Either way, I'll be starting a new system under the same name, as it appears to have missed the first trade.

atticus · Jun 30, 2009

Quote from bwolinsky:

Have another look at the c2 grid. There's definitely not 100's.

You're 71 out of 184 stock systems based upon annual return [21.9%]. Barely in the top 4 deciles. There are 100s of systems, in all combined-categories, that beat your return. Now, how is yours the best, because it's yours?

bwolinsky · Jun 30, 2009

Quote from atticus:

You're 71 out of 184 stock systems based upon annual return [21.9%]. Barely in the top 4 deciles. There are 100s of systems, in all combined-categories, that beat your return. Now, how is yours the best, because it's yours?

Have a look at the number of trades, and the hold time. It's easy to trade. That's mainly why.