BWolinsky Trading
- Thread starter bwolinsky
- Start date
- Status
Magna
Administrator
Guys,
If you would like to discuss strategy or the described trading system, no problem. If, instead, you want to make personal attacks, then we have a problem. All such posts will be removed, and it's best if this thread bothers you then please put the OP on ignore. But the childish name-calling is done (and that applies in both directions).
Magna
If you would like to discuss strategy or the described trading system, no problem. If, instead, you want to make personal attacks, then we have a problem. All such posts will be removed, and it's best if this thread bothers you then please put the OP on ignore. But the childish name-calling is done (and that applies in both directions).
Magna
Magna,
Lets be fair. My comments were rude, but, the fact is this guy is not being truthful.
He's here trying to push/sell his system. To add, he's made up a "VC Funding Group" that has funded this thing with 5mil imaginary money (he wants us to believe its real money). First he claims it has happened... later we find out no such thing has happened. This is all an attempt to lure suckers into his "advising/money management" scheme. He then goes around bashing other members on different threads who actually have something of value to contribute, and to top it all off he claims to have the best system in the world, which has a 37% draw down and hasn't made money in over 1.5 years.
Not that anyone would fall for this BS, god forbid, but at least keep the portions of my post that stated facts.
I apologize for getting childish, but come'on, the best system in the world and guidance to how we can pay for a sub. at C2, and how its backed by institutional money??? This is shilling at its finest.
Mike
I checked out C2;
7 systems; only 3 show as profitable.
Of these:
the Superbands hasn't been active for a year.
the pair trading scalper has not been profitable in 2009 looks to be down about 10k
the other pair trading one has only one trade. Tough to rate a system with only one trade. However it was a good trade, but seeing as how all the other systems don't seem to be making any money there is room for doubt.
Ok... let's discuss.
This system isn't pairs trading at all... it's a simple overbought / oversold system that actually has NOTHING to do with pairs. The backtest takes advantage of the inherent legerage of the instruments to make performance look much better than it actually is. Mean reversion hasn't work so well the second half of this year so all systems like this have gone through a drawdown. It ain't pairs trading dude.
So... BeauWo... discuss?
This system isn't pairs trading at all... it's a simple overbought / oversold system that actually has NOTHING to do with pairs. The backtest takes advantage of the inherent legerage of the instruments to make performance look much better than it actually is. Mean reversion hasn't work so well the second half of this year so all systems like this have gone through a drawdown. It ain't pairs trading dude.
So... BeauWo... discuss?
You're not very good at reading comprehension. I'll specificaly address any and all CFA references. I have never stated I have my CFA Charter. I have only completed Level I, and I call myself a CFA Candidate in every reference to the curriculum. I don't call it dropping out. I intend to come back to it in a couple years. I'm actually waiting to see if they revise the Level II exam from Case Studies to straight multiple Choice, but either way I will pass eventually. It's very likely you couldn't pass it, but you'll never know unless you try.
What was announced was that a co-investor would be willing to partner with another one of my clients. As I said, it is true that they submitted a letter of interest. They have not yet replied to my letter of committment. I thought they'd be quick to work with me, but that hasn't happened.
On top of all that, I manage millions of dollars at Fidelity as an RIA Rep for K.C. Capital Management, Inc. through SCF Investment Advisors.
I don't know what planet you live on, where making 1% per month is doable when the market drawsdown 56% at the same time.
I also did a cursory search for C2 systems older than 1095 days, or 3 years, annualizing at greater than 200%, and I only find Princeton Capital, but the drawdown is around 32%, so my statement still stands. Timac is in there, but at 89% drawdown completely unacceptable.
Get with it, Mike, the original Paris Trading QID QLD Scalper is gone, and has been replaced with what I believe is the best system in the world: <b>Pairs Trading QID QLD 2.0</b>. If you'd like to follow it, you're welcome to, and you can also hit me up with my ET username on covestor, as well. The original was probably 3-4 systems. Core was always the same, but the 2.0 version adds another level to the idea of volatility based overbought, oversold indicators.
I have never lied on the internet about anything, and if you go back through my posts, you'll see that it's all consistent with what I'm telling you. It's not my task to get you to comprehend what I've wrote.
I don't actively promote systems here. They just happen to appear that way, because I have a unique method in naming them, that what I call it here, I call it on C2, Covestor, and wl4.wealth-lab.com, consistently.
You know, Mike, I would invite you to post your research. I'm sure it looks good, but I doubt it's at the current level of my QID and QLD system.
I would ask you that if I didn't have very detailed statistics down to the APD stat of the backtest to show, that that wouldn't alleviate some of your doubts? I know a good system when I see one, and it has taken me <b>years</b> to get a market order script to produce results like what's showing, not just as a backtest, but on a walk-forward basis. I try to offer a tradeslist, because I feel that it gives each prospective subscriber insight into the system. The tradeslist you see is very representative of live trading. Your results would not differ materially from what's shown in the backtest due to the liquidity of QID and QLD. After the Q's, these are some of the most traded securities in the world, so what makes you think you'd have a slippage problem? There'd be some, and in my experience, they've balanced out. What I've tried to add to this thread is a measure of slippage I can come back to to see if a nickel here and there is a problem. I can post .1 per share commission if that would make you feel any better. At futurestruth.com they add a whole tick of slippage to everybody's result <b>per side</b>, and my feeling is that 0.1 is the max it's ever going to be.
Here's .1 per share commission:
Long + Short
Starting Capital $25,000.00
Ending Capital $546,660.96
Net Profit $521,660.96
Net Profit % 2086.64%
Annualized Gain % 149.76%
Exposure 51.93%
Cash Interest $0.00
Margin Loan Interest $0.00
Total Commission ($173,759.80)
DividendsPaid $0.00
Number of Trades 87
Avg Profit/Loss $5,996.10
Avg Profit/Loss % 2.20%
Avg Bars Held 2.82
Winning Trades 63
Winning % 72.41%
Gross Profit $998,751.74
Avg Profit $15,853.20
Avg Profit % 4.55%
Avg Bars Held 2.95
Max Consecutive 9
Losing Trades 24
Losing % 27.59%
Gross Loss ($477,090.78)
Avg Loss ($19,878.78)
Avg Loss % -3.96%
Avg Bars Held 2.46
Max Consecutive 2
Max Drawdown ($79,157.81)
Max Drawdown Date 10/28/2009
Max Drawdown % -22.12%
Max Drawdown % Date 11/3/2008
Wealth-Lab Score 224.6184
RAR 288.4051
Profit Factor 2.0934
Recovery Factor 6.5901
Payoff Ratio 1.149
Sharpe Ratio 1.8304
Ulcer Index 7.298
WL Error Term 8.92
WL Reward Ratio 16.7894
Luck Coefficient 3.4507
Pessimistic Rate of Return 2.1892
Equity Drop Ratio 0.0278
Now I really don't think even in the worst case that you'd have any problems being profitable trading that system. All that happens is the win percentage is a little lower. So, it goes back to my rule of thumb of cutting APR in half, and see if you'd still like to trade it keeping drawdown the same.
You'd be comparing Apples to Oranges by looking at each system and aggregating them together. Each system has nothing at all to do with the other.
Well, I hope by you watching what I do with my real money, you'd see I only ever traded in QID and QLD.
Beau,
With all due respect, I wouldn't have even gone down this road had it not been for the sheer size of your unfoudned ego. Your attitude is one of the worst I've come across. If it weren't for the constant selling of yourself and your system, as well as the comments on other threads where you put other people down and become confrontational, I'd leave you alone. But, face it Beau, you're asking for it and you're recieving it. There are at least a few people here who question what it is that you're after and how you're going about getting it.
As far as your CFA is concerned, for your sake, let's not compare educational achievements. You are seriously disadvantaged here, Beau. I do not go around stating what I've accomplished and I certainly do not use my professional/academic credentials to justify my condescention towards others as you often do. You really have no idea...
Frankly, what you have going for yourself at the moment is the ability to attract attention to yourself. However, have you noticed its mainly negative attention? Do you ever question why that is?
Think about that for a while and set your ego aside while you think.
As far as my research is concerned, I have little incentive to reveal it anywhere nor to anyone. You see Beau, I have been trading for a while and have made decent money from it - its not paper money from a hypo track record nor is it from a simulated backtest. Its real money Beau. Its my livlihood and I don't treat it like some BS marketing/self-aggrandizing game.
Also, since you have Admin privliges at C2, you've deleted the post where you claim you've actually recieved VC funding. And secondly, I'm not, nor was I ever a vendor, I put up an old system on C2 that a poster from another forum called me out on. I proved him wrong and won the bet. Bet's over and so is my participation in C2.
Mike
Magna, this guy lies. He hides his tracks and then lies again... like another poster mentioned, he is seriously degrading the quality of this site.
- Status