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.
How much capital required to generate $200/day pair trading?
- Thread starter lolatency
- Start date
You need $8,000 in CME emini'sQuote from lolatency:
Just a poll --
Assuming you routinely found such pairs to trade. How much of a capital base would you require to say, average $200/day? Informal guess -- I know it depends on random variables, but a guess with regard to the current market would be nice to poll.
Quote from Syprik:
Are you just severly incompetent, or misinterpreted what I use as a "baseline" comparison model?
Buy bar that closes "above" 20-monthly or 200-daily, or sell bar that closes below 20-monthly or 200-daily.
Ex, SP500 20-monthly from the date you selected (3/20/2007) to current entails 2 trades:
1. Long SPY 1425 April 1 2007
Flat 1375 Jan 31 2008
Gain/Loss: -3.51%
2. Short SPY 1375 Jan 31 2008 - Trade remains valid short @ 870
Gain/Loss: +36.77%
Net Gain/Loss from your 3/20/2007: +33.26%
200SMA is approximately +375-400 SP points net over that same time frame.
If you misinterpreted, no problem. If not, you are an absolute joke.
I took it to mean a 20 day and 200 day SMA cross, and everyone else would from your original quote. That's not the system you had described originally. Either way the system you described had only 1 trade, making it irrelevant, especially considering it's pitiful performance over several years. Comparing a system, even if I misinterpreted it, with 2 trades is not the same as comparing to a system with more than 30 trades in its history. Any system, no matter what you're logic would be, has to have way more than 2 trades to say anything. I got a nice one, sell short spy at 155.7. Two trades, one many year ago, and one recently, but does that mean it's relevant? The same applies here when discussing a 2 trade system over a two year period.
Quote from TSGannGalt:
I personally find it bothering how you continue to post / quote a PM in public.
It's really him that has the problem. He can't accept that he has no proof on the net one way or the other whether he's a profitable or not. Judging by his lack of understanding of 3rd party verification he's obviously been a losing trader.
PS: I'm up 30% this month.
Quote from bwolinsky:
I took it to mean a 20 day and 200 day SMA cross, and everyone else would from your original quote. That's not the system you had described originally. Either way the system you described had only 1 trade, making it irrelevant, especially considering it's pitiful performance over several years. Comparing a system, even if I misinterpreted it, with 2 trades is not the same as comparing to a system with more than 30 trades in its history. Any system, no matter what you're logic would be, has to have way more than 2 trades to say anything. I got a nice one, sell short spy at 155.7. Two trades, one many year ago, and one recently, but does that mean it's relevant? The same applies here when discussing a 2 trade system over a two year period.
Instead of taking the high road and admitting you misinterpreted a very straight-forward sentence:
Quote from Syprik: a baseline SP500 200MA daily ***or*** 20-period monthly directional strategy (close above = long, close below = short),
you choose to go off on yet another arrogant tangent of irrelevance in attempt to divert attention from your blatant error(s). The "or" throws out any possible realm of 200MA daily / 20-period monthly cross.
You then sputter on about "two trades is not enough to test system"...wow, you figure that out all by your lonesome? Was just employing your out-of-the-blue "3/20/2007" discretionary date for comparison purposes. In reality, those baselines get tested back on decade time lines, not 3 yrs.
Reading comprehension is your friend. The shovel helping you dig deeper is not.
Why do I even address such incompetence. I know better to pass over ET hackery.
Quote from Syprik:
Instead of taking the high road and admitting you misinterpreted a very straight-forward sentence:
you choose to go off on yet another arrogant tangent of irrelevance in attempt to divert attention from your blatant error(s). The "or" throws out any possible realm of 200MA daily / 20-period monthly cross.
You then sputter on about "two trades is not enough to test system"...wow, you figure that out all by your lonesome? Was just employing your out-of-the-blue "3/20/2007" discretionary date for comparison purposes. In reality, those baselines get tested back on decade time lines, not 3 yrs.
Reading comprehension is your friend. The shovel helping you dig deeper is not.
Why do I even address such incompetence. I know better to pass over ET hackery.
Whatever. I'm 11k richer today, and up 39% this month. Go back to the beginning of the thread if you want proof. You can also reference what the original question was, which asked about how much capital is required to make $200 per day pair trading.
Such systems from the peanut gallery are not the subject of this thread.
We are discussing making $200 per day on a pairs system. When you have a system that works, even if you have down 10% months, months like this one come along and make it all worth it. Being up 39% is a pretty good month for anybody.
If anyone disputes that, they don't know what they're talking about. Then you got yahoos that come on here and talk about making $200 per day with $200 of capital. That's about the extent of the sophistication of the posters on this board, so when they actually talk to someone on the subject at hand, they don't like the fact that that person knows how to do something that nobody else does. That person also does it better than everyone else in the world. Furthermore, you present actual results and it still doesn't matter.
Bunch of retards on this board. They asked the question, I gave the answer, only they're disappointed b/c it wasn't some smaller number like what they're trading with, so they try to rationalize and tell themselves what I'm saying isn't true. At the end of the day, the more money you have the more you'll make. $200 is a nice goal for consistency with about 169k to start.
The main mistake I see the traders on this board make, is failing to plan, and forcing themselves to trade everyday. Trading everyday is only beneficial when you thought about it for a long time the day before. When you start from that mindset to only do something you've thought about, trading is cake. It's a waiting game. Hyperactivity hasn't been shown to be anymore profitable than the swing trading I've taken the years to learn.
Quote from bwolinsky:
Whatever. I'm 11k richer today, and up 39% this month. Go back to the beginning of the thread if you want proof. You can also reference what the original question was, which asked about how much capital is required to make $200 per day pair trading.
Such systems from the peanut gallery are not the subject of this thread.
We are discussing making $200 per day on a pairs system. When you have a system that works, even if you have down 10% months, months like this one come along and make it all worth it. Being up 39% is a pretty good month for anybody.
If anyone disputes that, they don't know what they're talking about. Then you got yahoos that come on here and talk about making $200 per day with $200 of capital. That's about the extent of the sophistication of the posters on this board, so when they actually talk to someone on the subject at hand, they don't like the fact that that person knows how to do something that nobody else does. That person also does it better than everyone else in the world. Furthermore, you present actual results and it still doesn't matter.
Bunch of retards on this board. They asked the question, I gave the answer, only they're disappointed b/c it wasn't some smaller number like what they're trading with, so they try to rationalize and tell themselves what I'm saying isn't true. At the end of the day, the more money you have the more you'll make. $200 is a nice goal for consistency with about 169k to start.
Figured you were just a kid. Now you get to join the likes of stock_trader on ignore list.
Quote from Syprik:
Figured you were just a kid. Now you get to join the likes of stock_trader on ignore list.
If you go the the site listed on his ET profile, he is 24.
He may be on his way....but he should not be selling it.
Here is a review by someone who used his system:
"Don't fall for it. 1) Real-life losing trades far exceed 95% win rate of backtest results developer emails subscribers. 2) Developer's 2 other systems are losers 3) Appears developer has integrity issues: bashes other c2 systems. Nov 29 2007 emails subscribers, "This (trade) is going to be a piece of cake." Trade loses money immediately. 4) Emails subscribers a backtest severely lacking in robustness, includes only 2 years of data. 5) Name is misleading, neither scalping system nor pairs trading, but a fair value prediction system. 6) Directional price prediction is, according to most research is futile (Fama). 7) Sometimes parks orders until 9:28 EST, implying system allows for discretion. 8) Seems to have a limited history as a developer, appearing to have graduated college in 2006."
His average loser is 150% of his average winner.
Nothing like a disgruntled former customer to shed some light. bwolinsky have you ever thought of doing YouTube videos everyday? This would go well with your C2