Thanks for the clarification. You're assuming the co-op would have to be powerful enough to move the market. Well, I think certain markets could be manipulated, as the banks do now, and when I say 'manipulated' I of course mean nothing underhand in this. It is having the size to create subtle biases and exploiting reactions to these. A pooled account of 5000,000 say, that has buying power of 50,000,000, say could, I believe, if operating with the right infastructure and on the right market have a considerable advantage over me or, dare I say, you.
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.
'I Have A Dream'- to all futures traders
- Thread starter cap'ncod
- Start date
Thanks for the clarification. You're assuming the co-op would have to be powerful enough to move the market. Well, I think certain markets could be manipulated, as the banks do now, and when I say 'manipulated' I of course mean nothing underhand in this. It is having the size to create subtle biases and exploiting reactions to these. A pooled account of 5000,000 say, that has buying power of 50,000,000, say could, I believe, if operating with the right infastructure and on the right market have a considerable advantage over me or, dare I say, you.
Quote from cap'ncod:
This doesn't make sense. I understand and appreciate what you're getting at but the issue is the ability to 'weather' the storms, just like a yacht. The smaller the boat the more vulnerable it is to the conditions. As a little retailer. our 'splash' is often the slight ripple as the tsunami of bank power drowns us.
Completly wrong. Jessica Watson, an Aussie, went around the globe (23,500 nautical miles) in a 33 foot pink boat, all by herself, unassisted, nonstop. She was on the water for 210 days, simply an amazing fantastic adventure for a teenie bopper.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJS9k6EXZMY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UaA4Q4P5uc&feature=related
Ya gotta love youth, embrace it, it is fleeting.
Quote from bighog:
Completly wrong. Jessica Watson, an Aussie, went around the globe (23,500 nautical miles) in a 33 foot pink boat, all by herself, unassisted, nonstop. She was on the water for 210 days, simply an amazing fantastic adventure for a teenie bopper.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sJS9k6EXZMY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6UaA4Q4P5uc&feature=related
Ya gotta love youth, embrace it, it is fleeting.
Hey bighog, I'd love to embrace youth, but youth no longer wants to embrace me! Reminds me of our very own Elen McArthur, who as it happens learnt the ropes only a few miles from me. She's a gutsy one for sure but to return to metaphor, she had an enormous amount of technology to assist her. It's like you can surf the web up on everest now. It won't be long before they'll be a Macdonalds up at base camp. All these feats are becoming easier to accomplish, aren't they, with the right equipment and support infastructure. Now when Mallory hiked up that bad boy with nothing but a stout pair of boots and a wooly hat, well...
Last year there was quite a good set up if you followed the 17.000 market order / per minute strategy. That was quite a good indicator to "influence" ES movements. But, I suppose everybody has observed volumes in the last couple of weeks and month - there is much more liquidity in futures markets.
Must have to do with the fact that this year the largest part of hedge fund AUM´s strategy´s ( about $250 billion ) are committed to managed futures ( according to Barclayhedge and Eurekahedge ).
3000 is not firepower. That´s what we execute for breakfast.
Must have to do with the fact that this year the largest part of hedge fund AUM´s strategy´s ( about $250 billion ) are committed to managed futures ( according to Barclayhedge and Eurekahedge ).
3000 is not firepower. That´s what we execute for breakfast.
Quote from cap'ncod:
This doesn't make sense. I understand and appreciate what you're getting at but the issue is the ability to 'weather' the storms, just like a yacht. The smaller the boat the more vulnerable it is to the conditions. As a little retailer. our 'splash' is often the slight ripple as the tsunami of bank power drowns us.
i'm not talking about making money off of our ripples- i'm talking about making money off of the tsunami. as you suggest by the word it is a big move, so as you see it form go with, as you see it has already formed and matured start fading- try not to get caught at the beginning of the middle fading. it's worked for me for 6 years. as you get larger the market is all about a fight for liquidity- move the market a ways, then give up edge in the spreads to force the market to give you the liquidity to get out of your scalp- buy back your spreads at a loss- but much smaller than the amount you made on the scalp move. so pick at those spreads they give up to get out of their trades.
Quote from ASusilovic:
Last year there was quite a good set up if you followed the 17.000 market order / per minute strategy. That was quite a good indicator to "influence" ES movements. But, I suppose everybody has observed volumes in the last couple of weeks and month - there is much more liquidity in futures markets.
Must have to do with the fact that this year the largest part of hedge fund AUM´s strategy´s ( about $250 billion ) are committed to managed futures ( according to Barclayhedge and Eurekahedge ).
3000 is not firepower. That´s what we execute for breakfast.
Accepted. But: why do we have to get hung up on ES. So many other markets that could be looked into. 50,000,000 buying power might not be much in ES but Z, FDAX, CL etc? You've basically acknowledged the superiority of having size. Not only through sheer trading volumes but the superior infastructure to leverage it. A fully automated approach that can buy into institutional infastructure is what I'm thinking. The idea of trading in and out of the market all day every day, with the speed and accuracy of banks. Truly competing with them. The retail guy sits and waits for a set-up. Could be hours. Meanwhile the big hedgies and banks have made 500 trades. And the biggest problem for the retail is the inability to leverage capital through higher frequency approaches (will always be front run) coupled with the institutions ability to swing those big clubs around the key pivots, suckering the dreamers into believing the bottom or tops in. They all know how the retail thinks and sweats and how his little stops are 2 or 3 pts away.
Quote from cap'ncod:
Well, I think certain markets could be manipulated, as the banks do now, and when I say 'manipulated' I of course mean nothing underhand in this. It is having the size to create subtle biases and exploiting reactions to these. A pooled account of 5000,000 say, that has buying power of 50,000,000, say could, I believe, if operating with the right infastructure and on the right market have a considerable advantage over me or, dare I say, you.
The ink on your LLC agreement would not be dry until the CFTC would charge your group with collusion and trying to manipulate the market. They would require your group to register as a CPO if everyone is sharing the profits/losses. If each account is an individual account, someone would have to be registered as a CTA and make the trading decisions solely by himself with allocation of the trades. You could not organize with the purpose of trading and everyone openly trying to trade the same contract at the same time with the intent of creating a 'subtle biases and exploiting' the results of your action. This would be illegal.
Quote from limitdown:
very noble thought and challenge / invitation
as one stated even 10,000 / 30,000 in ES means nothing.
let's practice
ok?
here's $100,000,000
that's 100 million.
how will you allocate it?
keep in mind that some idiot with $2.4 billion hit the ES market and caused / contributed heavily to the one day blip.
ok, enough time (that was in real time mind you)
you would use the full size, pit traded contract so as to hid your true origin and source of funds / participation, NOT the ECN(s).
you would leverage no more than 60% of your active position in front markets (not to be confused with front contract traded month)
you would use your remaining 40% in reserves (that's all that I will say for free on these threads)
now, with those parameters, go and recalculate your disbursement of funds into trading vehicles (contracts, positions, etc.)
Thanks for posting. Do you mean use the services of a local or electronically trade the full size contract? Why would using an ecn be a bad idea (e.g. why not use, say, CQG's infastructure)? Finally, do you think a direct connection to the exchange's api and a spread strategy (pairing correlated markets. Could be different exchanges) would be a useful idea? Thanks.
Quote from chartman:
The ink on your LLC agreement would not be dry until the CFTC would charge your group with collusion and trying to manipulate the market. They would require your group to register as a CPO if everyone is sharing the profits/losses. If each account is an individual account, someone would have to be registered as a CTA and make the trading decisions solely by himself with allocation of the trades. You could not organize with the purpose of trading and everyone openly trying to trade the same contract at the same time with the intent of creating a 'subtle biases and exploiting' the results of your action. This would be illegal.
Thanks for the clarification. How do the banks and big hedgies get away with it then? If a CTA traded 1000 individual accounts simultaneously then surely he could trade any market he wanted. It's just buying power after all? GS has billions the co-op would have mere millions to leverage.