My experience is that "intellectual property" in quantitative trading is worth very little, since everyone is doing more or less the same stuff. You should also reasonably expect that your strategy will decay as time goes on and so will the value of your intellectual property. The more straight-forward and liquid is your asset class, the quicker will be the decay of your strategy. This is especially true if you have been in the business for a couple years and most probably doing things that are pretty obvious.Quote from dude_03:
But exactly, the problem is that I don't have an actual track record, so I expect to be asked to give up the Intellectual Property...
The fact that you have read about famous quant blowups does not mean that every quantitative trader fails. Percentage-wise probably much fewer then general public that tried themselves at trading. Definitely fewer then people like yourself that can't even interpret the delivery schedule for a futures contract.Quote from TheMagican:
How many quants lost their pants in the history?it was a rethorical question.
Quote from sle:
1) My experience is that "intellectual property" in quantitative trading is worth very little, since everyone is doing more or less the same stuff.
2) You should also reasonably expect that your strategy will decay as time goes on and so will the value of your intellectual property.
3) The more straight-forward and liquid is your asset class, the quicker will be the decay of your strategy.
4) This is especially true if you have been in the business for a couple years and most probably doing things that are pretty obvious.

Quote from gmst:
1) My experience is that "intellectual property" in quantitative trading is worth very little, since everyone is doing more or less the same stuff.
2) You should also reasonably expect that your strategy will decay as time goes on and so will the value of your intellectual property.
3) The more straight-forward and liquid is your asset class, the quicker will be the decay of your strategy.
4) This is especially true if you have been in the business for a couple years and most probably doing things that are pretty obvious.
Quote from dude_03:
I have been working for >2y years as a quant in a prop desk in a bank, while developing a automated system overnight and on the weekend.
I have been paper trading my system at work for ~8months now, and it proved to be good - where with "good" I mean that even under some conservative assumptions, it proved to have good risk-adjusted performance.
Great, you would say, where's the problem...the problem is that for for a number of "political" reasons, I am not allowed to make the jump to trading where I am, nor I am given a realistic indication on when this could happen.
So I am evaluating my options, and would like to receive some advice by some of the very experienced guys populating this forum.
Of course I am not saying that the system is failure-proof, I haven't even traded it live yet (!), but at the very least is showing some great potential.
Current idea is to first start trading my own and possibly family money to develop some practicality with operational matters (not much $, but enough to trade with minimum quantities while having the right risk/capital profile).
The possibilities after that are:
-open a CTA, and start trading with my money to begin with. If it does well, I think I can find some relatively high-net-worth individuals willing to invest ("find" as in I know them directly or via a second person).
-join a prop firm. I am a bit concerned in this case on how Intellectual Property would be handled, especially because I don't have an actual track record to make them "trust" me. Also I am not sure on how much capital I might be given (any opinion/experience sharing on IP and capital matter in this case would be greatly appreciated of course...)
If everything goes very wrong, and in say 1year I have gone nowhere and lost/finished all the money, I hope to be able to find another job- timing for this is not great, but 2.5 years as a quant in a prop desk should be worth something.
Little background on the system:
currently intraday only, with 1-2 round trip per day per instrument;
operates on FX and fixed income futures;
Backtested on 12 years of data, overall Sharpe 2, win rate >~50%, average win/average loss = 4/3 (including transaction costs, bid/offer, slippage).
I believe these factors could make it quite marketable as different from most of other funds/CTAs...opinions pro/cons are more than welcome;
Personal Considerations:
Of course to do any of the above, I would have to quit my job, giving up the option of getting to trade in there.
I am on my late 20s and don't have family/mortgage to sustain yet, which helps in making the time for such a move right.
While I am kind of learning about markets where I am, the "theta" is quite high: the desk doesn't do much algo stuff, so I am learning about different styles (which I am not intended to pursue) and the idea that I am wasting my time (which I consider one of the most precious things one has) doing something that I don't like irritates me as hell.
Why I want to do it:
Interestingly, it's not for the money itself. A quant career can be very profitable and almost riskless/stress free, and mine is well launched at the moment. If we count the number of people who "made it" trading, I think odds say that I should stick to quant.
However, for me it's about doing something that I enjoy doing. I would be way happier to trade and earn less than following a different âricher- path.
Thanks in advance for any advice/suggestion/opinion/insult for being nuts
Quote from sle:
My experience is that "intellectual property" in quantitative trading is worth very little
Actually, most people in the industry know what RenTech is doing, plenty of people came and gone. I will note that there is a big difference between "public" and "published" - plenty of stuff out there is public but have not been published.Quote from maler:
Otherwise why is it impossible to find out what RenTech is doing,
or why were the turtles bound to silence for so many years
and as soon as they started talking their stuff stopped working,
or why Goldman sued the russian guy that stole their HFT code?
If IP was really that valuable, why would you be in a weak negotiating position? If you are essentially a machine that transforms coffee into money, every would be willing to open the doors.Quote from maler:
Unfortunately if you posses such IP but not the resources needed
to apply it, then you are in a weak negotiating position with a partner
that would bring in such resources (capital, infrastructure, flow etc.).
Unless you can go it alone, you may have to share or give access to such IP
to be able to pull any dollars from the markets at the end of the day.
Quote from sle:
If IP was really that valuable, why would you be in a weak negotiating position? If you are essentially a machine that transforms coffee into money, every would be willing to open the doors.
Maybe we are coming from difference perspectives (my background is BD and IB prop desks)? My expererience shows that usually IP is pretty much worthless without the provider of the "I". Once someone is gone, the strategies that he used to run are either dropped right away or slowly decays, unless there is a junior that is ready to step into his shoes (that I've seen numerous times).Quote from maler:
The weak negotiating position comes from the fact that once revealed,
there is no way to protect an original strategy.