Murray Ruggiero
Sponsor
Intermarket analysis gets a bad rap because if you pick the correct predictive markets it works well most of the time except for these times it decouples. Even with these problems the winning percentages are very high. Let me give you an example I used in my April 1998 article.
I want to make a note because I am sure someone will that I am not showing a portfiolo here. I wanted to show what I did in my old article and since TradeStation could not do portfiolo analysis back then or even today, I did not do that much of it until I designed TradersStudio.
We used Silver to predict Thirty Year bond. We used my classic intermarket system with the parameters 14 for bonds and 26 for silver, shown in earlier post. This system did well since 1998 except in 2003. During this time both Silver and bonds rallied, they decoupled.
I have attached a year by year table ,which is referenced here.
You might say that the average of about 42700 per year since 1998, data used in article was though Dec 30, 1997 is not impressive and you would be correct. The problem is this decoupling. Another point is during the first five years out of sample it average over 45200.00 a year, which is not bad.
[ See 2003 problems in spreadsheet , plus chart attached]
These three trades took up over eight months and produced disaster, these trades could have been filtered out.
If you look at the attached screen shot you see two trades ,which failed when the market was trending. Intermarket analysis , the way I defined it is a counter trend methodology, it does bad when markets trend. We could have used correlation analysis or simple a trend following methodolgy to turn intermarket off when bonds trend. The winning percentages are huge, almost 70% overall.
The fact I am using a almost 8 year old set of parameters and that after a bad year with bonds are back in a trading range this relationship is producing historical normal returns, over 9K the first 8 months and is did make over 4K in 2004, you can see that intermarket analysis has promise, if you understand it.
I want to make a note because I am sure someone will that I am not showing a portfiolo here. I wanted to show what I did in my old article and since TradeStation could not do portfiolo analysis back then or even today, I did not do that much of it until I designed TradersStudio.
We used Silver to predict Thirty Year bond. We used my classic intermarket system with the parameters 14 for bonds and 26 for silver, shown in earlier post. This system did well since 1998 except in 2003. During this time both Silver and bonds rallied, they decoupled.
I have attached a year by year table ,which is referenced here.
You might say that the average of about 42700 per year since 1998, data used in article was though Dec 30, 1997 is not impressive and you would be correct. The problem is this decoupling. Another point is during the first five years out of sample it average over 45200.00 a year, which is not bad.
[ See 2003 problems in spreadsheet , plus chart attached]
These three trades took up over eight months and produced disaster, these trades could have been filtered out.
If you look at the attached screen shot you see two trades ,which failed when the market was trending. Intermarket analysis , the way I defined it is a counter trend methodology, it does bad when markets trend. We could have used correlation analysis or simple a trend following methodolgy to turn intermarket off when bonds trend. The winning percentages are huge, almost 70% overall.
The fact I am using a almost 8 year old set of parameters and that after a bad year with bonds are back in a trading range this relationship is producing historical normal returns, over 9K the first 8 months and is did make over 4K in 2004, you can see that intermarket analysis has promise, if you understand it.