OK fair enough. I made that assumption. I stand corrected if you are using fundamentals. But the math is still pretty fuzzy to me.
Kudos to MMs
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
OK fair enough. I made that assumption. I stand corrected if you are using fundamentals. But the math is still pretty fuzzy to me.
Who says it is one lot? It averages into a position in and out and has anywhere from 1 lot in the market to several, dynamically updating as the market expands and contracts. In fact it is humble in this way, admitting that any given entry may be bad. The problem is that the chains on the old NFV did not update to be more conservative when the market went strongly directionally. When it was doing well, it was killing it for six months straight. All the sourpusses showed up when it went bad.
I don't think you understand the old version of NFV. You need to spend time reading it to comment on it intelligently.
Well I won't keep beating this issue. Someone made the comment that you are out 400 handles since starting the thread and you never covered. I will admit I have not read much of the thread so it's possible that was hyperbole.
Let me end with this though and it's just a general comment and it applies to every trader. One of the worst markets you can have is one that is technically strong and fundamentally weak. And vice versa one that is technically weak but fundamentally strong. Because the technicals will blow out the trader before the fundamentals can save them.
To quote two of the best traders in the world, Bruce Kovner and George Soros, they only trade their fundamental views when the technicals agree with the fundamentals. If there is a dichotomy then they will not make the trade. Obviously whatever you think the fundamentals are, the technicals are about strong as we have ever had. At some point the technicals will change and when they line up with the fundamentals, the short trade will become a lot easier. This is not directed at your system but to the general trading public.
I did not see that comment. It is not down anywhere near 400 handles since its inception. It is down hard since I started shoring at 1089, and since then it has been in and out expanding and contracting its position size, and recently maxed out at 7 units shorts. GTS has been keeping score since then in a nice tabular form and you can look at this recent activity summarized nicely if you are so inclined. Before that, the system was up very strong. The loss is about 100 handles over the last eight months when it got caught after this very strong move.
Well, that is interesting. How do you quantify that? It seems that other than saying that the market is this way, there is no way to tell. In other words, it is only after the fact that you can tell, especially since markets are all about the future.
[raising hand]
I probably did. You are basing your whole model on a non-existing thing (FV), thus you are FUNDAMENTALLY wrong....
Please prove that there is such a thing as FV... This morning CNBC showed FV as -2 pts and futures were up 10 pts. If one shorted there, got his ass handled to him....
I'm assuming this question is in response to my comment about the market being technically strong. That is based simply on trend. Usually a good way to judge how strong or weak a market is, is to look at how many opportunities it gives one to enter. A market that goes up and doesn't let anyone in is a very strong market. Weak markets give you all sorts of long entries. LOL. The fact of the matter is the trend is up and it's smooth, very smooth. And it's not letting anyone in. That is a strong market.
Is there a way to mathematically state that? I can enter easily at any point in ES to the tune of several hundred contracts on the tightest possible spread. Same thing in the bond market. Same thing in just about any liquid instrument. Maybe you mean pullbacks?
Show me an equation that I can use. All you are saying is that momentum is strong. That is undeniable. But that is true only after the fact, and no one knows when the music stops. It just means you are a momentum trader, which can work and it clearly works here.
NFV is a mean reverting system, which means it acts against moves. The key is the edge required (spread between NFV(2) and SPX), and that may be the one ingridient that I am missing (NFV, not NFV(2) tries to deal with this with add/remove chains). For exampe, last nights ES trade was based on the slightest of edges. Bad move this time. I have talked extensively about this very issue dozens of times on this thread.
No, there really isn't a way to mathematically state that. LOL. If I could Nitro, if I could reduce it to a formula that if B is greater then A then C. We would all be billionaires and the markets simply don't work that way. It comes from experience. You watch thousands of markets and you begin to see what a strong trend looks like.
Nitro if there is a formula I can offer it's this. And this formula applies to trading, life, relationships, health, you name it.
Experience is the greatest edge. But to get experience, you need time. And to get time, you need discipline. Discipline affords you the time to gain the experience which will allow you to exploit the in-experience in everyone else.
That is the only formula I have found in my life that seems to have any value. Everything else is academic.