Looking for Pro firm

Quote from cdcaveman:

Nah I wanna create some charts on open interest.. there changes.. on all expires over a probability distro.. in that spectral format in front of the undering chart.. in color .. like a heat map kinda thing with a distro lightly overlayed... if that makes and sense... all real time

ok, man, cool.. i still would lean on hiring that out instead of trying to learn to program it yourself... but if you like work----- good luck!
 
Quote from Mike_McDermott:

<< bla-bla deleted>>
The group does require the manager to put up some of their own risk capital - that's just the way their program works. It's a great way to boost assets under management (AUM) and begin working with an institutional-grade investor.
(a) if this is a first-loss provider, please state that explicitly
(b) what is the post-leverage split, please?

Thank you.
 
Quote from sle:

(a) if this is a first-loss provider, please state that explicitly
(b) what is the post-leverage split, please?

Thank you.


I don't know how accurate this is, but someone sent it to me regarding how this program works:



The basic structure of the program is as follows:
&#61623; The manager contributes an agreed&#8208;upon amount of risk capital that sits in a
managed account.
&#61623; This capital is then matched 9 to1 by the__institutional anchor – so a $1MM
contribution by the manager would result in a $9MM contribution by the
institutional anchor.
&#61623; Each month the manager receives 55% of the gains generated by the combined
managed account.__The institutional anchor keeps the other 45% of profits.
&#61623; For profitable months, the account is marked&#8208;to&#8208;market and both parties are
paid their portion of the profits – without disturbing the positions that are being
held at the end of the month.
&#61623; The manager’s capital sits in a “first loss” position during any months when
losses are posted.__In subsequent months the manager’s capital sits in a “first
gain” position as well – receiving all gains until losses are made up.
&#61623; This arrangement is designed so that the institutional anchor only realizes a
profit when the emerging manager__makes money.
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

I don't know how accurate this is, but someone sent it to me regarding how this program works:



The basic structure of the program is as follows:
&#61623; The manager contributes an agreed&#8208;upon amount of risk capital that sits in a
managed account.
&#61623; This capital is then matched 9 to1 by the__institutional anchor – so a $1MM
contribution by the manager would result in a $9MM contribution by the
institutional anchor.
&#61623; Each month the manager receives 55% of the gains generated by the combined
managed account.__The institutional anchor keeps the other 45% of profits.
&#61623; For profitable months, the account is marked&#8208;to&#8208;market and both parties are
paid their portion of the profits – without disturbing the positions that are being
held at the end of the month.
&#61623; The manager’s capital sits in a “first loss” position during any months when
losses are posted.__In subsequent months the manager’s capital sits in a “first
gain” position as well – receiving all gains until losses are made up.
&#61623; This arrangement is designed so that the institutional anchor only realizes a
profit when the emerging manager__makes money.

Yeah that's the standard and was identical to the Alchemy Ventures PDF file I posted.
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

They use boiler plate marketing/documents?

All the capital allocators seem to be using the EXACT same boiler plate. Change a few words here or there but not a lot of money is being spent on legal. LOL.
 
So how does the leverage scale up and down with the trades... how could you find the risk controls... ie. How many options can I buy and sell .. what about when you have a good long short portfolio with determine risk.. IE a big options book... what are the changes in margin related to these
 
Quote from Maverick74:

Yeah I honestly don't understand why traders do this stuff. For one, we all know trading is hard as hell no matter what anyone says and really requires 100% commitment. And the software space is competitive as hell. I don't see how one can do both. Even being good at one is near impossible. I'm not saying mike and jack are not good traders. But I can say from experience and everyone I know, pick one, not both!


We aren't software developers. I have some rusty programming skills but haven't used them in nearly a decade. We are putting significant intellectual property into the venture, guiding it and shaping it along the lines of ideas we have had and conceptual analysis ideas we have been thinking about for years, in respect to trading tools that either simply aren't out there, are not out there in the form we really want, or are currently only available through custom proprietary platforms. That doesn't mean messing around with code. Someone else is handling that.

Once again, appreciate the friendly concern, but there's really no need to worry. We're big boys. We eat our wheaties and do our homework. We've thought of all the "hey wait here's why it might not work" elements and 3x times more besides. We're a little bit smarter than that. Everything is going to be ok.
 
Quote from marketsurfer:

It's a powerful program, in fact, the most powerful ever offered to retail. The issue with replicating such a thing is obtaining the massive quantities of data needed--- that group owns the single largest trade data repository ever created-- it's simply not available anywhere for any price. Best wishes to you on the software, there is tremendous competition in that space, and I am not even talking institutional or "fact set" type info. surf


Apples and oranges. A significant aspect of what we're doing, they don't touch at all. And we already know enough about data sources for that not to be a worry. And they can't be too dominant in the marketspace anyway if I hadn't even heard of them before now.

Thanks for the concern though :)
 
Back
Top