Well, luck follows the brave as they say. And it's pretty brave to use tech like TSL. I think milewski is probably well aware of the amount of previous "hyped up scams" that have existed on the markets and fooled people into wasting money for the past 100 years. Maybe if TSL isn't like that, and if it's truly innovative, well then he's way ahead of the rest of you. Considering he already profited from it, i'd say there's a pretty good chance he is! With all my studies on the subject, by now we all know my opinion. It's great to hear from a TSL user so that i can finalize that opinion.
Machine designed strategies. Do they work?
- Thread starter v75z52
- Start date
Well, luck follows the brave as they say. And it's pretty brave to use tech like TSL. I think milewski is probably well aware of the amount of previous "hyped up scams" that have existed on the markets and fooled people into wasting money for the past 100 years. Maybe if TSL isn't like that, and if it's truly innovative, well then he's way ahead of the rest of you. Considering he already profited from it, i'd say there's a pretty good chance he is! With all my studies on the subject, by now we all know my opinion. It's great to hear from a TSL user so that i can finalize that opinion.
Here is another example for XLF, which is an ETF that due to its price behavior I had trouble finding a good strategy for it. The PAL results are for 2% profit target and stop-loss, win rate > 63%, pf> 1.3 and trades > 27 in the in sample from 1998 to end of 2008:
In this case there are 5 long and 8 short patterns for those that complained before that the mix was not good. Naturally, they are all profitable in the in sample.
Here are the OOS results:
Only 3 patterns have pf < 1 and the overall pf I calculated comes out to 1.74 on a sample of 167 trades (OOS).
I recommend to users of other programs to post results that are verifiable with a demo version. Talk is cheap. Anyone can verify the PAL results I posted with a demo version only, he just won't be able to generate code. Search, backtesting, etc. are fully operational in the demo version.
I went with PAL because I could see what results I should expect while trying the demo version and I thought that was very honest from the part of the company.
Only 3 patterns have pf < 1 and the overall pf I calculated comes out to 1.74 on a sample of 167 trades (OOS).
I recommend to users of other programs to post results that are verifiable with a demo version. Talk is cheap. Anyone can verify the PAL results I posted with a demo version only, he just won't be able to generate code. Search, backtesting, etc. are fully operational in the demo version.
I went with PAL because I could see what results I should expect while trying the demo version and I thought that was very honest from the part of the company.
here is a example chart for you guys
its on BO:
PF 1.72
% profitable 54
avg month return 1200
std deviation of monthly return 1500
largest DD 5300$ (10/25/10)
a total of 7010 trades with 10 outlying
all market orders. only trading during market hours so will be some slippage but BO is tight spread so will be very minimum
its on BO:
PF 1.72
% profitable 54
avg month return 1200
std deviation of monthly return 1500
largest DD 5300$ (10/25/10)
a total of 7010 trades with 10 outlying
all market orders. only trading during market hours so will be some slippage but BO is tight spread so will be very minimum
Yes Bean Oil
use the pit until the early 2000's then stitch together globex for last 10 years or so.
use the pit until the early 2000's then stitch together globex for last 10 years or so.
The problem is I cannot verify your results. They may be actual but science says that results that cannot be verified mean little.
If TSL provided a demo that everyone here - not just those who have the program - could use it to verify the equity curve then your results would make sense.
Why don't you use as an example a more popular contract like ES?
IMO the OOS is too short compared to the IS. If this system is curve-fitted that amy not show in such a short in proportion OOS. You have only 6 years for the OOS in a total of 40 years. Most texts recommend 70%:30% proportion. That should bring you back to maybe 2001 for the start of the OOS.
IMO i would never trade a system that's already 30% OOS but just to prove a point here. ill do 60% OOS 40% IS.
