I should not have used the word 'discretionary' in my previous post. My bad. I am a systematic manual intra-day trader. I have a statistical edge in what I trade intra-day -- that data is 'scientific' enough to me! The 'discretion' comes in me deploying the strategy not in the strategy itself ... don't want to go into anymore details here. Yes, I don't have a completely mechanical system. I don't care if a system is completely mechanical or not as long as the system has a statistical edge.
Again, just because you haven't found one (i.e. trend following system) does not mean they don't exist. Look around there are examples. No one will give you their 'edge' in order to prove to you that their trend-following system works. You will have to do that work yourself.
BTW, there have been so many papers cited in these forums on Momentum trading. Why not pick one for a mechanical 'scientifically' proven strategy? Cliff Asness still runs his fund using momentum strategies that are 'scientifically' proven. There are also academic work done on intra-day momentum strategies. Look them up and find a way to make them work for you if you are really interested. I hope that is 'short-term' enough for you.
Once again, the way you define 'trend' (or 'momentum') could, in by-itself', be an 'edge'.
Regards,
Monoid.
Last edited:
Back to trading now.