Pabst's Blue Ribbon Trades

Crap trading on my part but I've picked up 12k the past 2 days since the Fed. I covered 10 of my 15 ZB shorts this morning at 11115. A trade I certainly wish I could un-do....
 
Long ES puts, short YM, long NQ. I've got enough on that it'll matter.

Flat Treasuries. I hate 'em BUT I think stocks are going to get hit HARD starting now. Bonds are on sell but they could do some breathing through all this. I love tech relative the rest of the list but that could change by the time I stop typing. I'll trade all night.

Watch Wheat. If the bull hold on wheat breaks, stocks will follow. Stocks don't fear inflation, they revel in it. Commodities led stocks up. They'll lead stocks down. If Gold, crude, grains pop, I'll quickly rethink stocks. For now I think the Dow plunges. Not sure about NQ. Look at the spread 1/2000-3/2000 for reference.
 
PP, 4.50% on 10 year note... expected....but based on how equity market behaves, I eventually expect yields on the 10 year to be higher then 5.3% next year.
 
NQ is Wheat.

Which sector would you want to be in before earnings.

NQ will end this run around 2130. That's where I'll unwind my spreads. Index margins suck BTW. The ES put spreads were legged (1525-1490's) so that even if ES ramps a bit with NQ I'll be ok.

Spectre: I don't discount Bonds rallying quite a bit more if my stock take is correct. Last October saw a similar selloff and the Bond market recovered and made new move highs EOY.
 
Quote from Pa(b)st Prime:

Rather than be a duplicitous fuck, I'll give you the down and dirty. Until the day before the discount rate cut, my account was as high as 240k. Today it's 90k.

Yea, I'm freaked out.

Here was the problem many Bond traders had. As we all know, during periods of turbulence the common profile is lower stock and higher Treasury prices. When the dust settles and stocks find a base then the flight to quality bid abandons Treasuries, forcing yields up a bit. Well this time was different. This was all about credit spreads. Great news for Treasuries, a bit bad for stocks, but collapse city for non guaranteed loans. RIMM doesn't care about foreclosures in Detroit. Treasuries do.

Going into the fateful opex Friday of August 17th I was short ES and short ZB. As I've recounted on ET that day I added to my short ES on the spike and covered 29pts lower 42 seconds later. By EOD on the 17th I was flat ES. Bonds as some of you remember, broke down to 109.08 on the news. Stocks up, Bonds down. Normal. The PROBLEM though is I stayed short the Bonds and while SPX is now 70 points higher than the 17th, Bond futures also rallied 5 and half points! There've been many times the past month that I didn't buy stocks when I was bullish because I thought my short Bonds would come in enough that I didn't need the extra exposure from ES. Big mistake. The stocks went up but Bonds didn't break.

Of course here and there I've sold ES and subsidized some of the Bond losses. That fact only shows how significant the Treasury losses in toto have been. I made a stand into employment. I was short the curve from Fed Funds to Bonds and on top of it I financed the purchase of 110 puts with the premium allocated from the naked short sale of 114 calls. My bad. I had told dhpar on this or another thread that a similar pattern to last years blow off highs in Sept could be in the offing. Instead of taking a loss at a time when my work suggested higher prices I instead added to losing shorts.

Now I'm paralyzed. I'm flat and trying to decide if I should take the advice of friends who suggest I just scalp 10 lots of ZB and ZN on the screen and be content making a thou a day or if I should continue trying to get rich. My retirement years are set so I suppose I should just relax and have fun.

I've had a wild last year. I went from 1 lots in NQ to a lucky Corn trade last fall and then overtraded a few 20 lots in the Bonds and EuroFx around the new year so that I went from essentially zero to 160k in 10 months. Perhaps this is a normal drawdown after such a climb. Jeez a 2 point move on 30 ZB and I'm back to a buck and half which is where I've spent most the year. Maybe I'll just teach......

I know it's easy to say in hindsight, but it sounds like you are pushing too hard with average or difficult trades. Big size is best reserved for those rare occasions where everything lines up in your favour e.g. you have a truly contrarian position, price action is strongly in your favour, and the market tone keeps confirming your position (e.g. if you are short bonds, they should rally sluggishly on bull news, but break hard on bear news...and drift lower on no news). As soon as the trade becomes hard or risky, you gotta cut back.

One good point that Cramer made is "avoid battlegrounds". Tough trades where 2 points of view are equally strongly held, and the market ebbs and flows between them. For example stocks this summer are a big fight between the recession camp and the cheap valuation/low rates/falling dollar camp. Is it better to bet massively on who is gonna win that one? Or to stand aside and try to pick up some profits by fading whenever one camp gets to an extreme.

The really good trades usually don't have to be forced (at least not once they get momentum behind them; if you are early then it is different). I'd suggest trying conservative trading on modest size, trying to "put beans in bags", just bide your time and grind out some income. Wait for the 2-5 trades per year where everything is set up just right, then get in and build up size by pyramiding as the market action confirms your view whilst sentiment stays sceptical. Let the market action, rather than your own opinions, determine when you trade size.

Looking at this year, there were only really a few great themes to play. Long oil from $50, short housing, long wheat, buying stocks (esp emerging markets) after the Feb mini-panic, long China, and long stock volatility since summer. If you look at them, one thing most had in common was that they were not difficult trades to hold onto once they got going. Only China stocks had any big scary corrections to fake you out. And the market was fairly complacent/sceptical of each one turning out the way it did.

By contrast, lots of people are bearish on bonds. That doesn't mean they won't go down, but it does mean there is an inherent bid simply due to the crowded nature of the short position. That suggests it is better to play on limited size or with limited risk (options/spreads) and be demanding about entry price, and not too greedy on exit. It won't be a forgiving trade like the ones listed above. So I'd recommend playing more conservative until you find another trade where all the ducks are lined up, then work on milking that for all you can. You got on the grains early - did you trade them as aggressively and with the size that you used in your bond short?
 
Thanks, Cutton. You of course are 100% right. There's something about me that seems to seek the most difficult trade. I've been scaling it down and although it's boring (I've made a grand total of two trades since Monday) I'm getting my swing back by staying spread.

Quote from Cutten:

I know it's easy to say in hindsight, but it sounds like you are pushing too hard with average or difficult trades. Big size is best reserved for those rare occasions where everything lines up in your favour e.g. you have a truly contrarian position, price action is strongly in your favour, and the market tone keeps confirming your position (e.g. if you are short bonds, they should rally sluggishly on bull news, but break hard on bear news...and drift lower on no news). As soon as the trade becomes hard or risky, you gotta cut back.

One good point that Cramer made is "avoid battlegrounds". Tough trades where 2 points of view are equally strongly held, and the market ebbs and flows between them. For example stocks this summer are a big fight between the recession camp and the cheap valuation/low rates/falling dollar camp. Is it better to bet massively on who is gonna win that one? Or to stand aside and try to pick up some profits by fading whenever one camp gets to an extreme.

The really good trades usually don't have to be forced (at least not once they get momentum behind them; if you are early then it is different). I'd suggest trying conservative trading on modest size, trying to "put beans in bags", just bide your time and grind out some income. Wait for the 2-5 trades per year where everything is set up just right, then get in and build up size by pyramiding as the market action confirms your view whilst sentiment stays sceptical. Let the market action, rather than your own opinions, determine when you trade size.

Looking at this year, there were only really a few great themes to play. Long oil from $50, short housing, long wheat, buying stocks (esp emerging markets) after the Feb mini-panic, long China, and long stock volatility since summer. If you look at them, one thing most had in common was that they were not difficult trades to hold onto once they got going. Only China stocks had any big scary corrections to fake you out. And the market was fairly complacent/sceptical of each one turning out the way it did.

By contrast, lots of people are bearish on bonds. That doesn't mean they won't go down, but it does mean there is an inherent bid simply due to the crowded nature of the short position. That suggests it is better to play on limited size or with limited risk (options/spreads) and be demanding about entry price, and not too greedy on exit. It won't be a forgiving trade like the ones listed above. So I'd recommend playing more conservative until you find another trade where all the ducks are lined up, then work on milking that for all you can. You got on the grains early - did you trade them as aggressively and with the size that you used in your bond short?
 
Update: Jeez I sound like Surfer, :D

I just unwound my NQ-YM. I thought NQ was going higher but I see a reason for the NDX high of 2094. That level could hold for a while. I'm long 1525-1490 put spreads. My NQ "hedge" enabled me to pay half the cost of the ES puts.
 
Quote from Cutten:

I know it's easy to say in hindsight, but it sounds like you are pushing too hard with average or difficult trades. Big size is best reserved for those rare occasions where everything lines up in your favour e.g. you have a truly contrarian position, price action is strongly in your favour, and the market tone keeps confirming your position (e.g. if you are short bonds, they should rally sluggishly on bull news, but break hard on bear news...and drift lower on no news). As soon as the trade becomes hard or risky, you gotta cut back.

One good point that Cramer made is "avoid battlegrounds". Tough trades where 2 points of view are equally strongly held, and the market ebbs and flows between them. For example stocks this summer are a big fight between the recession camp and the cheap valuation/low rates/falling dollar camp. Is it better to bet massively on who is gonna win that one? Or to stand aside and try to pick up some profits by fading whenever one camp gets to an extreme.

The really good trades usually don't have to be forced (at least not once they get momentum behind them; if you are early then it is different). I'd suggest trying conservative trading on modest size, trying to "put beans in bags", just bide your time and grind out some income. Wait for the 2-5 trades per year where everything is set up just right, then get in and build up size by pyramiding as the market action confirms your view whilst sentiment stays sceptical. Let the market action, rather than your own opinions, determine when you trade size.

Looking at this year, there were only really a few great themes to play. Long oil from $50, short housing, long wheat, buying stocks (esp emerging markets) after the Feb mini-panic, long China, and long stock volatility since summer. If you look at them, one thing most had in common was that they were not difficult trades to hold onto once they got going. Only China stocks had any big scary corrections to fake you out. And the market was fairly complacent/sceptical of each one turning out the way it did.

By contrast, lots of people are bearish on bonds. That doesn't mean they won't go down, but it does mean there is an inherent bid simply due to the crowded nature of the short position. That suggests it is better to play on limited size or with limited risk (options/spreads) and be demanding about entry price, and not too greedy on exit. It won't be a forgiving trade like the ones listed above. So I'd recommend playing more conservative until you find another trade where all the ducks are lined up, then work on milking that for all you can. You got on the grains early - did you trade them as aggressively and with the size that you used in your bond short?
[/QUOTE

Cutten:

Great post

A great thing I have found is rate trades by their probability(how many of your conditions are in line).

Then only take less than 1/2 of the best trades.

Seems like when an ES trade is set to move at least 15 pts it is a good trade to take.
Place the trade and walk away.

Plus it is a hell of a lot harder to start breaking rules and do massively stupid things,when your not in sitting in front of the screen all day.
 
Back
Top