This is a stupid question. What difference does it make if youâre not following a plan. Though Iâm sure the site administrator appreciates your efforts.
POLL: Are you troubled more by losing trades or decent moves missed by your method?
- Thread starter Gabfly1
- Start date
Except, of course, that I'm referring to actually following the "plan." I am referring to the "plan" itself and the user's current perception of it. Thank you for your judgmental input despite the fact that you obviously did not take the time to either read or understand the question or its context. Evidently, comments can occasionally be just as stupid as the perceived question.
Not trying to, repetitive and boring is how you fight fire with fire with Jack
Jack, do you really think your obfuscations can hide the failure of your "method"? The simple truth is that I tested one of your entry signals and it doesn't work. Period.
Specifically, I tested YOUR concept as outlined in YOUR paper, Catch Up With Tomorrow's Paper Today. I tested buying YOUR "0 to 7 turn" (see page 8) on 1000 stocks from 2000 to 2005 -- a total of 5000 stock-years -- using spydertrader's code for the scoring and exiting 5 days later and got the equity curve below.
Your attempt to add a new condition (for a prescreened "universe") that wasn't in your original paper is BS, as is your criticism of the time exits which I've told you ad nauseum were necessary because your exits are broken. You've also wrongly said that time exits are invalid when in fact they're useful for isolating the efficiency of entries. Or in your case, the lack of efficiency.
To further show how worthless that buying your "0 to 7 turn" is, I tested one of MY entry methods under the exact same conditions and parameters I used for testing your "method" -- 5 day exits, same stocks, same time period, NO prescreened "universe," same transaction fees, etc., and got this equity curve.
<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2715590>
Like it or not, here's the bottom line: buying your "0 to 7 turn" is no better that flipping a coin.
If one takes the trades from your "method" and compares them to trades from random entries, they'll find that the two groups of trades are statistically indistinguishable. Meaning, as I said, your "method" is no better than flipping a coin.
On the other hand... if one tests a profitable entry method (like mine) and compares those trades with trades generated from random entries, the differences between the two groups are statistically off the charts. Your inability to grasp this doesn't invalidate it.
Specifically, I tested YOUR concept as outlined in YOUR paper, Catch Up With Tomorrow's Paper Today. I tested buying YOUR "0 to 7 turn" (see page 8) on 1000 stocks from 2000 to 2005 -- a total of 5000 stock-years -- using spydertrader's code for the scoring and exiting 5 days later and got the equity curve below.
Your attempt to add a new condition (for a prescreened "universe") that wasn't in your original paper is BS, as is your criticism of the time exits which I've told you ad nauseum were necessary because your exits are broken. You've also wrongly said that time exits are invalid when in fact they're useful for isolating the efficiency of entries. Or in your case, the lack of efficiency.
To further show how worthless that buying your "0 to 7 turn" is, I tested one of MY entry methods under the exact same conditions and parameters I used for testing your "method" -- 5 day exits, same stocks, same time period, NO prescreened "universe," same transaction fees, etc., and got this equity curve.
<img src=http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/attachment.php?s=&postid=2715590>
Like it or not, here's the bottom line: buying your "0 to 7 turn" is no better that flipping a coin.
If one takes the trades from your "method" and compares them to trades from random entries, they'll find that the two groups of trades are statistically indistinguishable. Meaning, as I said, your "method" is no better than flipping a coin.
On the other hand... if one tests a profitable entry method (like mine) and compares those trades with trades generated from random entries, the differences between the two groups are statistically off the charts. Your inability to grasp this doesn't invalidate it.
The moment Jack came into it
My vote goes for moves missed. One move missed, you lose all.