Protecting successful trading strategy
- Thread starter bbk
- Start date
Agreed, but even if one were to keep their system totally secret (doesn't even trade it), that over time the profit potential will get crowded anyhow. If Napoleon had died young, the socioeconomic forces would have put someone in power who would have done things somewhat differently.
Avoid anyone blatantly ripping-off your idea. I know of three cases personally of inventors getting completely ripped-off without any of the subterfuge of which we are discussing. In both cases, the invention/system's ownership was transfer to a corporation in return for shares. At that point the opportunity for shenanigans grows enormously. Even if the lawyers and business partners can be beaten-off to the point where the inventor retains ownership, the essence has already been shared.
I still say that it is more important to go out and exploit the opportunity. Try to keep under the radar. Try to spread your trades to confuse ease-droppers, but by all means exploit the heck out of it before it goes away.
it may be true for a system that only works for a specific market inefficiency. so go ahead to exploit the inefficiency before it goes away. sometimes, for a system that exploits human behavior, and we know the human behavior won't go away even if 100 years later, such system worth every effort to protect . I do not know the inside of james simon's system. but since it has been working since 1988, this is the system that exploits on the market phenomena that may will not die out quickly.
if I have a system at the level of james simon, what should I do ? should I go out to trade without any camouflage and one or two years later it stops working? or I try to confuse the intruders while trading? surely i will go the later option, even if I may end up making less money. would not you?
if I have a system at the level of james simon, what should I do ? should I go out to trade without any camouflage and one or two years later it stops working? or I try to confuse the intruders while trading? surely i will go the later option, even if I may end up making less money. would not you?
The only two methods that I have seen in this thread are: make alternate trades to obfuscate and split your entries and exits between different accounts.
A third method is to bring in another traders. Elsewhere I have read that if your profitable strategy requires marginally violating certain exchange rules, for example, trade in a shop big enough to keep under the radar.
Historically, I have also read that a broker who needs to unload a large insider block may woo a well-known shorter and publicize the fact. People will then attribute the selling to the public figure rather than the insider looking to quietly unload. There were other tricks of Jessee Livermore, but these tended to be single use strategies.
A third method is to bring in another traders. Elsewhere I have read that if your profitable strategy requires marginally violating certain exchange rules, for example, trade in a shop big enough to keep under the radar.
Historically, I have also read that a broker who needs to unload a large insider block may woo a well-known shorter and publicize the fact. People will then attribute the selling to the public figure rather than the insider looking to quietly unload. There were other tricks of Jessee Livermore, but these tended to be single use strategies.
This is like fearing that the Casino...
Is gonna "reverse engineer"...
Your pathetic, marginal blackjack strategy...
Which is the 1,000,000th variation on theme.
Making money charging fees is relatively easy...
Extracting money from efficient markets is hard...
So no... your broker assumes you are a shmuck...
Because 98% of "traders", in fact, are.
Besides, there is no such thing as "successful strategy"...
Since >> 90% of the game is execution, execution, execution.
Even if a market maker sees you doing something interesting...
His infrastructure can almost certainly do it better and faster.
1 We sweep the web quarterly and have the bait and switch activities decist.
2 we do not respond to those who want to post our systems, our rules and the ATS's to compliment that particular web site.
3. On sites that are serviciing learners doing passforward, we provide text and illustrations on an as needed basis. Part of trading our paradigmn and approaches includes helping others and contributing to local problem solving. These niches have mostly honest people with common intrests.
4. We did a five to six year series on all the apps and the paradigm. Today you see a lot of people who do not research nor study but just ask assorted questions.
5.. We work with organizations to enhance their platfeorms and help them build trchnical support. One organization failed seriously And we requested that my name no longer be associated with it. Currently, you can see about 200 pages of coding snippets and discussion so the the approach can be used on other platforms. We focussed the pattern approach on TN and we focussed the indicator appraoach om MC. PVT is focussed on QCharts lists.
All the above is addressed to the retail amateur traders.
Our global meetings, allow for personal interaction and dicussion. Most personel are trending towards having a professional status. The PhD's coordinate the global meetings.
Above you can conclude that we give way a lot of stuff for retail trades who compound their way to wealth.
Going beyond this, pool extraction is a powerful lapproach that is used a the capacity of about 80 markets, PVT is less restricted and stocks may be traded in all the global markts. Sector rotation is where unlimited funds are applied.
The progreeion of users of these approaches is interesting to examine. Our niche is well offest in money velocity compared to the CW standards of preformance, effectivenss and efficiency. Sine we have no noise nor anomalies, thrading is very routine and productive. The approaches do not come and go as do "Edges".
As a person arrives at 50 contracts and has days @ 3X the ATR, ir becomes very clear that fulltime trading is not necessary. Since the approach is used globally, when trading is done by anyone is totaly decentralized. Everything is under the radar except for multiple POA based accounts. Currently the SEC is mostly "off duty".
The IRS for several years has been cycling question sets and laps are over 12 months apart. New questions indicate staff failure to process. This is like the oil well premitting sequence; private industry does not have to address key questons since the govermet employees are unsatifactorily prepared to handle IP and TS.
For all the extraction that is organized, we stay under the radar. No investor is outside of pooled capital. No investor can withdraw capital. Contracts are guaranteed contracts. These money deals are set by just competeing hith the client's alternatives. So it is most closely resembling a Madoff orientation and that filters out most affliations we would have had with F of F and MF's and HF's.
Accounts are tested by the clients to an extent prescribed by the deals. Their accounts are GAAP tested.
Our main thrust is problem solving in a science context. All projects and programs run independent of capital requirements. They dictate to us the needs, we provide. One MBA program will use these projects a field study credits for MBA's Application of capital is done by issuing capital on demand.
We are information procesors under very sophisitacted modelling, development and pragmatic applications. One of the myths of markets is data speed and speed of excution, We go to a multiple of market capacity and maintain an efficiency and effectiveness based upon that; we bypassed the speed issue (See BYU seizmagraphic data compression as a parallel).
By dispersing all aspects of information processing and having a foeign language as our financial language, most people who hack at us seem mostly to be puzzled.
It is necessary to be invisible for this part of it and to have security that keeps us out of the picture.
By dealing only in the nonprobabilistic fork of information theory, we became very isolated from the R & D of the CW of the financial industry. Read "The Predictors" to see how the "non science" of CW. totally misdirect R&D. Also read DERMAN to see how a person can go from the SCIENCE orientation of BTL to the shark world of GS and then wind up on the shelf at Columbia and runniong grad couses in :finance".
People like Rothenthal Collins had clients who wanted to use our apporach. Programmers, writers and their traders failed to mount a successful client service. We, of course, were at fault in the end. I have ant named Howard; he is a railroad spike with legs.
Two diverging forks in the road exist, re information theory and data processing. We are parasitic to them The CW fork uses probabilisitc stuff and they filter us out as "crazies".
The financial industry is slowly shiting away for extracting the market;s offer abd is skowly moving towards slowing down their regulation. This means the non probabilistic fork we completed just contracts to meet client demands based on their perception of what is possible. based on "betting", etc..
Apparently neither brevity nor spelling are your strong suits.
Why are you worried ?
If they are trading with you that gives you that much more fuel to the fire.
I would not be the least surprised if some brokers mirror or shadow their successful clients. It would be quite easy to do if you use platforms such as strategy runner.
If they are trading with you that gives you that much more fuel to the fire.
I would not be the least surprised if some brokers mirror or shadow their successful clients. It would be quite easy to do if you use platforms such as strategy runner.