SAC"s DEMARK finally speaks!

<i>"by the way, i am not passing judgement on any trader or manager, merely asking questions about method that I believe is sub par and over hyped."</i>

I had the chance to spend several hours with DeMark back in 2001, working with him on someone else's project. My take on him is an absolutely brilliant mind, very strong math skills and totally obsessed with financial markets. It is, by admission, his sole focus in life.

He also has a machine-gun style of thinking and speaking which is tough to keep up with. I suspect he's not real strong in the intensive patience & focus aspect of executing trades. Knowing what to do and being able to execute all aspects is the difference between Tiger Wood's swing coach, and Tiger Woods.

As for trend following? It is <b>the only way</b> long term gains are made AND kept. For sure the counter-trend gang can and do have periods of success, some of it impressive. But... over the course of time, it all flows back to the market. Only by realizing bigger reward than risk taken is it possible to last for years or decades. No other style has ever been proven in real time with real money... in spite of what you may hear / read that is not supported with real-money proof to validate rhetoric.

Trend faders, average-down players, inverted risk to reward gang all fail sooner or later. The only way to succeed long term is by trading much bigger wins than losses. The only way to accomplish that is by finding and following price "trends"... be they seconds, minutes, hours, days or weeks in duration.
 
Don't know much about DeMark. In fact, I got a couple of his books laying in my office somewhere that I only skimmed through, never read.

But I gotta tell you, I'm pretty impressed with PTJ and his results. I'm also impressed with SAC. Not sure how or why anyone would knock these guys.

I thought the article was an interesting article. I agree that fundamentals move the market....and therefore should have a place in every traders arsenal. I pay alot of attention to fundamentals. Likewise, all the bottom and top pickers obviously need to ride the trend at some point...otherwise, it's not worthwhile picking the top/bottom.

OldTrader
 
Quote from Surdo:

SAC was getting upgrades and downgrades before the trading desk of the firm making the call in the late 90's.

I have seen him have a stock hit while he was buying it at another firm during a negotiation of a block.

He is slimier than slime.
More...

Off topic, how is this slim? This is how the markets work. There is a natural pyramid of information, the top dogs all the way down to the retail 100 share investors. If I am buying a block, I want the best price no matter what, don't you? If you make money trading doesn't someone else lose? If that is correct ehn who cares what SAC does. If they don't do it someone else will. If you don't buy that stock at XX price someone else will.
 
Quote from makloda:

Surf, I guess all these funds are 10-sigma events and all these returns (net of fees) with reasonable drawdowns are theoretically impossible according to your 'efficient market theory':

Winton Capital ($7.2 bln under management)
esn9xg.jpg


Lynx/Brummers AB ($1.7 bln under management)
286vcra.png


Tulip Trend Fund C/Progressive Capital ($365 mln under management)
a4t1mv.jpg


Transtrend ($1.9 bln under management)
14nhg0n.jpg


Eckhardt Trading ($465 mln under management)
esn9xg.jpg


MAN AHL ($20+ bln under management)
29v0014.png
More...

makloda, is this information from a public site? Thanks, dtrader.
 
Quote from Casey30:

Off topic, how is this slim? This is how the markets work. There is a natural pyramid of information, the top dogs all the way down to the retail 100 share investors. If I am buying a block, I want the best price no matter what, don't you? If you make money trading doesn't someone else lose? If that is correct ehn who cares what SAC does. If they don't do it someone else will. If you don't buy that stock at XX price someone else will.
More...

When the one institution manipulates the price of a stock during the negotiation process of 7 figures between 2 other institutions so he can buy his 25K on a cleanup cheaper after he ran ahead of the print, is this ok with you? This is assuming you have worked on an institutional desk and understand what I am talking about.

Stevie Cohen is nothing but a bottom feeder, the biggest.
 
Quote from Aok:

Exactly JJ.

If you dont believe your own B.S first, no one else will.

Tom Demark? I thought he was dead.

Surf you dont really believe that TD believes that SAC doesnt receive inside info?
More...

No...SAC doesnt recieve inside info/calls from firms before upgrades.

That's right up there with the existence of the easter bunny.....Santa Claus..........................
 
Tokyo,

I would rethink Richard Dennis in your inclusion of the traders you mention. He blew up his first fund through Drexel 20 years ago...then relaunched in 2003 with 10mm under management through Mesirow Financial in Chicago.

He made +38% the first 9 weeks of trading...and was shut down at -35% 14 weeks later.

He has given back massive sums of his onetime vast fortune.
 
"Steve (Cohen) is definitely the best trader. He doesn't have that high a success rate. It's his disposition, he was built for trading. You can't describe it. The ability is something innate"

I completely agree
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top