Quote from vorzo:
ges and dawg,
You make a valid point that I was aware of when I started to backtest. There may be intrabar signals during the day that may ruin your profit margin obtained taking the signals that DO show up on the historical charts.
For argument's sake, let's say you trade the strategy purely mechanically, and you take all the entries. If you have 4 false intrabar signals during the day, and you have a 2 pt stop, then you would have a -$400 loss in stopped trades each day, or -$24k for 60 days/contract. Scary :eek:
But, we don't actually use stops when we trade like Jack is teaching us, we do wash trades if they don't go our way, and we have other signals to validate the primary ones. My understanding is that Jack's methodology is not supposed to be traded mechanically, but instead used as training wheels to help us understand and feel the market.
The only way to know for sure would be to write a code that would use consecutive 1 min data points as closing values for the 5 min bar. That way you'd have 5 intrabar points in your stoch plot that may catch an intrabar signal. And this would still be an approximation, you'd have to go to tick data points to be fully accurate. I'll think about a way to code the 1 min data points into a 5 min chart - any ideas are welcome.
Fruity,
I posted results for entry on bar close - return was ~ $1k/mornings, so about $2k/60 full days, or about 0.75/day. Bummer.
Nice dialogue on this stuff. And thanks for the effort too.
the points you bring out on the descretionary aspects of the mechanicalset up are really very important part of transitions.
A major easily programmable facet would be to consider the 50
% line. If there is sufficient strength to not have a hitch or stall (no harmonics) on transitions to entries, then I say first op in the sequence is a go; if not, not. This precursor eliminates the fractal change course of action for a cure.
We should try for a rocket and wash combo as a baseline for making improvements using just one contract. Then add icebergs. Then add point 1,2,3 stuff.
Once we get there, and I see people making money (meaning exercising belief as actions), I will get more keen on the doubling profits routine.
I think back testing can be more broadly understood at some point and these dialogue is very constructive. It is hard to discuss stuff until a basic minimum quality shows up. Is everyone exponential rather than arithmetic at this point?