You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
"Trading as a Business" quant interview, highly recommended
- Thread starter HiddenAgenda
- Start date
Interesting mix of views. Thankfully, the tone of the discussion is polite and respectful.
It's interesting the interview mentions small-cap stocks as a market with some potential for applying TA successfully (if I'm reading it correctly).
Any good sources, blogs or publications which zoom in on small caps TA specifically? I know Tim Sykes trades this stuff, just curious if there's anything else along those lines.
Any pointers are appreciated (I think we're NOT allowed to discuss specific small cap stocks here, so I'm just interested in couple of good leads to that trading niche)
Thanks guys.
What a day in the markets! Really interesting! be careful out there!
It's interesting the interview mentions small-cap stocks as a market with some potential for applying TA successfully (if I'm reading it correctly).
Any good sources, blogs or publications which zoom in on small caps TA specifically? I know Tim Sykes trades this stuff, just curious if there's anything else along those lines.
Any pointers are appreciated (I think we're NOT allowed to discuss specific small cap stocks here, so I'm just interested in couple of good leads to that trading niche)
Thanks guys.
What a day in the markets! Really interesting! be careful out there!
Noticed that you are actually the one who turns everyones' words around?
I said quants are useful in creating and maintaining derivative pricing models: You sit at the rates exotic desk, a customer calls up and asks you to make a market in a prdc or range accrual. How many swaps are you gonna trade in what tenor and which swaptions in order to get your book hedged? Without any sort of monte carlo pricing engine you are pretty much out of luck. But hey, you are the expert here so we should all yield to the opinion of a software developer...
I said quants are useful in creating and maintaining derivative pricing models: You sit at the rates exotic desk, a customer calls up and asks you to make a market in a prdc or range accrual. How many swaps are you gonna trade in what tenor and which swaptions in order to get your book hedged? Without any sort of monte carlo pricing engine you are pretty much out of luck. But hey, you are the expert here so we should all yield to the opinion of a software developer...
Quote from pedro01:
I think we can safely say that quants should not be used to help create and maintain models to price derivatives.
We can say that based on the real life experience and the outcomes of people relying on their models.
If you maintain that this is all quants do (and I do not agree with that), then shouldn't we just get rid of them altogether ?
Quote from makloda:
I studied both electrical engineering and economics and let me tell you that both physics and engineering PHDs/professors were - measured by intellectual rigor - LEAGUES and BOUNDS above their colleagues in other academic sub-disciplines that I was exposed to.
Yes - but could they trade as well as a cockney lad who left school at 18 and who's first car was an XR3i convertible with go faster stripes ?
Probably not.
You fall foul of the myth that it takes smarts to trade.
Of course it takes some smarts but then again, no more than it takes to be a great painter, sculpter, chef, formula 1 driver.
Quote from asiaprop:
lol, I seriously suggest you stick to software development, you clearly never seriously traded options or made markets in options. Case rest!
P.S.: People referencing to penis size generally have issues regarding the same, did not know that?
I don't develop software - I have other people do that for me.
In fact, a lot of the people that develop software for me are far more intelligent than me on paper. Saying that, there is no chance they will ever run a company. They have a fundamental disconnect between the theoretical and real worlds.
Simply put, there is a difference between being smart and savvy.
Smart people work for savvy people.
I have 2 Phds on my team and I left school at 18. When it comes to relating complex concepts in terms that the common man (e.g. the guy who needs to sign that contract), a pure intellectual just can't cut it.
very possibly true...(your last statement). Yet, you clearly lacked a lot of common sense in this whole discussion. You rambled on and on and on while you have never looked inside a sell-side shop in order to comprehend how risk there is really run. Thats why I recommended you stick to things you actually know...and hey, work on your penis size issue...;-)
Quote from pedro01:
I don't develop software - I have other people do that for me.
In fact, a lot of the people that develop software for me are far more intelligent than me on paper. Saying that, there is no chance they will ever run a company. They have a fundamental disconnect between the theoretical and real worlds.
Simply put, there is a difference between being smart and savvy.
Smart people work for savvy people.
I have 2 Phds on my team and I left school at 18. When it comes to relating complex concepts in terms that the common man (e.g. the guy who needs to sign that contract), a pure intellectual just can't cut it.
Gun to the head, I'd give my money to a Physics PHD for trading rather than giving it to a guy with a PHD in sociology, political science or law.Quote from pedro01:
Yes - but could they trade as well as a cockney lad who left school at 18 and who's first car was an XR3i convertible with go faster stripes ?
Probably not.
You fall foul of the myth that it takes smarts to trade.
Of course it takes some smarts but then again, no more than it takes to be a great painter, sculpter, chef, formula 1 driver.
Nobody said every Physics PHD is destined to become a great trader. What nonsense. Still, physics/engineering geeks generally are very good at the vital mix of model building, validation and statistics. That's just my experience.
Some may think these tools are a disadvantage in trading rather then an asset while I (and others) disagree.
I am not at all sure if this distinction (entrepreneur vs. employee type) has to with people being high achieving academic accolades or with completely other (character and upbringing specific) traits.Quote from pedro01:
I don't develop software - I have other people do that for me.
In fact, a lot of the people that develop software for me are far more intelligent than me on paper. Saying that, there is no chance they will ever run a company. They have a fundamental disconnect between the theoretical and real worlds.
Simply put, there is a difference between being smart and savvy.
Smart people work for savvy people.
I have 2 Phds on my team and I left school at 18. When it comes to relating complex concepts in terms that the common man (e.g. the guy who needs to sign that contract), a pure intellectual just can't cut it.
There are numerous examples in business history of uneducated as well as highly educated people running successful businesses. To say the "academic types" are generally not cut out for running their own business is overly broad.
I'd go further and say 90% of the general population is not cut out for running their own business, because of a whole host of reasons that are completely unrelated to their academic background or the lack thereof.
fully concur, however, would you not agree that there are only very few academicians of Feynman's type who can express complex concepts in layman's terms? Thats what I agreed with Pedro above.
You are right, success in trading, running businesses, leading people is often completely uncorrelated with their academic background.
...and why do I get the impression this is turning into a science vs arts pissing contest?
You are right, success in trading, running businesses, leading people is often completely uncorrelated with their academic background.
...and why do I get the impression this is turning into a science vs arts pissing contest?
Quote from makloda:
I am not at all sure if this distinction (entrepreneur vs. employee type) has to with people being high achieving academic accolades or with completely other (character and upbringing specific) traits.
There are numerous examples in business history of uneducated as well as highly educated people running successful businesses. To say the "academic types" are generally not cut out for running their own business is overly broad.
I'd go further and say 90% of the general population is not cut out for running their own business, because of a whole host of reasons that are completely unrelated to their academic background or the lack thereof.
1st of all anyone wanting to treat trading as a business would not set out trading their own money.
2nd if they had to do that the best method would be breaking up seed capital into 10 different accounts with 10 different models of near term market action.
a)Establish a track record for the best fund.
b) drop the rest.
3rd go shopping for stupid customers(with $ signs in their eyes) who don't know this drill from the hedge fund and MF industries.
2nd if they had to do that the best method would be breaking up seed capital into 10 different accounts with 10 different models of near term market action.
a)Establish a track record for the best fund.
b) drop the rest.
3rd go shopping for stupid customers(with $ signs in their eyes) who don't know this drill from the hedge fund and MF industries.