Update from Karen the Supertrader

[JackMorgan]

actually i do have audited results and i have posted them here before that's why i can speak with authority on any trading subject. once i knew i could make repeatable returns i figured out i didn't need the hassle of clients and have been a private trader since.

also i have published more free trading ideas and actual disclosed systems than anyone i know.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/markbrowndotcom/

Free trading ideas
Disclosed System

I dont see the word profitable in that mix ???

 

[MarkBrown]

Free trading ideas
Disclosed System

I dont see the word profitable in that mix ???

see where it says "See publication" below, you have made me aware that i need to fix the links tomorrow when i get time, then you can check back and download the articles. also in the metastock forum there are systems which i published that to this day are still profitable.

Oddball System 20th year anniversary - 5000 trades

Found the 1st OddBall system article for you here.

also feel free to search my 20 years of posting on this forum and the hall of fame section of this forum.

i think my independently audited and published track record is also on the forum but if it's not i can send it to you if you wish proof of my claims of profitability.

 

[newwurldmn]

EXACTLY that's why no one really has any winning strategy and she's just like anybody selling options or option spreads.

But when you trade options, you are predicting vol. + direction not just vol. That's why options are much harder to trade than stocks cuz with stocks, you are always dealing with 100% delta and 0 implied volatility. And that's also why options are so much more lucrative.

I don’t follow the nuance between your two paragraphs.

No one has a winning strategy.
but if you do, options are more lucrative?

 

[TheDawn]

I don’t follow the nuance between your two paragraphs.

I do not know what do you mean by "nuances". The two paragraphs are my comments on two different issues/concepts respectively in your comments.

but if you do, options are more lucrative?

For equivalent strategies, ceteris paribus, yes.

 

[newwurldmn]

I do not know what do you mean by "nuances". The two paragraphs are my comments on two different issues/concepts respectively in your comments.



For equivalent strategies, ceteris paribus, yes.

there must be a nuance that makes your two seemingly contradictory paragraphs true.

1. no one can have an edge in options because you can’t predict volatility.
2. Options give better payouts than stocks because you can have a volatility and delta view.

 

[TheDawn]

there must be a nuance that makes your two seemingly contradictory paragraphs true.

Your perception of the two paragraphs being contradictory is wrong. There is no nuances. Like I said, they are just responses to your two totally different comments respectively.

1. no one can have an edge in options because you can’t predict volatility.
2. Options give better payouts than stocks because you can have a volatility and delta view.

Again, how are they contradictory? You still have not explained how they are contradictory. And to clarify, I never said that no one can have an edge. What I said was no one can predict with certainty the richness and cheapness of the volatility of an instrument. You implied that somehow people need to be able to predict richness and cheapness of volatility in order to have an edge

But the thing is, nobody would be able to determine with certainty the rich and cheapness of vol. Everything is all relative and depends on what happens in the future. If there is a volatility crush happens, even the current 20 IV will still be too rich but if there is a huge explosion in volatility, then even 100 IV is still too cheap. And that's where the excess return comes from. If everybody knows with certainty how much the market is going to move in T+1, then there will be no excess return. The options will give the same return as term deposits.

 

[newwurldmn]

Your perception of the two paragraphs being contradictory is wrong. There is no nuances. Like I said, they are just responses to your two totally different comments respectively.



Again, how are they contradictory? You still have not explained how are they contradictory. And to clarify, I never said that no one can have an edge. What I said was no one can predict with certainty the richness and cheapness of the volatility of an instrument. There is a difference.

you statement that “No one can predict with certainty” is a truism and doesn’t discount the ability to predict volatility or direction. I’m not sure why you stated.

So you are saying, that some people can predict volatility with enough predictive power that they can develop alpha that can earn, and if they also can predict direction, they can earn a lot more with options than with stocks?

 

[TheDawn]

you statement that “No one can predict with certainty” is a truism and doesn’t discount the ability to predict volatility or direction. I’m not sure why you stated.

That's a direct response to your statement that being able to determine the richness and cheapness of vol. is the only way to have a winning strategy.

she doesn’t have a winning strategy. Selling strangles on the spx without some system to determine rich and cheapness of vol is trying to exploit risk premium in one of the most efficient asset classes in the world.

My response was: well, no one can determine the richness and cheapness of vol. because that determination is based on the ability to predict future volatility which no one can, not with certainty. Without the ability to predict future volatility, one would never be able to determine the relative richness and cheapness of vol. My statement is made to point out that your criteria of someone having a winning strategy based on his/her ability to determine richness and cheapness of vol. is an unfeasible one. Do I really have to spell out the meaning of every single of my sentence in English? I thought your first language is English given that you are born in the United States?

So you are saying, that some people can predict volatility with enough predictive power that they can develop alpha that can earn, and if they also can predict direction, they can earn a lot more with options than with stocks?

What??!! This sentence does not make sentence.

 

[newwurldmn]

That's a direct response to your statement that being able to determine the richness and cheapness of vol. is the only way to have a winning strategy.

My response was: well, no one can determine the richness and cheapness of vol. because that determination is based on the ability to predict future volatility which no one can, not with certainty. Without the ability to predict future volatility, one would never be able to determine the relative richness and cheapness of vol. My statement is made to point out that your criteria of someone having a winning strategy based on his/her ability to determine richness and cheapness of vol. is an unfeasible one. Do I really have to spell out the meaning of every single of my sentence in English? I thought your first language is English given that you are born in the United States?



What??!! This sentence does not make sentence.

I didn’t mean that someone had to predict volatility with 100percent accuracy. In colloquial trading parlance, “predicting” means “taking a view.” Perhaps I should have been clearer.

 

[SunTrader]

I didn’t mean that someone had to predict volatility with 100percent accuracy. In colloquial trading parlance, “predicting” means “taking a view.” Perhaps I should have been clearer.

You're not the one needing to be clear.