You just mentioned in another thread that markets have changed significantly in the recent years from the 2000 era, I see a contradiction here.
Are you suggesting that past strategies that were shared and presumably worked well are still of equal or near-equal merit in today's markets? If so how do you explain the dearth of recent posts and claims of steadily increasing equity curves from most of these veteran traders?
No contradiction because those are two different issues involving 1990s versus today's markets.
For example, the issues I mention about the 1990s were the surprise rate cuts, crazy IPOs volatility out of the gate, commercialization of the internet, enormous volatility ranges, burst of the bubble and so on.
In today's markets, we do not have that at all.
Simply, no contradiction.
In contrast, I believe you're trying to compare
trade strategies (something I didn't mention) that traders used in the 1990s versus today's markets. The only thing I discussed was that traders that made a bundle during the 1990s...
lost it faster when the bubble burst (that's an important aspect you overlooked in my reply you're talking about).
With that said, the past strategies at this forum...they were not shared in the 1990s...I believe this forum was started when the bubble burst although I believe this forum was here in 1998 - 1999 but
not as a forum but as a fee-base strategy site that quickly changed its identity to a discussion forum (ask Baron about such for clarification) when the dot.com bubble exploded and fell like a hot potatoe.
That's the difference and the other reason why there's no contradiction considering the Hall of Fame thread are primarily strategies associated in recent years (not +20 years ago)...occurring
after the bubble burst...
after 1990s.
Therefore, you got your years mixed up and those veteran traders you're talking about that made specific claims about their steady increasing equity curves here at ET (not sure whom you're talking about)...I'm sure you're not talking about someone that traded in the 1990s involving the era I was talking about and making my comparisons.
As to today's markets versus markets since 2005, if someone told you they're still profitable...markets changed after the 2008 - 2009 financial fiasco that in my opinion any trader worth their merit should have been able to adjust (adapt).
That's the key to any longevity in this business of trading or investing...if you can't adapt...you won't survive. Usually that adapting involves the trader (not the strategy). For example, someone here mention that he still uses the exact same strategy but he now has more experience and can better recognize changes in the volatility (a lot lower now since the financial fiasco of 2008 - 2009). Thus, he has more none trading days now in which he only trades about
5 days per month whenever volatility shows up in comparison to prior recent years where he was trading almost every trading day...
Yet, he's still using the
exact same trade strategy while his profit level remains about the same even though he's trading less mainly due to the fact he's also gotten better at position size management, risk management and discipline that some traders develop when they get more trading experience.
Once again, no contradiction considering I was talking about different trading eras involving technology, FED, IPOs, commercialization of the internet whereas you seem to be talking about recent trading years compare to today's markets via trade strategies.
