YM in a Can

Sunny,

I cite the power of a handgun and do not know how to use it. What is the point? The purpose of my comment, if you care, was to open up a discussion about it. Would you please comment as to the suggestions you might have, since you are so bold to repeat me?

I am not a user on Ensign software and I have spoken to Michael over the years. Sunny, I am not a newbie, Ok. (if you do not believe me just search the archives in his yahoo group)


Michael B.




Quote from sunnyskies:

Respect the power of PMS. ES, you sound kind of like that when you cite a concept but you admit you dont know how to apply it :)

Regarding as to why good mechanical systems seem to work in the ES for a few months and then break down.... Easy - "market conditions" change and the system does not have an edge in the new conditions. Enthios' systems all performed like that and he's a good developer. Talk to him if you wish, he's an approachable guy also.
More...
 
Quote from TriPack:

Michael,


1) Not take new system trades in the first/last 30 minutes of trading.
This is a 24hr. system.

2) Equalize the stop loss and profit target size (rather than have a 1 to 2 win/loss ratio starting out as was the case in my original system)The current equation sets levels to achieve a smaller loss than reward.

3) Convert the hard stop into a trailing stop.
So far our testing has not improved the results, with a trailing stop.

4) Convert the trailing stop into a stop and reverse trailing stop to take advantage of the large trend moves to make back some/all of the loss incurred with the stop.
I would rather tweak the equation to do this, rather than a dynamic trailing stop.

5) Adjust the (trailing) stop/target size for volatility rather than using one parameter set for all types of volatility levels.The equation already evaluates range, but I have been thinking about using 2-day range instead, as I need to re-create the equation to make it my own. A two-day range will give less trades, perhaps.


6) Not enter new system trades after really big range days, or really small range days.This is good.
More...

Michael B.

P.S. I am unable to do my own backtesting, as I do not know how. Fan27 has spent a lot of time on this, and I really need to be sure about any changes before I trouble him with more testing. I am stumped. Perhaps to use PSM the way that I am must be reconsidered as it is an aggressive martingale type of sizing, which really is not my style. I really do not have any other ideas, and am just logging the trades here in hopes of some revelation.
 
I don't know if anybody has mentioned this. But why not "add to" at the L1, L2 and H1, H2 levels on the "inside level trades and just use single units on the "outside level" trades?

Any comments/questions?

There are 2 facts:

1)Outside Level trades occur less frequently.

2)Outside level failures lose less money.

Michael B.

P.S. I would not have time to trade this way, though.
 
Hello Michael:
Reading your comment about backtesting, I have to confess my bias. I believe that backtesting does not work. The reason is that the basic premise is not valid. What you do when backtesting is to start with a sequence of actions in response to market price (when the market does A, then enter long, when it does B, exit). There is an implicit relationship between the two sides of the equation. Unfortunately that relationship of one price point to another is a dynamic rather than a stable relationship. That is why you can backtest and develop a system that seems profitable on paper. But when you go to real time trading, you find that the drawdowns are greater than you expected, the number of consecutive losers escalates, and the per trade profits start to slip until you no longer have the confidence to pull the trigger. So what do you do then? Well surprisingly the answer is stop backtesting and start testing for correlation and dependency. What you want to do is to find a relationship between to points on a price chart whose correlation is as close to 1 as possible (This is basic stats Michael, if I can learn it anyone can), Then you measure the strength of that relationship by testing for dependency (there are two kinds of dependency, and again this is something you can learn about if you want to just using google). Once you find a stable correlation between two points that exhibits dependency, you can then propose a method of trading that says, "if I see price move to point A, then go long". "When it moves to point b, exit". If you think about it, this is the opposite of what people are doing with Tradestation and other backtesting platforms. Instead of trying to make the market fit your system, you are finding out how the market moves and designing your system around that movement. I appreciate the opportunity to offer my opinion. Hope it helps in some way. Steve46

P.S. By the way, this has been discussed before on ET, by Acrary. look at his posts and you will find examples of correllation and dependency that may help make it easier to understand.
 
Steve, I regret to say I am not at your level yet. (If I were to explain in the spirit of this system, I am a L1 when comparing your knowledge to mine :)). I have no idea what you are talking about, and I mean no dis-respect, and you are writing very clear.

Michael B.

Quote from steve46:

Hello Michael:
Reading your comment about backtesting, I feel I have to confess my bias. I believe that backtesting does not work. The reason is that the basic premise is not valid. What you do when backtesting is to start with a sequence of actions in response to market price (when the market does A, then enter long, when it does B, exit). There is an implicit relationship between the two sides of the equation. Unfortunately that relationship of one price point to another is a dynamic rather than a stable relationship. That is why you can backtest and develop a system that seems profitable on paper. But when you go to real time trading, you find that the drawdowns are greater than you expected, the number of consecutive losers escalates, and the per trade profits start to slip until you no longer have the confidence to pull the trigger. So what do you do then? Well surprisingly the answer is stop backtesting and start testing for correlation and dependency. What you want to do is to find a relationship between to points on a price chart whose correlation is as close to 1 as possible (This is basic stats Michael, if I can learn it anyone can), Then you measure the strength of that relationship by testing for dependency (there are two kinds of dependency, and again this is something you can learn about if you want to just using google). Once you find a stable correlation between two points that exhibits dependency, you can then propose a method of trading that says, "if I see price move to point A, then go long". "When it moves to point b, exit". If you think about it, this is the opposite of what people are doing with Tradestation and other backtesting platforms. Instead of trying to make the market fit your system, you are finding out how the market moves and designing your system around that movement. I appreciate the opportunity to offer my opinion. Hope it helps in some way. Steve46
More...
 
Michael:
In my experience, the words (jargon) are half the battle. Don't be put off by the abstraction. Some level of abstraction is necessary to discuss the subject but it takes a bit of time to get used to. It is worth your time because once you get over that hurdle, you are no longer at the mercy of others, or of changing price relationships. You can do anything you want to. Just take it slowly and look into the terms that may confuse you. Acrary's posts are very useful. We all learn in our own way. Perhaps his posts will be the key that makes it accessible to you. At least think about it for a bit. Best Regards, Steve46
 
ACRARY is a genius,

Michael B.

P.S. I wish he would come here and read the thread and make some comments.


Quote from steve46:

Michael:
In my experience, the words (jargon) are half the battle. Don't be put off by the abstraction. Some level of abstraction is necessary to discuss the subject but it takes a bit of time to get used to. It is worth your time because once you get over that hurdle, you are no longer at the mercy of others, or of changing price relationships. You can do anything you want to. Just take it slowly and look into the terms that may confuse you. Acrary's posts are very useful. We all learn in our own way. Perhaps his posts will be the key that makes it accessible to you. At least think about it for a bit. Best Regards, Steve46
More...
 
Quote from steve46:

Hello Michael:
Reading your comment about backtesting, I have to confess my bias. I believe that backtesting does not work. The reason is that the basic premise is not valid. What you do when backtesting is to start with a sequence of actions in response to market price (when the market does A, then enter long, when it does B, exit). There is an implicit relationship between the two sides of the equation. Unfortunately that relationship of one price point to another is a dynamic rather than a stable relationship. That is why you can backtest and develop a system that seems profitable on paper. But when you go to real time trading, you find that the drawdowns are greater than you expected, the number of consecutive losers escalates, and the per trade profits start to slip until you no longer have the confidence to pull the trigger. So what do you do then? Well surprisingly the answer is stop backtesting and start testing for correlation and dependency. What you want to do is to find a relationship between to points on a price chart whose correlation is as close to 1 as possible (This is basic stats Michael, if I can learn it anyone can), Then you measure the strength of that relationship by testing for dependency (there are two kinds of dependency, and again this is something you can learn about if you want to just using google). Once you find a stable correlation between two points that exhibits dependency, you can then propose a method of trading that says, "if I see price move to point A, then go long". "When it moves to point b, exit". If you think about it, this is the opposite of what people are doing with Tradestation and other backtesting platforms. Instead of trying to make the market fit your system, you are finding out how the market moves and designing your system around that movement. I appreciate the opportunity to offer my opinion. Hope it helps in some way. Steve46

P.S. By the way, this has been discussed before on ET, by Acrary. look at his posts and you will find examples of correllation and dependency that may help make it easier to understand.
More...

Excellent Post Steve46.

thanks
fan27
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top