TheCyclist的帖子 - 14页

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 13, 2012 at 15:10

Sherry,I went to quite a bit of trouble to explain the problem. You don't want to hear it fine. Fact is that problem needs to be understood by anyone who is going trade fx with any measure of success.

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 13, 2012 at 12:02

Quick technical knowledge check.I want to sell $10 000 worth of eurusd, gbpusd and usdchf, what are my lot sizes on mini account? If you can't answer that then your kurtosis problems are bigger than you don't realize.

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 13, 2012 at 11:58

No mate, what leverage you at? 50: 1What you have is: Serious problem (grid) x 50 x martingale Don't believe me. Just watch it fail. When it does. Come back read all of this again. I've spent the last 3 years or so trying to solve a problem you just doubled up on.

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 13, 2012 at 11:23

You see,I'm not 100% sure yet, but I'm starting to think all the funds run fat tail systems. They've never solved this problem to, and all of them run at < 30% per annum if they are to survive for any period of time. Only the HFT guys managed more and as their are at least 100 of them competing on speed alone now against each they are down to a few percent per year. Only the biggest and the best are getting anywhere. I hope that puts things into perspective for you. Barking up the wrong tree here. No cats here.

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 13, 2012 at 11:05

Read this bit very carefully and slowly:"Many—notably Benoît Mandelbrot as well as Nassim Taleb—have noted this shortcoming of the normal distribution model and have proposed that fat tail distributions such as the stable distribution govern asset returns frequently found in finance.[2]"Mandelbrot is the fractal guy (the math used to measure mountain ranges and coast lines) and Nicholas Taleb is the Black Swan guy. Go buy their books. "The Black–Scholes model of option pricing is based on a normal distribution. If the distribution is actually a fat-tailed...

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 13, 2012 at 10:58

Not going to analyze anything. No need. You'll see your posterior in due course. Don't blame it on external factors like a tsunami next time. Got nothing to do with it. That strategy is fundamentally flawed on all levels. It can't work. It's not possible for it work.The most obvious factors are:1. Kurtosis : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fat-tailed_distribution2. Martingale - which accelerates the kurtosis3. Targets - which at that size right of the bat incurs a kurtosis to big for any portfolio to handle with this kind of leverage. In terms of targets and kurtosis, about 20% of...

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 13, 2012 at 00:08

What's emotions go to do with trading?I find this quite irritating for 2 reasons. The first being that someone who is doing say 2% or 4% a month quite stably for the last say 5 years can't compete with this claim even though it's primarily bullshit. And secondly the amount of regulatory changes in the last two years in fx has been substantially more than the rest of the industry for the last 15 years. In other words because of claims like this and the losses that follows for clients the industry is going to end up being so heavily regulated that most of us can't trade it. Ask ...

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 12, 2012 at 14:29

Yeah, you're still saying maybe this maybe that. You know what...No. Maybe nothing. There's nothing here. Just ineptitude.As I said, I shouldn't really have anything to do with these type of boards. Just frustrates the crap out of me, must be nuts to make a claim like that or really clueless. Kookoo lala land. Everyone living in the clouds.

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 12, 2012 at 14:25

Since when has losing money become acceptable in trading? He can cover x pips? What the **** is that ? If you lose 10% of $100 you lost $10 you have $90. If you make 10% on $90 you have $99. See that 1% gone missing? Rule 1 of fx. Don't lose. Any system that wants to do 1000% will lose so much along the way it will have to do 10000% plus just to break even. Just not possible to run at that pace. Short periods maybe, but then you see your arse and blame it on a tsunami. Whats' the point of that?C'mon guys...really.

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 12, 2012 at 14:07

Marcel, Easy 1000% per annum with MM? Best trader in the world does 30%, worth $44 billion, super trader here does 1000% worth $50?! No one does 1000% and survives to tell the tale. Look at his other claims, 70% PM, that's something 5000% per annum + , tsunami suddenly doesn't work. But what's the use of long term gains? Well 30% long terms gives you $44 billion. That's why he's got $50. Nothing this guy is doing has anything to do with trading. He doesn't have a clue mate. You're not far behind either.

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 12, 2012 at 11:31

I spent quite a bit if time yesterday on tsunami's...

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 12, 2012 at 10:59

"so whats important about long time performance?"You kidding right? Carry one dude. No need for me to say anything further.

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 12, 2012 at 10:37

Or why don't you simply add the account that made the gazillions that gives you the confidence to smack down a whole $50. Then we don't have to wait. We just look at this very good and stable past record that backs this all up ?

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 12, 2012 at 10:25

Ja dude, been seeing claims like this for close to a decade now. It's fat tail, the conversation doesn't really go any further than that. In fact you managed to get two concepts in there that would individually guarantee failure. Fat tail wasn't good enough, oh no siree, you had to martingale it.Just a time bomb. Nothing else.

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 12, 2012 at 09:50

I shouldn't participate in forums. Just don't have the patience for this kind of bullshit.

EASY 25% p. Month 在一般中 Apr 12, 2012 at 09:46

Fat tail system with $50 in it running for a week doing 25% pm done 46 trades? I don't have the words to even begin to say what I think of this.

Inverse Pairs 在一般中 Apr 12, 2012 at 03:45

If your position sizing is right those don't really matter.News is just scheduled volatility as apposed to unscheduled volatility. There is a maximum or minimum amount of volatility that can come into the market before world global systems will fail. Almost did in 2008. For a while couldn't get dollars in places like Singapore or Bangkok at the money changers. I tried, was traveling at the time. So that would be low volatility and on high volatility big business pick up problems and the governments move to intervene. So that causes blips, but I've seen what 2 or 3 interventions in ...

Inverse Pairs 在一般中 Apr 12, 2012 at 01:43

It's a completely different way of thinking about fx. Think like an investor, not a trader. The trade is not the end here. It's the tool you use to adjust your position.

Inverse Pairs 在一般中 Apr 12, 2012 at 01:39

API : http://fxtrade.oanda.com/trade-forex/api/EA's I did my own, not for sale or available. Never really looked at other peoples EA's. This approach is not about time frames. They don't feature. Eur is what it is on 5 min, 3 hour or daily, the current price is the current price on ALL time frames. I wouldn't use any indicator you can just load of the net as well. The math is readily available. Study it, use it. You have no idea what's in that indicator, so it might scupper you before you even start. This approach is very much not about indicators anyway. It's about cur...

Strategist and EA Programmer 在编程中 Apr 11, 2012 at 12:19

Errrr MC, Hate to break this to you, but run the same back-test on the same data on 2 different machines and you get a different result. Just the processors will change the result. We tested back testing throughly and it's useless. I've never matched a days live trading to a backtest on the same day. If MT is online or offline when you do a back test it will change the result. It makes up data if it can't find it. I gave up on back tests years ago and just run live now days....

EURUSD	1.04437	GBPUSD	1.25226	AUDUSD	0.64521
USDJPY	153.97	USDCAD	1.41372	USDCHF	0.88823

帖子作者：forex_trader_28881