Stopped out for a few tick profit, was busy with other things. In hindsight looks like I should've covered on around 1.4574. Interesting approach tho and will test further for a possible addition to the toolbox. Trade management seems to be very subjective (as with any method) but I like the style and will dig deeper.
If the positive expectation is on the side of trend following on intraday ES futures, then it must be pretty easy to prove that through some kind of tradestation code. Has anyone done that?Of course, I'm sure the gurus will claim their method can't be codified, that there is an 'art' element to it as well. Put enough to these different 'artistic interpretations' on how trend following is supposed to be done then a few are guaranteed to be winners I'm open minded to the possibility of this working but I have to see some numbers
daal - here is the honest truth. i just ran a bunch of numbers for the book i'm writing and the problem is that that some definition of trend is needed to run the test. any definition of trend is subject to a tradeoff between lag and false signal. any test is a joint test of whatever trend is actually in the market AND your specific definition of the trend. the reality is that it is possible to structure a test that shows weak hints of what you're asking about or that shows the edge behind some of the _pieces_ of trading systems. (again i've done that for my book) but it is much harder than we wish to make a simple test to prove the edge is there in firm statistical test. from a discretionary trader's standpoint, it is possible to add discretion and make the stats a little better than they are raw. from a pure system standpoint, most trading systems in equities are mean reverting and trend following in futures. it's a good question. sorry there is no quick and easy answer.
may i second your search, pls. just yesterday, thursday, the normally profitable hard stop of 20 for daytrade, for cl market, turned the table on me. twice it hit my stop with breakeven plus 3, then proceeded speedily south.... if any guru tries to lure you to believe that his one system would enrich you.... better think again.... adamg is telling you the truth as he experiences it.... remember hunt brothers....? they were right.... i was enriched then.... but then.... anyone followed them to the end.... would be ended with them as well.... adamg.... let's know what you find out.... ok? what is the name of your book? have a name for it yet? regards
The best way to smoke out those BS poster is simple, take one of the daily chart, show them the mid day chart, let said the price chart from 10am to 1pm, then ask them if they are thinking the market is going to go up or down. And most important, ask them what is their profit target and stop loss. Take into account the commision and bid/ask slippage. Try it for 10 times, I bid that they will only right in less than 5 times. This is not surprise, but the most surprise part will be if you look at their overall profit/loss based on their "define" profit target/stop loss, most of them are actually LOSS (after commision and slippage). It boil down to something simple, those using a high risk/reward (let say risk/reward = 1/2 will only win in average one in three trade, and after commission and slipage, they are actually loss; for risk/reward =1, win about 50% of time but still loss after commission & slippage, same thing happen to any risk/reward) It is easy to post all the BS TA after event. Same as the authors in those TA books. The winner is always the brokers, MM, trading educator, web site promoters, trading system sellers, and -those "self pro-claim successful day traders" that posted in here because they are under the secure and "consistent" payroll from Barron .
Hi nakachalet, I actually don't have a title yet... turns out that is pretty much the hardest part of the process lol. I can tell you this... I did extensive and proper research... I literally generated 2 gigabytes of csv number files for my research for the book and only ended up using a fraction of it. The short answer is that there are some edges, and they can be applied in either systematic or discretionary ways, but they are much smaller than most people would like to think. I don't post after the fact BS... that drives me nuts... I do post a video every weekend (had been doing 2 a week but it's going to weekends only) on my YouTube channel (AHGrimes) and I also tweet some days. I don't tweet some days at all but when I tweet, I tweet everything the good the bad and the ugly. Check out my YouTube and you'll find a webinar I just did yesterday where I addressed a few of these issues. FYI... I am not selling anything. I do have a book coming out (probably 9-12 months) and I am very excited about it because I think it does things that simply have not been done in print before. It's a complete exposition from statistical roots to actual setups to psychology. But whatever I'm not here hawking my book... I'm much more interested in focusing on what really works in the market. (This thread btw is a step in the right direction.) No B.S.... trading is really hard... One reason is simply that the edges are so small but then there are a lot of behavioral issues that complicate the playing field as well. Check out my YouTube... start there. I'll answer what questions I can, but I'm spotty... some days still writing like 14 hours a day so I don't really answer emails or chat those days.
Could someone posts some charts from today using channels? Preferably 6E,ES, or NQ. I was looking at 60 min charts and 5 min charts. Just didn't seem to work as well today. Thanks in advance!
I have used trendlines before. It's more of an art than a science and takes some time to master. They're constantly changing as the day progresses. I've gotten much better at using them to trade with over the last few months. Mine just weren't holding up as well today it seemed. I want to see others' interpretations from today's charts.
Careful using trendlines at will, to make sure you are using the correct ones try to make it a requirement that they are actually part of a well established channel otherwise you might find yourself analyzing noise. FoN