Good stuff, @Spectre2007. I agree that index futures are noisy and even random on lower time frames. It seems easier to try and capture a larger chunk of the daily range. Doesn't require a great win rate, either. Cut your losses ruthlessly and add to a winner once in a while.
- Biden dropping out - Yemen response, awaited - Will continued bombing of Yemen persist - Will Yen continue to rally (Japanese economic landscape) - Trump implied win, /ES rallies - Will FOMC continue to be dovish? Powell may look to continue his tenure ES should rally, unless Oil flow is curtailed with Yemen bombing tankers. Both bonds and equities should be favored for global inflows in the midst of Chinese liquidating their holdings. Trump will crater oil prices, he will promote domestic energy generation (inflation expectations mitigated) Ukraine/Russia ceasefire with new peace deal forced.
dude, i have tsla at average cost basis of 35 (post splits), on the news they finished their first shaghai shop. you are late to the party. the point is that tsmc makes 100% of the high end chips, it will cost more in the futures. and if he gets chinese emotional, no chips for anyone.
only index bet i am comfortable now is longing rty. it is 6% below the high while other 3 already topped out so many times this year. when the fed is on the rate cutting path, small companies will do well, at least will catch up the pace.
If I could ask one more question. So the example we looked at last time was in hindsight too easy. Price did exactly what you were expecting and price followed perfectly your methodology. But lets look at the July 17th now. I outline first the high tick as you would call it at 5667, which did only poke a few ticks before dropping back down, but it didn't go down too far before going higher and making a higher high. (It turned right at the previous day low and VWAP, which in itself is very juicy for me) So would there be a short here that might be a loser or a break-even trade? And then 30 minutes later, it broke the low tick that was put in just before the open at 5653, but it very quickly rallied back up, and went back inside the range, so this support didn't turn into resistance (unlike the example from July 19). (Here the bounce happened after the 5650 level broke, so that is also juicy for expecting a bounce) So my question is this. Here it didn't work as cleanly, and you of course never know in advance, so where would your trades be here and are you taking on losses? As a follow up question, how often are you taking losses? Do you just get out right away after it doesn't go your way for 4-8 ticks? Since your stats from the trading competition were so, so good, you clearly know what you are doing, but if we break down your individual trades, would be see lots of losses? Its of course no problem to take 3 to 4 losses of 2 points each if you end up having multiple 10 point winners in a session, so is this how your trades stack up, or do you actually have a very high win rate as a result of waiting for only the best trades?
your entries should always be on a retracement to build a buffer against the stop loss being hit. Unless its news event, and your trying to just get in with the momentum. my win rate is 90%, I have a stop against catastrophic loss secondary to infrastructural issues. I make sure the stop is on the broker end. But I have a 'mental stop' if price is not adhering to my internal modeling. Having a mental stop lets price action be noisy without taking you out. This can also be dangerous since one trade can take out your daily pnl to the wood shed. So its not for everyone. Most novices should use minimal leverage and trade on the longer timeframes. there is also the 'dispersion' principle in regards to price action. The wave structure will be of general size on the retracements. Also don't blow your wad on one entry. Scale in entries, since price action can be noisy. there is also the 'feeler' trade, meaning you just have 1 unit on to see what the price is indicating. The feeler is another internal reinforcement of your modeling. So further unit entries are in alignment of the bias of the feeler.