Hello, I don't want to sound like the odd ball, but for some reason I really don't see the issue with buying an indicator or system that has proven to work. This is better then spending countless hours figuring out something to make (and losing money and time away from family, etc) money when someone else has already done it. I just pay for their system, learn from it, enhance it, and gain experience at a faster rate. Plus I have a working system that I can build on or gain ideas from, plus some mentoring. I'm not afraid of failing, but why not learn from something that works for a fee. What am I missing? Maybe it's just me, but I rather pay to learn faster and make money now then take years figuring it out and suffer stress from losing. Just my 2 cents.
Apparently 30% of traders (standing to the poll of this thread) share your same way of thinking, and I think it is a very smart way of thinking.
w4rn1ng, Seriously, i don't understand why the poll is not 100% buy a system. Why figure it out yourself when someone can teach you or just use their system? I pay $3000 for a system tommorow if it's meet my criteria. That's just me. That being said, I am working on testing my own trading ideas.
Although I don't agree with your point of view, I like your replies - you seem a nice and polite guy If systems you buy make you a consistent profitable trader then go for it ! What 30% of naive traders apparently don't realise is that market makers can see who their counter parties are whereas normal retail traders don't have access to the information. Besides, market makers have obligations to take risks to make financial markets function well. It's not they want to take risks but they are obliged to take risks for liquidity demanders. My point is TA itself does not work consistently and any system based TA is bound to fail in the long run.
I agree with the fact that most trading systems are not really a good thing, personally I'm against any fixed trading system, and simply know that none can work, if not for a limited period of time. The reason for this is that the market conditions are constantly changing.
victorycountry, Thanks for your comment. I respect your comments, but I will stay on the naive trading until proven otherwise. The goal of trading is to make money as easy as possible. Whatever the market makers do, let them do it, none of my business. I rather keep things very simple and trade whatever makes money. I don't trade that large anyway. I simply do not believe that all systems will eventually fail as other posters has posted. If that's the case, why even trade if eventually the system will fail? If I backtest a system over +8 years why should I suspect it to eventually fail? On the other hand, its common sense to think that everyone can't trade the same system for along amount of time if system is sold to the public. I rather take that risk and still buy it and make money and manage my money accordingly while I build my own system for me and gain valuable experience trading a vendor system. Learning fast and easy and simple at a cost that is a win-win situation. This my is real 2nd year trading, so maybe I am naive, but that makes logic sense to me.
People think that small retail orders don't get the attention of the market makers or algos. You would be surprised when you put your small order between the bid ask, how the algos react. It really depends on the liquidity in the option contract your trading. If you become the bid or the offer then other players are going to start reacting to it. You're not going to move the market but the other players going to try to find a way to take advantage of you.
Agree I have experienced this first hand, dead market with a 2 tick spread, up the bid with a 1 lot and it sets of a quick frenzy.