Discussion in 'Journals' started by Sweet Bobby, May 18, 2016.
I want to see newwurldmn and sweet bobby throw down behind the piggly wiggly.
That would be a sad day for ET.
nah, it's be a great day....it would be WWE style...SB would throw his creepy doll thing in his profile picture and knock NW the F out.
OK, so would Bobby explain the master plan from here now? How does he proceed in 2017?
All of this for a paper trading simulation
That wasn't very nice Algofy, you made Sweet Bobby take his profile pic down.
Maybe he's just doing a different pose with it.
If we all could just expect perfect fills and unlimited liquidity, trading would be orders of magnitude easier. I know next to nothing about options but when liquid futures and ETFs have serious slippage then what could be said about relatively ill-liquid options.
If you do any modeling - in my opinion you should assume screen fills (hit the bid, lift the offer).
The reality is the execution of options is terrible. The brokers provide a delayed quote feed and market makers don't provide fair quotes even when the underlying has tight spreads. They back off when they want to and not just when the underlying spreads widen and there is no obligation to quote markets. At least in Asia, they are required to quote markets or they can be fined. If you want to do real modeling, my suggestion is trade small and experience the real execution that you can expect. I have done modeling with real market data in simulation mode but that still failed to pick up the algos that reacted to my algos. There is no good way to simulate the real market as the computers are constantly reacting to order flows.
If you start to analyze your trades and market impact, you will scratch your head as to how bad the execution gets especially in volatile markets - they trade through your price and you don't get filled cause it happened on a different exchange by a high velocity trader with fiber between his algo and all ten exchanges - they will just pick you off and front run your orders.