They are pretty much as was stated by me in a previous post.... Anyways besides this, I should also add that it is not good to look for re-entries (based off a newly formed low) after a failed signal, other than that, that pretty much sums it up. I am finding I like this trading slightly more, because I can pretty much put in the order and once it is filled, put in stops in two places and trail my failed signal stop. I am looking to start putting together a trading business plan, over the next two weeks. Once I have that together along with some confidence and experience with this system I will probably begin trading it.
Trades for past two days 3-4-04 9:18: Short @ 1152.25, cover @ 1153.5, -1.25 pts 3-5-04 no trades Gross since inception: 21.00 pts
When the system is 90%, and the trader is not required to think, the trader might have a chance. The man I used to work for invested big money only to fail at this business....High paid programmers, computer experts, etc....It is not a 2 week confidence thing....maybe a 2 year confidence thing. I'm slow...it took me 3 years/4,000 hours/500 charts to backtest to think I've got something promising...Maybe I don't...If I did, it would not be given away or sold so the whole world could trade on my #'s... Work for it and you might get lucky.
Trades for today Long 1156.00, stop @ 1154.5, stop hit -1.5 pts Lately i have begun to notice that when I attempt to trade a false breakout like I have been doing and am then subsequently stopped out, there looks to be a high probability that the breakout is for real, and thus this may be a good point to stop and reverse. However at this point I have no system for this, so until I have a tradeable plan for these types of trades I will hold back on executing them. version77, you requested a number of trades that have allowed me to get x amount of points using this system. When going back to calculate this I realized that I was mixing in some results that should not be mixed in for the system i am currently working on. The corrected gross since I have begun trading this system should read as follows (as of today) Gross pts: 16.00 # of trades: 10 So far I consider this to be pretty good. The system is certainly tradeable and even when factoring in slippage, the results are still pretty good, my backtesting that I have done manually so far confirms this as well. You also must remember that this is only on one contract, so scaling out would possibly improve these results. Anyways like I have been saying I am going to continue to trade this until I feel that I can trust it and will also work on trading the breakouts that results from the failed signals. I find I enjoy this type of trading as it is much more relaxed then the frantic day trading/scalping I have been doing earlier. The rules are also very clear to me and without indicators attached to the system there is no crossing and then uncrossing moving averages or any sort of vagueness whatsoever. One flaw that I do see in the system is the reliance upon fixed boundaries by which the breakouts may fail by. Currently the breakout must be .75 pts or more and then retrace from the original point by .5 pts. I feel that this is rather weak and that these numbers are currently curve fit to the most recent market. I am considering changing these numbers accoriding to how much the daily range is changing.
Come up with something that has to do with market conditions. e.g., how long is the base it is breaking out from, what kind of volume was there on the breakout, etc. It seems like criteria like these would stand the test of time better than a fixed point view.
Good call, actually I have been working on this slowly but surely. I have been watching volume and I find it is very very helpful, however at this point I have no way to incorporate it into my trading. As for market conditions I believe you are correct about incorporating those as well, but I have yet to do so in an effective manner. Today took one trade today, 7:54 long at 1142.75, scratch trade, trailing stop hit. this is a trade that likely could have been avoided by using volume as a filter, all the down bars had solid volume while the weakness was obviously on the upside as there was a lack of volume.
You are placing added pressure on yourself by posting all your stuff.........You seem to be looking for the magic answer and it ain't going to happen overnight....
porgie, this is kserra's Journal. Why do you keep getting in the middle of his journal with your comments? I am going to have to put you on ignore... you are very depressing...