When you run a de-briefing of your results at the end of the day/week and you found that the 30-YR had a+4 long bias but effectively it traded short all the day (apart during the up spike on GDP headline release) , which considerations do you use to evaluate such a scenario vs. the actual result? I mean constructively, obviously! Thank you, Bernard
"Annoyed" was the word you used in your post, which I quoted. Why you think it is strange that I also used it is beyond understanding. But your strange behavior continues. As you said, lets drop it. But you remain a strange puppy.
Art's futures biases for May 1. A "1" means bullish bias. A "-1" means bearish bias. The total is the sum of biases. A positive sum will be long bias. A negative sum will be a short bias. A sum of zero will be a neutral bias. _____________________________________________ The CzarCharts are projecting still further upside action in the bond complex for Tuesday.
Art's futures biases for May 2. A "1" means bullish bias. A "-1" means bearish bias. The total is the sum of biases. A positive sum will be long bias. A negative sum will be a short bias. A sum of zero will be a neutral bias. _____________________________________________ For Wednesday, the bullish majority in the indexes should rule. We just switched to the bearish timeframe for the month-of-year, which could mean a prolonged disappointment for the fund-playing legions. We're not quite there yet though. Ideally, Wednesday the 8th would be the day the cumulative calendar will biases turn positive. From there, it will be a matter of how the other indicators fall into line. There are still bull flashes across the bond complex, albeit less insistent than they have been the last couple days.
Art's futures biases for May 2. A "1" means bullish bias. A "-1" means bearish bias. The total is the sum of biases. A positive sum will be long bias. A negative sum will be a short bias. A sum of zero will be a neutral bias. _____________________________________________ For Thursday, the CzarCharts are proclaiming the indexes a dead wash. This dovetails with the fact that the market generally chops around the day after a big move. The signals are still a net buy for the bonds despite a contradictory 5-year either-or.
Bernard 111 wrote When you run a de-briefing of your results at the end of the day/week and you found that the 30-YR had a+4 long bias but effectively it traded short all the day (apart during the up spike on GDP headline release) , which considerations do you use to evaluate such a scenario vs. the actual result? I mean constructively, obviously! Thank you, Bernard hi Bernard. I'm not sure i understand your question. if you mean how do i analyse the fact that the move was contrary to the projection, all i generally do is say "i guess that's one for the 'L' column." maybe you mean what is relevant in the overall profit/loss analyisis during testing. that's just a very primitive "if it closed in your direction, it's a profit, contrary, a loss" stat. i realize that doesn't reflect exact trading logistics such as when you had a bigger short opportunity all day even though the close was higher. though imperfect, i still consider it helpful to know whether a market wants to close higher or lower under given circumstances. hope i helped
Hi Art, I'm trying to developing a more scenario-trading style with my bonds decisions switching away from scalping but it's not easy to develop such a new frame of mind. That's why I was interested to know how you evaluate ex-post the trading session a mkt that went down when the scenario was with bias +4. Thank you for your clarification. - B.