Proving that a Variant Perception Strategy Works...

Discussion in 'Strategy Building' started by NoiseTrader, Sep 11, 2006.

  1. I use a technical-based interpretation of variant perception (developed over a 30 yr period) -- that's very profitable. Here is the record of trades and analysis over the past several months (in a very difficult period). I'll update this periodically.

    Here are some links that explain the method in a genaral way, its too profitable to fully diclose, but the general ideas may be helpful to some...

    More specific rules here...
  2. Would you mind disclosing your Y2006 ratio of (income generated by selling trading courses) to (income generating by actually trading your too profitable to disclose method) ?
  3. Probably 12 or 15:1 in favor of market-generated profits....

    I understand your pessimism -- but its pretty simple: You can follow the analysis along and prove it (or seek to disprove it) to your own satisfaction -- or you can dismiss out of hand what may turn out to be of great value.

    I hope you actually read through the trade logic in the links, a lot of pros are read my analysis daily and are using it as context in their profitable trading operations, in fact some of them are very successful hedge fund managers who don't waste any time reading things that does not produce results.
  4. m4a1


    i got this from the link you posted. with all due respect, isn't this exactly how Julian Robertson blew up his fund?

    "Big Idea #1: Clifford Asness is a quant. A 39-year old who, last I checked, was pushing $13.5 billion around in market in ‘05. His wildly successful hedge fund AQR Capital is built on two insights that seem contradictory : “Cheap assets outperform expensive assets more than they should” and “Momentum portfolios work better than they should.”

    Now Asness, like most with an edge, tends to be pretty secretive, but I’ve got a few quant friends in that world and I understand, in general, what he does. He sorts stocks (or whatever assets he’s trading) into deciles from cheap to expensive, and he buys when stocks in the cheap decile group trigger a momentum buy; he then shorts roughly an equal amount of stocks in the expensive decile group as they trigger a momentum sells and rides this market neutral portfolio. His personal cut for doing this runs $25-50 million a year."
  5. AaronCapps

    AaronCapps Global Futures

    I did a google search on Julian Robertson and what i found was that he went long the top 200 stocks and short 200 worse stocks.

    His blow out has been contributed to the tecnology craze of the late 90's.

    This thread seems to be about going long the cheap stocks of one sector and short the expensive stocks of the same sector to attempt a neutral hedge for Risk. counting on the cheap stocks to make a larger % move then the expensive stocks.

    that is my opinion based on what i have read and seen so far.
  7. m4a1


    but those clients who earned 15% per year for x number of years lose everything when the fund blows up for that 1 year. so overall return is -100%, maybe + some change.

    the fund manager stays rich because he keeps the fees he earned from all the previous years earning 15% per year. on that one year that he blows up, his clients lose everything, but he doesn't have to return any of his fees.

  9. I lost interest in your web site after reading and searching for a short while. I don't trust anything much more complex than price action, not that I think your system is not valid and profitable. More like I don't want to deal with anything complex to conserve my feeble mind of energy! I also could not find on your site an approximate rate of return to be expected nor historical real returns to get me or I think any other potential customers interested. There is a record of some trades but it's not enough.
  10. It never ceases to amaze that something that looks or even hints at promising is so readily dismissed out of hand after a cursory glance --

    When I started learning how to trade 30 years ago, I would try just about anything and then prove to myself if it showed something of value or not -- if I had not had this "I'll check anything out attitude" especially those ideas far afield, OUTSIDE of the realm that I thot worked that I would never have developed a lot of the tools that I use profitably today --

    Get on my list,watch the analysis
    over time in future out-of-sample data then prove to yourself if this way of looking at markets has any merit.

    Here's some data: Out of those Elite traders who have signed up to get my analysis in the last 6 months, less than 1% have voted it was of no use in their trading and cancelled, 99% still read it religiously --

    Stop banging your colllective heads against the wall -- and try some of these crazy ideas I talk about and then prove to yourself what works and what does not work.
    #10     Sep 11, 2006