This is a problem in some other markets as well. What is a suitable substitute? Using volatility measures or components of the index?
As you and others have just said, a person can pull 60 points per contract ($500 margin) a week by doing 100 to 200 trades a week. This is especially reasonable when, on the ES, for example you can expect a 12 point range per day as a measure of what is offered. On average this is a 2 to 4 five minute bar hold. I posted an example this week where two trades that consumed 20 minutes of market time produced about 5% of the values in the profit range you suggest. 1.6 hours is 5% of the weekly trading time. So there is a great deal of time available to pick off more equally valuable turns. ################################## Dear Sir If you adressed this message to author ... suspect ,that exist not reason for retail with small capital to trade es small risk -en,ym, high volatile ert and dax(depend from margin conditions ,some time before openecry offered 1000$ intraday margin for dax) Example with 500%-600% per week related to multiple attempts with 100% loss.It can be only short term peak perfomance for small capital with objective -win day,week conterst or to make record . It is not for long-term ...
For long term, a person has a business plan and the trading goes through many stages of improvement and growth. DAX is the future for trading to make money. You list sets of criteria. For the long term a person needs places to shift commodities profits to simply because the commodities markets only have so much liquidity. The combination of commodities and currencies provide the base for extracting capital under leveraged conditions. Using 500% a week under steady state conditions after ramping up capital to the capacity of a given market is very doable. Weekly transfers otu of commodities and currencies are normal and that capital goes to position trade equities. This is less leveraged and does not have a significant upper bound in the application of capital. But it is prudent to not have too much capital in a stream nor too many streams. 100,000 share limits and 8 to 12 parallel streams of of 10 instruments each is a suitible application from an opportunity point of view and a management point of view. This is extraction and not competition. You can see that SAC and its clones simply buried themselves with an in opportune strategy. Surpluses beyond position trading need to be skimmed monthly into sector rotation applications. The rotations are usually up to two months per cycle. 4 1/2 weeks is currently optimum. Again this is an extraction process where an optimum amount of capital is removed from peaking sectors and reinvested in the rising sectors. there are about 200 sectors available for rotation. We have just come through an era where securitization, corporate books, and quantiative trading reigned. that has been driven to illiquidity now and for the forseeable future. Skirting around this modus as always been possible. The quant epic is like the carbon sink of natural cycles. The active carbon is ultimately parked in carbon sinks just like the white cliffs of Dover (carbonates derived from living organic life). There have never been any contests that replicate making money. There are several reasons: the contest rules, the contest trading platforms; and the contest participants that are drawn to poor rules and poor platforms. Too bad. The performance of trading may only be measured in comparison to what is offered. Being effective and efficient is related only to what is offered. 60 points a week on 100 to 200 trades demonstrates effectiveness and efficiency. Optimizing comes after obtaining effectiveness and efficiency. Here the level is 180 points a week on the same number of trades. The major shift is to precision and, as a direct consequence, more time in the market compared to the available market time. When a person looks at the feedback loops of a strategy, take OODA for example, it is easily seen that the OODA approach has no refinement capability as related to what the market offers. At best it is a model for competition of traders where competition is not the real game used for making money. Neither is mostly any other published modelling. It is not easy to draw anyone into the consideration of making money from what the market offers. There is not much commercial interest in that as you have pointed out. The interest of the financial industry largely lies in client relations and managing money of clients. This is very different than making money from what the market offers. As seen from above the equity curve has three levels of contribution each determined by the leveraged capacities. Adding client capital, of course, could be put on the table. In fact, it is about the only thing that is on the table for large financial institutions. Almost all bonuses come from dealing with clients and acquiring their capital and making use of it in non trading ways and taking a slice. Making money trading ultimately comes down to moving money out of other's accounts and into the trader's account. The market affords the capacity to do this and the stratagies afford the money velocities. Both are always present, therefore, the trader must always be in the market at capacity and be attaining the maximum velocity of transfer. This data is ever present and available to all. There are no contests that afford a demonstration of this kind of activity. Platform providers do not design to this specification either. If a person works and trades in this manner, it is considered unbelievable and astonishing. Why? simply because no one seems to consider extracting what markets offer as the design criteria for making money. The question is why not? The reason for why not is that the most capital given to designers is given to address the extend to which the market is out of balance and to have a design to take advantage of the imbalances. A person can go to where big money is operating and see that there is no connection to what is offered by markets and big money. You mention small money and what is done. Small money is a temporary situation at best. How long can a person be small if he is extracting the potential? From the above you can see why the bonuses at big money places are so small. These guys who get the bonuses are definitely afraid to trade. They just spend it instead. Can you imagine what it would be like if hedge funds and mutual funds made any money?
No offence ssss, but very hard to understand what are you trying to say with these "100% risk.... weekly 600% profit"... I understood your point that high frequency scalping is very profitable for brokers, but what are you trying to offer instead? P. S. As for me I don't even see why would I want to scalp at all. With retail commissions it's so much work and less profit compared to doing like 50 trades a week trading intraday swings with far better R/R. But thats just my case.
If you're scalping with 55-60 eurocents per roundtrip on Eurex, then commission is still an important factor but opens up a whole new world of possibilities in terms of strategies. The prop traders who have membership fees scalp ticks and half-ticks in the STIR-market and spreads of index futures. Maybe two ticks with index futures. As was said on this thread before, scalping is a loosely applied term and surely when considering retail commissions it's only viable on the longer term scalping strategies (sic).
With such commissions of course it would be the way to go... But with EUR4 roundtrip (usual retails comm.)...
CFerret Registered: Sep 2005 Posts: 343 12-23-07 05:15 AM No offence ssss, but very hard to understand what are you trying to say with these "100% risk.... weekly 600% profit"... As stated -if any operator have objectve's to win day ,week trading contest against 100-10000 competitors,he must perform great risk . 99% would loose ,one would win with result some 500 -1000% per week It is from praxis You can observe high and low part of table by by contest each month http://www.interbankfx.com/Contest/ContestResults.aspx I understood your point that high frequency scalping is very profitable for brokers, but what are you trying to offer instead? Author can not offer ,he is not teacher and not planned to be . Onlly from he's multiple contest experience(which alsov limited) ,author can say with good precision -who need this or another tactic (motive ) ,is 60% winning trade's realy or advertising?( adv junk ) ################################# P. S. As for me I don't even see why would I want to scalp at all. With retail commissions it's so much work and less profit compared to doing like 50 trades a week trading intraday swings with far better R/R. But thats just my case. ################################### All top results by contest as 755-855% montly by fxcm or 500-1250% per week by trader2007 was performed with 20-50 operations per week or month Alsov russian snsh performed from 11000 $ until 230 000$ in quartal with low quantity of operations Exist multi bln capabilities to perform 20-50 operations in month (time ,entry,exit ,position value and anothers parametr's)
...As was said on this thread before, scalping is a loosely applied term and surely when considering retail commissions it's only viable on the longer term scalping strategies (sic). ############# Speed advantage by institutional not forget alsov ...
OK, I see, your words were about contests crap, not real life everyday trading... Then everything you said is absolutely reasonable...