Mark Fischer made his dough getting fat edge in the Silver pit. You're missing the point here. A series of draw downs is a blowup. Obviously Vic and Aaron said better to blow all at once with the chance of high frequency profits than death by a thousand cuts. If I use a negative expectancy discipline no matter what my risk, I lose. Forget magnitudes.
not to get off-topic here but does anybody have details on Ed Seykota's system? I mean I know he uses trend-following but that is a pretty vague term.
I heard tulips were pretty popular just before he was born. I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people.â Isaac Newton The specialists only gave out level 1 back then, and for some reason, in all his genius, he just couldn't figure out why he always seemed to be wrong on his erudite calculations. Here we are centuries later -- and for some odd reason, the house still wins 99% of the time. I guess all those GS execs are just too intelligent for the world's Newtons, eh?
Your question was the significance of VN and Aaron and the answer is nothing with respct to the markets and "systems" overall. A series of drawdowns is not a blow up. A drawdown is a reduction in account equity from a trade or series of trades. Everyone has drawdowns cause no one is 100%. You must mean a specific size or type of drawdown because any loss is a drawdown. I do not know of any long-term investor who has not had drawdowns, but that does not mean they blew up and closed up shop.
I guess you didn't read the recommendations on his site? Probably your own fault then... http://www.schindlertrading.com/index.php?page=diversification "We recommend investing no more than 5% to 10% of your portfolio with Schindler Trading to take advantage of the diversification benefits without overly exposing your portfolio to the volatility of the Schindler Trading program. With a minimum investment of $20,000, a little math shows that an investment with Schindler Trading is only appropriate for investors with an investment portfolio of $200,000 or more." You probably received a prospectus or agreement outlining the risks. Unless you can prove HUGE gross negligence, you're probably out of luck. If you *needed* that 100K for retirement, why didn't you put it in something safer?
This statement is 100% false. I can't believe this message board. Who wants to bet me that Jreynolds created a new alias just to post this. Whoever you are, you do know that this statement is libelous right and you can be taken to court? If Aaron was a jerk, which he is not, he could get a lawyer to suponea Baron to give up your identity and serve you with court papers. I just want to make sure you are aware of that.
His fund is not down 90%. I have his numbers in front of me. You want me to call your bluff? Are you ready to put some money on the line? I know exactly what happened and the story you are posting is 100% inacurrate.
wow. a man in the know. how do the rest of get close enough to have such information. i'm only hearing about it now. please tell us more secrets of the wall street insider.
I concur with Maverick. As far as I know (which is end of 2007), Schindler is not anywhere near down 90%.