I am pleased to announce the completion of beta testing of the SCHADEJJ Trading System. It is the culmination of nine years of development by the eight principal analysts and algorithm developers represented in the name, and by twelve supporting coders, archivers, testers, rationalizers and coffee makers. The development teams pronounces it "shot edge". The rather less reverent support team snickeringly refers to it as "shoddy." No matter. Every organization has its dissidents. SCHADEJJ is an inspired synthesis of every seemingly plausible system posted on ET. We hope you will recognize them all. Quite a few concepts are original with the developers, and have been posted here over that same nine-year period. Calculated from a one-minute price and volume chart, it is a tribute to the creative bickering genius of this community, analogous to the popular 1000 monkeys with typewriters theory of the origin of Shakespeare's plays. After the close today I will provide a chart which will readily facilitate back-engineering the code. The developers feel strongly that ET would not value and use the system if given it outright, the received opinion here being that first one must "do the work." Kindly stand by for the chart posting.
The system netted $902.90 with the minimum trading increment of my preferred daytrading instrument. The identity of that instrument is unimportant because SCHADEJJ works with any instrument regardless of volatility or volume.
Seriously? Did I just reverse engineer it in 2 seconds and I didn't use volume at all? An EMA of an HMA? Or is this thread a parody of something and I didn't get the joke?
Thank you for replying so intelligently, IronFist! Such a rarity on ET these days. Normally my threads attempt to counter the idiotic with the parodic, but this time I was deadly serious with the attachment of one of my best intraday systems. Congratulations on reverse engineering it using price only and so quiickly. Mine actually uses volume. And I have a half dozen that perform about the same, each using different methods. This lends support to my oft-posted contention that most profitable traders model the same data in unique ways, but if they are good they all get similar results.
assuming you're being serious, I've backtested tons of MA-only systems and none of them made money over time. The same as all trend following systems, large, sometimes phenomenally large gains, followed by a billion small losses on a choppy day. I mean I'm totally kidding this system is awesome. Dude let's sell it to people and split the profit.
Be careful. The fact that you can duplicate that day's performance with an MA-type system does not imply that your back-engineering will work in the future. And you no doubt noticed that I have not shown performance for a narrow range day. There is nothing even remotely like an MA in the particular system I showed.
i was talking about my version of it with the HMA and EMA It is interesting to note you can get similar results by analyzing much different data. For example, I've gotten similar trend following systems (entries and exits) by looking at only MAs for one system and then only bid/ask volume for another system.
Which of course begs the eternal question: if everybody responds to the market in the same way, even if for different reasons, how can anybody make money long term?