http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/price-efficiency.asp "The semi-strong version of EMH holds that while prices are efficient, they react instantaneously to new information, while the strong version of EMH maintains that asset prices reflect not just public knowledge, but private insider information as well." Semi-strong-form efficiency[edit] In semi-strong-form efficiency, it is implied that share prices adjust to publicly available new information very rapidly and in an unbiased fashion, such that no excess returns can be earned by trading on that information. Semi-strong-form efficiency implies that neither fundamental analysis nor technical analysis techniques will be able to reliably produce excess returns. To test for semi-strong-form efficiency, the adjustments to previously unknown news must be of a reasonable size and must be instantaneous. To test for this, consistent upward or downward adjustments after the initial change must be looked for. If there are any such adjustments it would suggest that investors had interpreted the information in a biased fashion and hence in an inefficient manner.
Damned! List of things we require. 1. An edge 2. Huge ranging market (has to be easy and obvious to trade though) 3. No spread if possible 4. Zero or minimal coms and fees 5. Free money 6. No war 7. No famine 8. World peace 9. Heaven guaranteed 10. Anything that's good!
Let's throw in a quick accounting thingy here just for confusion on their business side. Let's say currently they have 40 Live traders. (since they haven't been adding and I am sure some of them failing, their numbers are probably close where it was a year ago, but that isn't the point). Since most Combiners passes the 50 K combine AND the Live trading account's value is inflated by a ratio of 3 at least, we can make the following math: 40 trades x 90K average account size / 3 of actual account needed = 1.2 million That is a rather small amount for backing 3+ dozen traders. My numbers here or there could be off a bit, but the overall point here is that the amount needed to back their live traders isn't that high and I am sure quite a few of the posters here could come up with that much money. Now here comes the interesting part. Let's assume the backer actually has way more money, but the amount needed for backing didn't really increase over the year. So what if the backer has 5 million, but they only use 1.2-1.5 mill for backing? What are they doing with the extra capital when there is not enough traders to use the available money up??? I am sure some of you smart guys can come up with good usage for that money....
Es has went up 50, down 60 and up 35 in past 10 trading days and you say it is a terrible product to trade? I've traded Es nearly everyday since 2006 and survived the 6 point intraday ranges it once had. My only edge is buying fear and selling greed and it still works 8 years later. Hell even in a low Vix market it is a money printing machine if you are patient. As a contrarian trader I clean up with vol spikes due to mean reversion and spend the rest of the time grinding waiting for the next big move. The spread is just a cost of doing business to me. What index do you think is a better instrument to trade ?
Trading ES you gotta be a one pump chump.... My avg trade per day is like 1.25 over the last 123 days.
Forget about indexes, then. What instrument do you think is "easier" to daytrade compared to ES, Maverick?
No such thing as "easier" or "harder" You either have an exploitable edge or you don't. Now, this does not mean you cannot make money trading something that does not have an edge. I think people on ET have a very difficult time understanding basic math and expected value. If you don't have an edge, it simply means your compensation is coming 100% from risk. Which is fine. But you need to understand that concept. IF, you are going to go that route, you need to really really really understand the concept of optimization and you do NOT, I repeat do NOT want to leverage yourself. It's exactly the OPPOSITE of what most people do here. They have no edge, trade the most efficient products and use the most leverage. And of course their failure rate is near 100%. The math does add up.