Trading times for yesterday, Friday June 6, 2003: 15:44 (937) 14:22 (732) 10:27 (143) luckily, it doesn't make much difference if i post these ex post facto. results coming probably (hopefully) tomorrow. this is only two weeks worth of data, so i don't expect anything conclusive.
since the number of trades is different between my method, walther's times, and the random times, i am posting the results as a per-trade P/L. results for 05/27/2003 thru 06/06/2003 : BASELINE (my method): -0.17 per trade. i had a loss over this period. RANDOM: -0.84 per trade. WALTHER's times: -0.53 per trade. if i use his times as a filter for entering my own trades, i get -5.75 ES points for -1.91 per trade (yes, only 3 trades entered) in short, his entry times were worse than mine, but better than random.. note: the sample size is quite small. i'll probably collect more data as long as he posts SP500 times, and compare again later.
I just want to post real statistics of my trading times. For some reason you felt is ok to distort and deliberately lie about hypothetical results my method produced . In above mention period of time my method had 12 winners and no losing trade . Walter
I am not lying. This is for my method only.. I am not talking about using your indicators. Why would I care how it performs for your indicators/method??? I only care about how it works for me, how it improves my methods. You should be happy to know that (so far) your times work better than random. To clarify: MY RESULTS SPEAK ONLY ABOUT USING WALTHER'S TIMES WITH MY OWN PERSONAL TRADING METHODS. EVERYONE SHOULD TEST THEIR OWN METHODS, AND DECIDE FOR THEMSELVES WHAT WORKS AND WHAT DOESN'T.
Trading times for today, Monday June 9, 2003: 12:38 (472) 12:00 (377) 10:29 (148) I know 10:30 has passed already. I don't think anyone is seriously taking trades based on these, so it shouldn't be a problem.