Have you read either of my books? The books show TF systems, philosophy and psychology. Very straight forward. I don't get the impression that you understand, use or follow trend following strategies as commonly known. Correct me if I am wrong. In terms of how you would not define the American dream as 'broke', have you seen my film? Or just the title? Update: It should be noted that your other views added below are not trend following or remotely close. Trend following doesn't involve sitting around trying to figure why prices are moving one way or the other.
Beau, go read the disclosure documents at the following links cover to cover. They may help you to have a better feel for trend following -- if that is a goal. If not all on the sites, try iasg.com too. http://www.dunncapital.com http://www.wintoncapital.com http://www.altispartners.com http://www.transtrend.com http://www.aspectcapital.com http://www.hawksbillcapital.com http://www.grahamcapital.com http://www.emccta.com http://www.abrahamtrading.com http://www.millburncorp.com http://www.drurycapital.com http://www.clarkecap.com http://www.tacticalnet.com http://www.saxoninvestment.com http://www.eckhardttrading.com http://www.sunrisecapital.com http://www.jwh.com http://www.bluecrestcapital.com/ http://www.ahl.com/ http://jpdent.com/ http://www.chdwk.com http://www.vacacm.com/
In one of your earlier posts a a little while back you specifically responded to someone that you didn't trade. I was only taking you at your word. We all know you don't run a fund. Your response was not in reference to a fund. Give me a bit and I will post a link to your statement if you need me to? My post specifically stated that the book was published 7 years ago. 2004 plus 7 is 2011. We also know that your book has been updated twice since then. I've read the last update but not the one from November 2005. I'm probably mistaken but where in either of those books was a definition of trend listed? I would assume everyone understands the concept of buying pullbacks in extended up moves or selling pullbacks in extended down moves, you do not?
I am certainly not defending trend following but the fact is, Covel is the world renowned authority on the subject. He has interviewed 100's of major trend followers and other traders. His work dwarfs my 50 or so published interviews in 2004--2006 of financial heavyweights. When Covel defines trend following, it's the accepted definition based on his research. Certainly not the self serving definition of some nonsense sprewing no name alias on elite trader.
Interesting. I know that Wikipedia isn't the end-all-be-all but it is a great place to start. They have a pretty straight forward and generic definition. "Trend following is an investment strategy that tries to take advantage of long-term moves that seem to play out in various markets. The strategy aims to work on the market trend mechanism and take benefit from both sides of the market, enjoying the profits from the ups and downs of the stock or futures markets. Traders who use this approach can use current market price calculation, moving averages and channel breakouts to determine the general direction of the market and to generate trade signals. Traders who employ a trend following strategy do not aim to forecast or predict specific price levels; they simply jump on the trend and ride it." So Mr. Covel, why wouldn't it behoove a trader or investor to research trends to better understand and blueprint the components of a trend so they could possibly better define entry areas thus improving overall profits and minimize losses?
Funny that the wikipedia article is mentioned. I am not only name checked in the trend following book listed as a source but also thanked for my contribution profusely in the other book cited as a source trend trading by brown on page XVII. Funny!!
Dan Rather has interviewed literally thousands of business people over his 40+ years in the industry but he has never been or ever will be considered an expert on business. He is just a respected journalist that made an error at the ending point in his career. Perfect example of a journalist's humanity and potential fallibility.
The post was directed at anyone who makes up definitions. Elite seems to be full of these folks. Regarding Dan Rather--- I disagree with your analogy-- Dan rather interviewed people from all types of business, politics and every walk of life. Had he focused on a small niche such as trend following-- he would be an expert in that field. You are comparing a broad based journalist to a niche researcher. There is a huge difference. Surf
Although I agree with Mr. Covel that knowing why price moves in a certain direction isn't necessary for a good trend trading strategy, you raise a good point in that a more explicit definition of trend would be enlightening in how best to exploit it. But I doubt we'll be getting any consensus on the definition. For example, the "long-term" reference in the wiki definition seems unnecessary because trend following can be done intraday, unless wiki is using "long-term" in a relative way, i.e., long within the given timeframe, no matter how fast that timeframe may be. For example, 200 minutes would be "long-term" for those trading in the 1-minute timeframe but wouldn't even register for EOD traders. Of course wiki gives no clue as to whether "long-term" is being used relatively or absolutely so the definition is subject to criticism. We all "know" what trend is in a general sense; the key for at least some of us is finding a way to quantify it so it can be measured and exploited systematically.