Turtle Traders suck?

Discussion in 'Trading' started by axeman, Feb 17, 2004.

  1. You captured the essence of the Turtle Trading Methodolgy....

    Michael B.


     
    #31     Feb 21, 2004
  2. Balance....grasshopper....balance

    Michael B.


     
    #32     Feb 21, 2004
  3. everytick,

    You must be a wise guy! I see you understood the turtles 'edge'.
    I'm sure it will make you rich! :D

    nononsense
     
    #33     Feb 21, 2004
  4. Divergence Software just came out with an eSignal .efs study that they call their "Turtle Trading System"....

    "This is an eSignal adaptation of the original Turtle system as described on the Turtle website. The system takes short-term and long-term breakout trades. When trades are entered, a Stop and Profit Exit are set. Add-on trades (a user option) are available per the original Turtle logic. Audible, pop-up and email alerts can also be selected. All parameters are configurable via a script menu and the script is eSignal Backtester and eSignal PaperTrade Broker ready. Source code is provided so the algorithms can be modified and integrated into other studies. Requires eSignal Version 7.5 or better to operate.

    http://www.sr-analyst.com/studies.htm

    [​IMG]
     
    #34     Mar 3, 2004
  5. This is pure speculation and just plain wrong.

    I was there. I made over 110% each year during the four years of the Turtle program and over $31.5 million for Richard Dennis.

    I also wrote the document on www.originalturtles.org.

    The reasons some people made money and others didn't came down to who could follow the rules and who couldn't stomach the ups and downs and therefore traded the rules erratically. Invariably those who varied from the rules did so at precisely the wrong time.

    Yes we were allowed to vary from the rules we were given but that was precisely the rope that hung the Turtles who lost money. If you stuck to the rules you made over 100% per year, period.

    I have also tested the rules over recent history and they still work reasonably well.

    - Curtis
     
    #35     Mar 3, 2004