who ruined the US markets ?

Discussion in 'Trading' started by iceman1, Dec 7, 2012.

  1. My thoughts exactly. :cool:
     
    #61     Dec 11, 2012
  2. Everyone advocates this in these markets but I think this is just recipe for disaster. Increasing size to account for lower volatility is destined to fail because the R/R is horrible when you try to trade "noise" (or a tiny range), you will lose on spreads and on commissions in the long run. Its worse with a bumped up size because you lose even more.
     
    #62     Dec 11, 2012
  3. pemully

    pemully

    Livermore said no man can beat the market ...
     
    #63     Dec 11, 2012
  4. Specterx

    Specterx

    Nikkei had plenty of volatility in the last years...
     
    #64     Dec 11, 2012
  5. Specterx

    Specterx

    As for "crappy markets" - those grind-up periods we get after each major Fed intervention (e.g. late 2010-early 2011) tend to be my best months, with the lowest drawdowns etc. The market is so predictable that you can trade it with tremendous size and no worries (though you do have to hold through multiple days). It's boring, but the point is to make money not to be entertained.

    That said my personal sweet spot is an average ES daily range of maybe 12-14 points. Less than that and it's hard to be flat at EOD and still get reasonable trades, while I don't necessary do any better with much higher vix levels. There is more range but the movements and 'mood' of the market are less predictable, you aren't in practice at your maximum level of focus all day to take advantage of every swing, etc.
     
    #65     Dec 11, 2012
  6. I guess that there are a few ways to view volatility. Most guys want "tradeable" volatility, not illiquid crash type volatility, as that wipes out more traders than it actually helps.

    And realistically, as much as I hear about guys longing for 2008 type volatility, I bet we lost more than half of the regular posters on this site during that time frame...and how many prop firms disappeared around that time. Those short bursts of intense volatility seem to hasten the process of rewarding those who are exceptional at this and literally slitting the throat of those who are marginal players.
     
    #66     Dec 11, 2012
  7. And from what I can recall, Livermore literally bit the big one in markets just like we've experienced the past few years (if you believe that the current markets have similar analogs to the mid-late 1930's).
     
    #67     Dec 11, 2012
  8. Specterx

    Specterx

    Most (all?) edges contain implicit assumptions about volatility or the trending character of the market of which the trader may not be fully aware, but will sure get exposed in dramatic fashion by a 2008-style event.
     
    #68     Dec 12, 2012
  9. mm19

    mm19

    totally agree. but if one plays perfect only setups (few) then bet size can be increased, providing it is not play with noise as markets may react on your size - so longerterm.
     
    #69     Dec 12, 2012
  10. Humpy

    Humpy

    The main reason the markets have survived in reasonably working order is because the politicians haven't managed to get their thieving hands on them too much.
    Even prize clowns like Greenspan/Bernanke etc. have been kept at bay thank god.
     
    #70     Dec 12, 2012