Not for me, 5 years is promising but to really trade it properly (I mean with size), at least 10 years is needed. It appears in many ways, markets really changed in 2007 - perhaps because around then, HFT really picked up.
I'm sorry. Are you bragging or complaining? I could make that much every year greeting at Wally's. Plus I make more than that sitting on my fat old useless ass drawing Unsociable Insecurity. Greeting at Wally's I'd at least meet a lot of horny fat old widows and get well laid for far less than your annual earnings could buy.
So, you think the lifespan of an objective edge is more than 10 years? The way Surf talks, they only last a couple of years and then they (apparently) disappear forever. With such a major discrepancy in opinion, it seems to me that you are better off trading one as soon as it appears, so long as you keep your position-sizing such that you are not over-betting on any individual trade. Since we're just throwing opinions out there, I personally think the market evolves at about the same pace as humans, since it is a completely human construct. As a result, the idea that in a single lifespan the market will "evolve" strikes me as a rationalization for failure. That's not to say that there are not "regimes" in the markets, where certain edges work and then stop working when the market moves into a different "regime" (that's just the word du jour to describe it, I suppose). The highest form of trading success would then be to figure out if a single edge worked in all regimes. Now, if there were such an edge, what would likely be at its core? Volatility. So, if you can build an edge where volatility is the central focus and decision driver, you can build an edge that endures across all market regimes and, really, all markets period.
No one said this was a fail safe trade. And you can see the distance of my stop. That would require a very large account to trade and for me to feel comfortable about it.
Way back in 2003, Niederhoffer wrote about the volatility edge-- that's been used and tested to death. The market evolves faster than the majority of traders, otherwise it couldn't exist. Either it will regulate your edge out of existence or it will change so your edge no longer works. Fixed system proponents are seriously behind the curve. surf
Yeah, because there's only "one" volatility edge. Get over yourself. You need to come to grips with the fact that you are not omniscient with regards to ways in which to analyze the market. You just come across as a self-important ignoramus. The market doesn't need to "evolve" to fool the majority of traders. It just needs to be complex, even if that complexity is relatively static.
just remember people are stupider then you think... Random walk theory makes so much sense because there are so many stupid people out there.. sure if your blind you'll never see the hundred dollars on the floor... Sure if your stupid you can't see anything coming... Sure if your stupid you should just buy an index fund and go back to your day job.. if you have any brains what so ever .. you can extract money out of the market.
The best part is he uses Vic "I blew up my fund twice doing the same thing" Neiderhoffer as an example. Vic probably used price drivers....price drivers that drove his fund into the ground....TWICE!!!! Vic is a failed trader who loves to rip on others who suceeded in something he couldn't do....... See the similarities?