Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
not sure if I understand correctly what you're trying to say. but the very success of this forum was based on helping/sharing. and that included helping with coding for nt.
I know you might not be aware of this, since you're still kind of a newbie (member since 2014)
I guess what I am saying is NT have dug themselves a hole (I believe). They have pissed away a lot of goodwill for their platform and brokerage and are reacting slowly.
I own a lifetime licence but other than charting and a few indicators which I am still fond of I effectively abandoned NT brokerage long ago for ordering.
I did contact them recently with some positive suggestions on how to pep up their image (CTFC complaints reg ecosystem not helping either) but while I got a response, it was too mundane and confirmed (to me anyway) that they have little self-awareness.
Of course the forum is based on sharing but.. its a two way street, NT is not actually a big business and they would IMHO do well to get involved as a vendor as there is a LOT of migration.
Even Shark Indicators aka Bloodhound had a notice about NT 8 compability reading something roughly like, we will have a beta when NT can bother to respond to us on a technical matter (I think a bug), we are one of their significant partners but we give up asking for a resolution eta.
The exact wording had quite a pissed off tone which was surprising from a vendor indicating a lot of frustration. The reason I created TPV (my bespoke bot) is NT 7 had a core bug identified by my C (everything) developer in 2014, acknowledged by support as real and a problem for what we wanted to do. Their response was effectively we are working on NT 8, cannot fix anything in 7 now. I was burning too much cash to risk being cast on the rocks like that more than once so jumped ship.
In retrospect they were not the people to do big work with but I had limited industry frame of reference in 2014. My new broker sorted me out for enterprise class software with no undocumented code or proprietary secrets.
Just a "newbie" insight of course
If I am very wrong and the dev I know can find a way to commercially provide a service to FIO members, fine, great. I´m not cutting noses off to spite here.
Nobody anyone would have heard of, they don´t take retail clients having abandoned that years ago. I know my broker well and he does not want public enquiries.
I got in under a friend of a friend thing, some good dharma from charity work I do maybe. I´m spoilt with them, I get a very rolls royce experience, same as they give their funds and props etc. They really do know their stuff however their brokerage side is vastly larger than NT.
In a way, if I had not had such a woeful experience with NT in 2014, my buddy would not have made an exception for me. I did look like I was about to have a stress driven heart attack by November 2014.
I would have certainly and gladly shared lots of good stuff on FIO by now if I had stayed on NT but it did not happen that way. Que sera.
May be of interest. What is very exciting about this time is social "science" is actually via MRI and other measurement machines gaining a greater share on the science part. Not all MRI studies are of great quality but Neuron published work is worth a look.
@AuthenticTrader I wasn't going to comment but this logic posted by Grady is nonsense. That logic doesn't make any sense because if I know where you will buy and your entry has an edge then why wouldn't I just buy everything in front of you? If you plan on trading with tight stops, do you think there is unlimited volume at these prices? The low tick had like 39 contracts executed only in the ES. The price above that had 1600 vs the closing price of 36,550. If you use market orders, the same sorts of issues apply but the issue is speed. Even if everyone buys after you, there is still a chance they will find the exit better and/or that they will just increase the volatility. Neither are beneficial. Also, think about if they had planned to sell to you but recognize they can get a better price. They might hold for better prices. This doesn't mean that I always think trading is competitive because there is a lot of uncertainty. Generally, we think of more competitive games as relying less on luck and more skill -- being more deterministic.
What would really happen if 2,000 are trading exact same method and buying at same time? Just thinking about it off the cuff, all orders will arrive at random. So, if those 2,000 traders are trading 5 lots, that's 10,000 contracts: absolutely enough to cause issues for some methods. Now, if you want to say that you don't care to share because you already know the competition is better and/or that what you do is so difficult then possibly or to demonstrate your abilities-- that can make sense.
Traders do share actual edges for free though and yes sell them. In order to understand why, remember the future is unknown. Every serious trader knows trading is a risk venture. So, it makes a lot of sense to pair something risky like trading with a low risk income stream like selling stuff. There are also real costs to developing edges and trading. If you're not trading a big enough account then selling stuff helps offset those costs. For example, let's imagine 2 traders develop a good strategy. It takes 6 months. We'll say the sunk cost on that is $50,000. For a firm, the cost might not be significant but for an individual trader -- it means you have to make 50k to break even. So, that's going to be much more difficult to do for an independent trader.
The other factor is that people who do this: it is their work. So, they would do it regardless. Many serious traders haven't made it and don't have capital to trade everything they make. Most traders do share with other serious traders for the collaboration, networking etc. benefits and sharing among small groups of traders doesn't have a lot of risk. Academics also publish edges for other reasons.
Now, there is some truth that there isn't anything new under the sun meaning that most edges are being traded by hedge funds already. However, they aren't being traded by everybody. That's the difference. To be honest, a lot of discretionary edges won't be traded by most funds anyway because the uncertainties and risks are too significant. As a general rule, better traders are more likely to share because they are more aware that the competition is already ahead of them. But, they are more likely to share among other traders in small circles. Specificity is of course a very relevant factor also as to the cost of sharing and the the number of traders you are sharing with.