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)
I think my approach would be immediate exit after entry, so I'd give up a tick and have an overall $17.50 loss. 3 of those would be $52.50, leaving me around $27 profit.
I don't think I can afford to attempt a breakeven trade, since if it goes another tick against me, I am in trouble.
In any event, I am waiting on TST to clarify a couple of questions I have, before I proceed.
Can you help answer these questions from other members on NexusFi?
well you now see ,it looks like you have a well balanced system ,now you can start looking back over time to see how to unbalance it for winners both ways ,i find this very interesting
:when you cheat -you only cheat yourself
refer to post # 470 & 527 & 930
option traders refer to post 996 thru 1005
One question regarding the attachment above: Isn't it strange that the actual/perfect results are ALL THE TIME very close to the "lower 25%" band?
I am familiar with Monte Carlo simulations, but have used them only for corporate planning purposes and not for trading (I'm a discretionary trader anyway). Not sure how exactly you applied it here (which are the input variables with which data and distributions applied?), but shouldn't the trading results be more evenly distributed between the different top/lower 10%/25% bands?
Without further information (for me) it looks like the model is not a good approximation of reality. Or, maybe I misunderstand something here completely...
Thanks in advance!
k
PS: ... and by the way, do the rollover... with the same arguments the others gave, who voted for the rollover.
The thick lines are based on historical walkforward backtests. The average profit per day and the standard deviation are all you need to create the thick line curves. Plotted with that are the actual results. Since the actual results are around the 25% line, it tells me 2 things:
1) The strategy, during the combine, has underperformed its historical backtest
2) The strategy, since it is within the 10 and 90% lines, is within expectations (ie, the strategy does not appear to be broken).
The problem is, with so little Combine data, it is tough to draw any long term conclusions yet.
if you used a bollinger with your system ,just the center line ,not outsiders, it may help you see where you are balanced and unbalanced , use it and back test your entries and see how it fairs with it ,
:when you cheat -you only cheat yourself
refer to post # 470 & 527 & 930
option traders refer to post 996 thru 1005
When I said, "it looks like the model is not a good approximation of reality" I meant the Monte Carlo model and not the trading systems, btw. But now I understand (I hope), how the thick lines have been created and, hence, how they have to be interpreted correctly.
Yes, 1 combine (or even 2 or 3!) are not enough to draw any conclusions.