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)
Does anyone have thoughts on crude oil? Any entry points you would think about entering the next few trading days? Crude oil has been on a wild ride lately!
When I originally set up my spreadsheets - many years back - I was thinking just find the HOD or LOD whichever is first. If the LOD was first that would imply the direction of the day (dir) is up so Dir=+1. If the HOD was first then the dir=-1 (or down).
Of course this was too simplistic - for most days.
If the ES starts high, falls 20pts and then rises again 20.5 (forming a "V" shape) then there is a change in intraday direction from down to up.
So even though the dir is +1 (with +20.5 > -20) the first leg dir -1 seems to be what the model finds.
At this point I thinking about adding another dir so the above would have
dir1=-1 and dir2=+1
I watched a webinar this evening Kevin Davey on Algo trading, which from youtube lead me to a youtube of a podcast with EP Chan
How quant trading strategies are developed and tested w/ Ernie Chan
The article startedwith this:
"Loss aversion is not a behavioral bias
In his famous book "Thinking, Fast and Slow", the Nobel laureate Daniel Kahneman described one common example of a behavioral finance bias:
"You are offered a gamble on the toss of a [fair] coin.
If the coin shows tails, you lose $100.
If the coin shows heads, you win $110.
Is this gamble attractive? Would you accept it?"
later...
"According to standard stochastic calculus, in the continuous approximation it is -0.0005125 per round - we are losing, not gaining! The layman is right to refuse this gamble."
which includes:
"To compute that, it is easier to first find out what the expected log price of the stock is at time t, because that is just the expected value of the sum of the log returns in each time interval, and is of course equal to the sum of the expected value of the log returns when we assume a geometric random walk. So the expected value of the log price at time t is just t * (m-s2 /2). But what is the expected price (not log price) at time t? It isn't correct to say exp(t * (m-s2 /2)), because the expected value of the exponential function of a normal variable is not equal to the exponential function of the expected value of that normal variable, or E[exp(x)] !=exp(E[x]). Instead, E[exp(x)]=exp(μ+σ2 /2) where μ and σ are the mean and standard deviation of the normal variable (see Ruppert). In our case, the normal variable is the log price, and thus μ=t * (m-s2 /2), and σ2=t *s2 . Hence the expected price at time t is exp(t*m). Note that it doesn't involve the volatility s. Risk doesn't affect the expected wealth at time t. But we just argued in the previous paragraph that the expected compound growth rate is lowered by risk. What gives?"
"It is ill-defined because wealth is not an "ergodic" variable: its finite-time average is not equal to its "ensemble average".
LONDON (Reuters) - Global equity funds saw massive outflows this week, a sharp reversal from last week's inflows as pessimism over economic growth gripped investors once again, driving them instead to search for yield in credit and buy safer assets like bonds.
Some $20.7 billion was pulled from equity funds in the week to March 20, while $12.1 billion was ploughed into bond funds, the biggest inflows since January 2018, Bank of America Merrill Lynch (BAML) strategists said on Friday citing data from EPFR.
Despite big gains for stocks globally this year, positioning is decidedly negative with $66.8 billion outflows from equity funds year-to-date.
Investors are hunting for yield, the strategists said, noting the ninth straight week of inflows to investment-grade bond funds - $6.6 billion this week - while high-yield bond funds drew in $3.2 billion and $1.2 billion went into EM debt.
The market is struggling to digest a rapid about-turn from the U.S. Federal Reserve on interest rates as economic growth disappoints globally and fears of a deflationary environment return.
"Extraordinary abrupt end to central bank hiking cycle & Fed paranoia of credit event are uber-bullish credit & uber-bearish volatility," the strategists wrote.
---------
I think it is disgusting anybody with a grudge with no evidence against you can call the police and you have no right to ask for evidence or question the person giving the complaint who can hide as a coward in the shadows.
Anyone can stage a swat against you - no consequences - no identification - no evidence.
The whole thing is absolutely disgusting.
NOTICE: that the police show up at 5:17AM - Why then? Were they not attempting to create a conflict?
--------------
FERNDALE, Md. -- Two police officers ordered to remove firearms from a house on a "red flag" protective order fatally shot an armed man Monday morning in Ferndale, Maryland, police said. Anne Arundel County Police arrived at the house at 5:17 a.m. to remove guns from the home under a new law
Michele Willis, the man's niece, told The Baltimore Sun that one of her aunts requested the protective order against Willis, but she declined to say why.
Commissioner Barbara Kirkmeyer, one of HB 19-1177’s harshest critics, said "... think actually, this bill should have been titled: ‘The Extreme Order to Confiscate Your Firearms, Eliminate Due Process, and Violate your Constitutional Rights Bill.”
Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams:
“The bill is so riddled with constitutional problems that it makes it hard to understand how professional lawmakers could have constructed something so terrible,” Reams said, adding the bill, “raises some serious concerns about due process, in that a person can have their guns taken away and their rights violated, all without ever having a chance to appear in an initial court hearing and cross examine accusers and witnesses in person. In legal terms, this is an exparte hearing.” (source)
Legendary / Stochastic Calculus is not your friend
Experience: None
Platform: Ninjatrader, Python API
Broker: CQG
Trading: S&P, Crude, Gold
Posts: 875 since Oct 2009
Thanks Given: 3,496
Thanks Received: 1,558
WOW! @aquarian1 this it crazy!...makes me sick even reading it! I am a total 2A supporter and American Patriot Combat Vet...it kills me to see articles like this...
that is horrible, because some one likes to speak there mind they should have there guns removed? I'm all for taking guns away from people who are mentally unstable or have the motive to do bad but if this truly is due to one persons words about another then actions need to be taken against that person, this is going to turn into a huge issue. Whats going to happen when people find out you support the party opposite of them they could easily make something up and have the police come take your guns away.
-P
"Truth is not what you want it to be; it is what it is, and you must bend to its power or live a lie"-Miyamoto Musashi
A few thoughts. I represent people in restraining orders a fair amount (we call them orders of protection). They are very easy to get, the initial or ex parte version can be ordered with no hearing or notice to the respondent. Certainly in some situations that’s good for the victims safety, but in others where there are phony allegations it can nearly ruin a persons life. The only way to know which one is it is to go to court and sort it out.
In Tennessee, the orders that are served on respondents simply say get rid of your guns. It’s kind of the honor system. I’m not aware of a law or a department policy somewhere which says they’re going to come and take your guns. Aside from the obvious constitutional concerns, from the perspective of law enforcement I can’t think of a more undesirable assignment. Just a disaster waiting to happen, and it did in this case.
Regarding the deceased individual in this story, assuming the facts reported in the link are true, he did just about everything wrong that you could do in this situation. I mean first of all, if the cops come to your house, for whatever reason, don’t answer the door with a gun in your hand. Really. That is just not cool. Then after you’ve put it down, DONT PICK IT BACK UP!
All in all though, this law seems like a bad idea.