||EPS - Basic
||Market Cap (m)
Randstad Hldgs Share Discussion Threads
Showing 51 to 72 of 75 messages
|is it time to buy this smelly dog?|
|22 random trades again today. A very dark day for the Randominator today, the perfect storm of bad trades. The first 3 trades (all different forex instruments) amazingly all filled just before market open at midnight. Just amazing that each should fill and not exit but there you go. Will post more later after some analysis of the days events...
18 winning : +180 points
4 still open from today, 1 from a couple of days ago: -1232 points (!!!!)
Randominator Stats as of 22:00 5th January
279 trades since 3rd December (21 trading days)
269 winning (2690 points)
5 losing (-750 points)
5 still open : -1232 points (!!!!)
Overall P/L = 708 points
Winning% = 96.5% (?)|
|22 random trades today. That BIG loser that I mentioned yesterday, "due any time" now just happened. Maybe self-fulfilling because I let the DOW short from the 31st (overnight low of the day) run today when by rights I should have closed it at open when it jumped >1% from entry point. I'll explain the latest thinking on stops at some point in the not too distant. It's related to overall P/L *since* a given trade is entered.
Bad boy 330 point loser (still open) - still up on last two days trading though so quite suprised.
22 winning : +220 points
1 still open : -330(dow from 8:35am 31/12/08 at 8661)
Randominator Stats as of 21:15 2nd January
257 trades since 3rd December (20 trading days)
251 winning (2510 points)
5 losing (-750 points)
1 open (-330 points) !!
Overall P/L = 1430 points
Winning% = 98%|
|HAPPY NEW YEAR ONE AND ALL!!
19 random trades today. Managed to close that stuck long overnight at profit target who'd have thought it. That means we've had well over a hundred trades now without a loser! And that means we're due a BIG loser any time now.
17 winning : +170 points
2 still open : -30 points (gbpusd) and -30 (dow)
Randominator Stats as of 22:00 31st December
235 trades since 3rd December (19 trading days)
228 winning (2280 points)
5 losing (-750 points)
2 open (-60 points)
Overall P/L = 1470 points
Winning% = 98%|
|Stats up to 30th December to go here.|
|Daily stats from the Randominator experiment
The experiment started on the 3rd December 2008|
|That's an interesting one, bv.
I've saved it for further study.|
|More thoughts on the futility of forecasting where the market is going.
|this indicator is very good, atleast you get on the right side of the market, which is more than i am at the moment
and scroll down|
|Help any idea where I can get these charts from ? Nothing on futuresource.com
I think the author of the article was just trying to show that winning is not the most important part of trading. By cutting your profits and running your losses you can have a very high percentage of winners but you will not make any money, especially after costs are added. The system with random entry and cut losses/run profits money management was just a bit of fun to try to demonstrate that you still need and edge in the first place for the money management to work.
I think there is a natural tendency to try to win all the time as people are
instinctively competitive. However, in trading this not always the best approach. The most important thing to look after is your equity curve and hence, money management and risk control. A good book on this subject is "Beyond Technical Analysis" by T.Chande which looks at portfolio construction and money management with multiple trading systems.|
|DCB, is peace of mind a good thing in a trader? Often the best trades are the ones that are hardest to make (like buying near the recent market lows), while the comfortable trades are usually wrong (eg taking profits too quickly). Or is this missing the point again?
squeeze, thanks for your work on this. Maybe that bit of code was a copying error by the author or something as that particular trading system seems to be based on novice trading - buy at random, close each trade as soon as it shows a profit but cling onto losers like grim death, etc. Not that I've ever done anything like that, of course...|
|I suspect that the random trading approach .i.e. applying a random decision process to a mostly random price variable, is probably conceptually flawed.
It feels a little like changing your number each week whilst playing the lottery. For instance if you choose the same number your probability of winning is about 1 in 14 million. However, if you randomly select a number each week your chance of success is now 1 in 1.96e14 and so you are much worse off.
(lurking statisticians please feel free to comment)
A further problem is how to verify results with random trading. You can add all sorts indicators and tweaks but are any improvements due to the modifications are just the result of chance?
At least "random system" is another addition to the list of oxymorons|
|Money management .
I have a system.
Ask me, then do the opposit, I am wrong more times than right, so you win.
Yes your right. Obviously drank too much beer last night.|
|I think perhaps people are slightly missing the point of the work described in the first post.
Nobody in his right mind would pick trades on the basis of a flipped coin. For psychological peace of mind, we must all feel that the way we are picking our trades gives us an edge. Whether it does or not depends on skill. What Tolsonogov demonstrated in his first paper was that having a majority of winning trades does not guarantee long term profitability. He is right. What he is saying is that using a system of money and risk management will benefit the bottom line. He is right again.
dead cat bounce
|Squeeze, Error in context, there is no dependancy between draws so which numbers you choose are completely irrelevant.
|The problem is whether you can be bothered to participate in the money management system required - i.e. to take lots of small losses and small stopped-out gains while awaiting the 'big move'. Is it worth all the effort? It's not 'stress' or 'risk' that concerns me here - these are 'controlled' one way or another - just the size of reward you can reasonably expect to get from a reasonable size of 'pot' when you could be doing other things with your life.
Sorry - Feeling a bit philosophical today.|
|squeeze, does that include the correction mentioned in post 18? Also, there's a different number of trades in each simulation, which makes it a bit difficult to compare.
There's enough to show that the system isn't any good, though - the average profit is much smaller than the average loss and the maximum drawdown is almost ten times the maximum profit. If you suffered the maximum drawdown, it would take nearly 200 average winning trades, with no losers, to get it back!
It's also an excellent illustration of how much difference trading costs can make to a trading system. Add in the effects of "slippage" (delays in sending the order and bad fills - breakout systems are particularly prone to this) and it gets even worse.|
|But if we have a random system wouldn't that mean we could just do
away with all that thinking and emotion and just get on with it?
The author seemed to be making the point that the emotion and thinking was
producing a random method anyway!
So it seems that all we have to do is come up with ANY system and
trade it using good money management (and without emotion or thinking).
Rules I have heard mentioned many times.|
Does the system test plot an equity line?
Maybe you could put a moving average on it and
exit when the equity line falls below it.|