Concept FX

[Arek Okrasa]

Thank you wise man!

Now another ball is rolling... what about this? It is the better one?

Thank you for your previuse advice
Arek

 

[Arek Okrasa]

Any suggestion about the second one? Is it going right?

Arek

Arek im an optimistic pessimist..and my mind set is....think the worst of every trade and you will never be dissapointed

 

[jason0181]

Arek

With both these trades having the USD, but on oppsite sides of the pair, if there is any fundamental data that goes in our favour, we will be in luck. I am going out for the day as well, so wont be looking at the charts, and just trusting in the technical analysis that the triggers have happened at the right time.

Everyone - Enjoy the day, and dont look too much.

 

[anddy26]

im not dissapointed so far!.lol..this one has a better chance of them all so far...but dont bank on either being finished for a day or 2..unless they get stopped out..and if that happens it will be the next half hour.lol.


i just love the smell of napom in the morning

 

[SandyW]

Learn to enjoy it!

Thank you wise man!

Now another ball is rolling... what about this? It is the better one?

Thank you for your previuse advice
Arek

Hi Arek,

This is the best thing that can happen when you start, I mean having trades going against you. It teaches you to handle losses, and stops you expecting a profit every time you trade. Maybe the biggest psychological challenge. Remember that trading ALWAYS involves losses as well as profits. It seems silly to say it, but you must learn to enjoy the losses, as well as the profits. They are just part of the game. Remember we have a system in place to limit them. And every time there is a loss, there is also the next trade which might be the big win of your career. Both these current trades are adversly affected by the weakening dollar, but that is also the reason they have actually triggered. So let's all just stay cool!

 

[Arek Okrasa]

Thank you Jason

Arek

With both these trades having the USD, but on oppsite sides of the pair, if there is any fundamental data that goes in our favour, we will be in luck. I am going out for the day as well, so wont be looking at the charts, and just trusting in the technical analysis that the triggers have happened at the right time.

Everyone - Enjoy the day, and dont look too much.

 

[Arek Okrasa]

Thank you Sandy

Arek

 

[Arek Okrasa]

Sure Anddy
The smell is great this morning - i agree

Arek

im not dissapointed so far!.lol..this one has a better chance of them all so far...but dont bank on either being finished for a day or 2..unless they get stopped out..and if that happens it will be the next half hour.lol.


i just love the smell of napom in the morning

 

[GMP]

Hi GMP,

Of course it should be a constant 5%. The hypothetical question was meant to be "5% of what?" The original (or subsequently increased bank) or a current reduced bank. So, if in the event of profits my trading capital increases to (say) £8000 then I raise my stake to 5% of £8000. But if I subsequently suffer losses and my capital goes back to (say) £4000, I continue to stake 5% of £8000. So the stake will always ratchet up or stay level, but never be reduced. That is the approach I always take.

Hi Sandy
I'd say 5% means 5%, regardless of the level of your bank. If your capital goes down to £4000 and you're still staking 5% of £8000, you're staking 10% of what you've actually got and you might as well not be using a percentage at all.
To stick at a hypothetical starting level when you're on a losing run means your risk is increasing disproportionately with every trade, and you'll be down to zero in far fewer trades than you would be had you stuck to a % of whatever you have left.

 

[SandyW]

5% of What?

Hi Sandy
I'd say 5% means 5%, regardless of the level of your bank. If your capital goes down to £4000 and you're still staking 5% of £8000, you're staking 10% of what you've actually got and you might as well not be using a percentage at all.
To stick at a hypothetical starting level when you're on a losing run means your risk is increasing disproportionately with every trade, and you'll be down to zero in far fewer trades than you would be had you stuck to a % of whatever you have left.

Hi,

Thanks for continuing the discussion. I think the point at issue affects everyone using the system, which is why I raised it.

I quite understand, and I don't argue with your logic. But I think there is a real dilemma. If you do reduce your stake, you will certainly get a softer crash if your losing streak continues, but assuming you do save yourself from crashing, it will be a very slow climb out of the pit. And if you do climb a little way out and things go against you again, you will just go down again, and repeat the process until you finally sink.

The idea of 5% of the starting capital, and never less, is based on the idea that you would need 20 losses in a row to get wiped out. Although a wipe out is always a risk, we have to trust the system, which statistically suggests a worst case draw down of only 40-50% . Reducing the net risk during a draw down just results in a slower climb in profits. Remember the winning trades will tend to be bigger than the losing trades.

Either way you are a hostage to fortune, but my judgement is that one should never reduce the stake.

Finally, if you look through the Concept-FX "results" on the web, you will see they have never reduced the stakes, even in the face of significant draw downs. There is a rachet under the stake. It stays level or it goes up, but never down. It is hard to pick out visually, but if you separate out the results for each of the 6 pairs in an Excel spreadsheet, you can see what I mean at a glance.

I cannot find this point made in the Concept-FX User Manual, but I was a former user of Tradewin. I do not have that manual with me, but it was actually quite specific on this point if I remember correctly.

Sandy

 

[GMP]

Hi,

Thanks for continuing the discussion. I think the point at issue affects everyone using the system, which is why I raised it.

I quite understand, and I don't argue with your logic. But I think there is a real dilemma. If you do reduce your stake, you will certainly get a softer crash if your losing streak continues, but assuming you do save yourself from crashing, it will be a very slow climb out of the pit. And if you do climb a little way out and things go against you again, you will just go down again, and repeat the process until you finally sink.

The idea of 5% of the starting capital, and never less, is based on the idea that you would need 20 losses in a row to get wiped out. Although a wipe out is always a risk, we have to trust the system, which statistically suggests a worst case draw down of only 40-50% . Reducing the net risk during a draw down just results in a slower climb in profits. Remember the winning trades will tend to be bigger than the losing trades.

Either way you are a hostage to fortune, but my judgement is that one should never reduce the stake.

Finally, if you look through the Concept-FX "results" on the web, you will see they have never reduced the stakes, even in the face of significant draw downs. There is a rachet under the stake. It stays level or it goes up, but never down. It is hard to pick out visually, but if you separate out the results for each of the 6 pairs in an Excel spreadsheet, you can see what I mean at a glance.

I cannot find this point made in the Concept-FX User Manual, but I was a former user of Tradewin. I do not have that manual with me, but it was actually quite specific on this point if I remember correctly.

Sandy

Well, if that's what Concept recommend that's what you should do, to be faithful to their system. It goes against conventional trading wisdom as I understand it, but if they have that much belief in their system and you're buying into it, fair enough.
I'd never risk more than 5% of my capital on any single trade myself and I know a fair few traders who would baulk at risking even that much (3% seems more popular). Certainly it takes longer to build up your winnings, but it also takes alot longer to lose everything when the system you're using is failing for whatever reason (and systems always fail at some point). The longer you have to understand why it's failing, the more chance you have of putting it right... and that's probably the nub of the matter here - with a black box thing like Concept you don't have the option of tweaking/rectifying the system, so I suppose if you're going to sink you might as well do so quickly! (With a bit of luck Concept will prove to be unsinkable anyway... but some boat had that reputation once I think)

 

[SandyW]

Buying in to Concept-FX

Hi GMP,

Different subject. I read in an earlier post from you that you were going to put off buying into Concept-FX for a year, to see how we got on. None of my business of course, but I am intrigued, because if we have a good year you will presumably buy, but we MAY then start a bad year, just as you join. Given that a long view is necessary, and at present there is already a run of over 4 good years on "record", I would have thought there was nothing to be gained by waiting. Of course if there are other issues for you, that's another matter. Not trying to push you, just interested in your logic!

It's a gamble either way, but I wish you would join us in this!

BTW, again, I absolutely do not have any vested interest, other than to be sharing and testing ideas in a group of intelligent users. It's a pity this is such a public forum really.

Sandy

 

[anddy26]

Sandy are you interested in joining a few of us who are at different levels and want to learn this trade..we have a chat screen and a chart screen open ...and u can take control of my screen and show us ur theory...
some concept users some not..but concepts alerts are never discussed

 

[SandyW]

Workshop

Sandy are you interested in joining a few of us who are at different levels and want to learn this trade..we have a chat screen and a chart screen open ...and u can take control of my screen and show us ur theory...
some concept users some not..but concepts alerts are never discussed

Hi Graham,

Yes, and I did express interest before, but as I said I think I will have a problem with the clock as, although I am a Brit, at the moment I am rather far ahead of you on the outer fringe of Eastern Europe and not even in the EU (nice!)

 

[anddy26]

Hi Graham,

Yes, and I did express interest before, but as I said I think I will have a problem with the clock as, although I am a Brit, at the moment I am rather far ahead of you on the outer fringe of Eastern Europe and not even in the EU (nice!)

Ah ok Sandy...if you want we can include you in the discussions if you have a specific pair you want to talk about...if there are others here than can chat thru the day..why dont we use paltalk which is a voice room and chat room where we are all on the same screen or skype?

And arek...are you doing a wee polish jig at the trades on the go at the moment??

 

[SandyW]

I've sinned

Hi All,

Just broken my resolution to always wait for Concept! I moved my stop loss on a trade to break-even as the trade was 1:1 in profit. So much for absolute disciple. Forgivable?

 

[GMP]

Hi GMP,

Different subject. I read in an earlier post from you that you were going to put off buying into Concept-FX for a year, to see how we got on. None of my business of course, but I am intrigued, because if we have a good year you will presumably buy, but we MAY then start a bad year, just as you join. Given that a long view is necessary, and at present there is already a run of over 4 good years on "record", I would have thought there was nothing to be gained by waiting. Of course if there are other issues for you, that's another matter. Not trying to push you, just interested in your logic!

It's a gamble either way, but I wish you would join us in this!

BTW, again, I absolutely do not have any vested interest, other than to be sharing and testing ideas in a group of intelligent users. It's a pity this is such a public forum really.

Sandy

Hi Sandy
My logic in waiting is that I don't necessarily trust the testimonials and figures a company displays when it's trying to sell you something - I'd rather see how it performs real-time for myself. It seems some of the people on this thread are genuine customers (rather than pseudonymous stalking horses) so I'm curious to see how they get on. Twelve months is a decent period to watch in my book. Not exhaustive by any means but with the banking crash and looming recession it looks like as good a year as any for testing any given system - if it can make a profit through these choppy waters I'll be impressed.
Having said that if the dollar resumes its downward trend (and today it's looking decidedly ill again) and the Euro continues upward, maybe it won't be as good a testing ground as I hope. When people start to realise the European economy isn't actually that much safer than the American one, we should have a good deal more unpredictability to test Concept against.

 

[SandyW]

Hi Sandy
.... When people start to realise the European economy isn't actually that much safer than the American one, we should have a good deal more unpredictability to test Concept against.

I'm with you in spirit then. I just decided to go for it. If only to stop myself overtrading and gambling on and on!! It will be good exercise for that alone, whatever the longer term brings.

This credit crunch is actually more like a global financial scandal, maybe even a moral one, in my mind, and most certainly rooted in the Anglo-Saxon world and its disgusting consumption, pursued at any price. Governments should have had the basic gumption and moral courage to stem it long ago. But that's western democracy, politicians and bankers for you. It puts the lie to GB's claim to be the one to sort out the mess. He was instrumental in causing it! Pity is I see Eastern Europe trying to ape us!

One point worth bearing in mind is that one day a spreadbetting outfit will blow a fuse.

 

[GMP]

I'm with you in spirit then. I just decided to go for it. If only to stop myself overtrading and gambling on and on!! It will be good exercise for that alone, whatever the longer term brings.

This credit crunch is actually more like a global financial scandal, maybe even a moral one, in my mind, and most certainly rooted in the Anglo-Saxon world and its disgusting consumption, pursued at any price. Governments should have had the basic gumption and moral courage to stem it long ago. But that's western democracy, politicians and bankers for you. It puts the lie to GB's claim to be the one to sort out the mess. He was instrumental in causing it! Pity is I see Eastern Europe trying to ape us!

One point worth bearing in mind is that one day a spreadbetting outfit will blow a fuse.

Yep, the freemarket given free-reign will sooner or later cause itself to freefall! I've been wondering how long it'll take for it all to filter through to a SB company. I imagine they'll be one of the last assets to cut given the profit-margins, but I've noticed a few re-organise their spreads lately. Chances are the only one to fold will be the one I've got most of my money deposited with! (I think we're covered in Britain by the FSA up to a point but I probably ought to check.)

 

[SandyW]

Yep, the freemarket given free-reign will sooner or later cause itself to freefall! I've been wondering how long it'll take for it all to filter through to a SB company. I imagine they'll be one of the last assets to cut given the profit-margins, but I've noticed a few re-organise their spreads lately. Chances are the only one to fold will be the one I've got most of my money deposited with! (I think we're covered in Britain by the FSA up to a point but I probably ought to check.)

Of course, I bang on aboutb the politicians, but we are all guilty, me too. I am also abit blase about security and the risk of losing assets. Not sensible, but life has got so damned complex. Actually I try to keep my "wealth" in gold bullion. As regards the FSA, after the Equitable Life fiasco, when they said it was all the fault of Directors and Shareholders, I reckoned I had heard it all! If such a disaster was not regulated by your actual regulator, what are they there for? And of course Northern Rock was final proof that the government is totally without wits and irresponsible. The reason they bailed out NR was purely and simply a local political threat in the North East, their heartland. So much for "doing the right thing" as GB likes to claim!

I would not rely on the FSA for anything. They would find some sort of cop out. If you think you are covered, you may be. But what sympathy would you get as a spreadbetter? You would be portrayed as one of thousands of gamblers who deserved to get their fingers burned! Not as a worthy and innocent Northern voter. So look after yourself. Spread your risk. I do not keep the whole of my trading bank with the SB company, but at least half of it in bullion, and feed money in and out of the SB account as necessary to cover margin and a bit.