Yes, correct: that was my suggestion. Be happy with a small edge and systems that don't trade frequently but build many of them. As I said somewhere else, if you have a system that trades twice a month, and build 40 of them, that will give you 80 trades per month, which is 4 trades per day.
It's not hard to build 40 of them, because if the principle is a good one, it will work on many different markets.
Trust me - i wasted my first few years of back-testing trying to create a system that took care of everything and that rarely failed, and each time I wasted my time. The more complex the system, the more it's likely to not be a healthy one. At least with my small experience, and my limited programming skills. With the little programming I know, I have to keep things simple - but that may also be a blessing. Because as i said, the most advanced people are the ones who get the least done. Whenever I read posts on elitetrader.com, in the automated trading section, I looked with more interest at the posts by people who couldn't write a proper sentence and made many spelling mistakes. Those are the ones who are probably making money. The others are too busy lecturing. They have so much knowledge that they get lost into it and lose focus on making money. Their purpose becomes knowledge rather than making money. Anyway, I was too ignorant to get the complex stuff to work, so maybe this is wishful thinking and I just want to make myself feel better.
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wishful_thinking
Prominent examples of wishful thinking include:
Economist Irving Fisher said that "stock prices have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau" a few weeks before the Stock Market Crash of 1929, which was followed by the Great Depression.
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irving_Fisher#Stock_market_crash_of_1929
The stock market crash of 1929 and the subsequent Great Depression cost Fisher much of his personal wealth and academic reputation. He famously predicted, a few days before the crash, "Stock prices have reached what looks like a permanently high plateau." Irving Fisher stated on October 21 that the market was "only shaking out of the lunatic fringe" and went on to explain why he felt the prices still had not caught up with their real value and should go much higher. On Wednesday, October 23, he announced in a banker’s meeting “security values in most instances were not inflated.” For months after the Crash, he continued to assure investors that a recovery was just around the corner.
So maybe I am like Fisher and 1929, or maybe I am ignorant enough to not fall in love with my own theories and deny the truth. Anyway, my theory is that, in the creation of trading systems, as in every other field, you can only understand and verify so much information. So it would be best to take one simple idea and method and test it extensively, rather than test superficially a whole bunch of complex ideas.
I could understand from the start that neural networks were out of my reach, so I discarded them, knowing i would get lost in that subject. However, i did waste a few years trying to create systems with 10 to 20 different parameters. Usually they would be as long as 40 lines of easylanguage. Today all my 60 systems are between 2 and 4 lines of easylanguage. And, instead of using 10 to 20 parameters, they use on average 3 parameters.
Here's some parameters:
1) time of the day
2) day of the week
3) month of the year
4) where price is relative to its moving average
5) where price is relative to one hour ago
6) where price is relative to yesterday's close
7) where price is relative to one week ago
8) where yesterday's close is relative to the day before yesterday's close
9) range of the day
Mix these ingredients together, even randomly, and you'll be able to produce about 10 different systems (I didn't even go that far). Then multiply these 10 different strategies by 20 different futures and you'll come up with about 200 systems, while at the same time you will verify if the strategies were good because they should work across many securities. The hardest part of the work for me is automating them. I have more ideas that work than systems because I didn't have enough time and energy to automate them.
I am not a cook, but we could compare creating systems with creating recipes. It would be pretty easy to start with a set of 20 ingredients, and create many recipes that will most likely taste (and test) good. But you first have to find and buy the ingredients (data) and you have to actually physically prepare the recipe (test, automate, paper-trade it) and then see if people like it. The creation part, when you're thinking "banana with strawberry and whipped cream will taste good together" takes a fraction of the time needed to buy it, prepare it and eat it. I think it's comparable to creating a system. Now, when I am in the bath tub like Archimedes, I almost try to keep myself from coming up with new ideas, because I know how much work it will take me to implement them, and I am still busy implementing previous ideas.
In other words, when creating systems, it is harder to implement ideas and multiply them by the many securities you can apply them to, and finding the capital needed to trade them, than the mere coming up with those ideas. Still, after all this work, even if that's only 10% of the work, I wouldn't just publish my code on a forum, out of respect for my work. But I could almost do it.
You see, many of the ideas are known to everyone: opening gap, volatility breakouts, oversold conditions... everyone knows about them. And they work. They are recipes that make money. All known edges still work and if you build a system on them, it will make money. And if you find out that it doesn't work, you can simply reverse it. There will always be an edge in the markets, since they are not random and they are not a flat line.