Hey, Techies......Reality Check

[ducati998]

rogue

Sure, and I've said it before scalping is a legitimate and viable way of making the money.
How many have the correct tools, knowledge on how to scalp effectively.

Not many, as the tools required are as a starting point a seat on the exchange. Without that you are deluding yourself that you are in point of fact approaching scalping from a professional viewpoint.

cheers d998

 

[ducati998]

Rude

I haven't got the faintest idea.
Why don't you research it and tell me.

cheers d998

 

[RUDEBOY]

Ducatti, don't become childish by answering my question, with my question. Stop trying to deflect to suit yourself. It's your thread, i just thought you may have the answers to your own thread? Rude.

 

[ducati998]

rogue

There is a legitimate strategy in Poker.............buying the pot.
Technicals open you to this tactic everyday in the market.

You may be right.......................but guess what, you're wrong.
cheers d998

 

[SOCRATES]

rogue

Sure, and I've said it before scalping is a legitimate and viable way of making the money.
How many have the correct tools, knowledge on how to scalp effectively.

Not many, as the tools required are as a starting point a seat on the exchange. Without that you are deluding yourself that you are in point of fact approaching scalping from a professional viewpoint.

cheers d998

Paragraph one:~ very few.

Paragraph two:~ not correct.

 

[roguetrader]

rogue

Sure, and I've said it before scalping is a legitimate and viable way of making the money.
How many have the correct tools, knowledge on how to scalp effectively.

Not many, as the tools required are as a starting point a seat on the exchange. Without that you are deluding yourself that you are in point of fact approaching scalping from a professional viewpoint.

cheers d998

I have no idea who he/she was/is or what he/she was doing.

 

[roguetrader]

rogue

There is a legitimate strategy in Poker.............buying the pot.
Technicals open you to this tactic everyday in the market.

You may be right.......................but guess what, you're wrong.
cheers d998

Sorry Ducati, poker is not one of my games, so I am unfamiliar with the concept and the analogy is lost.

 

[RUDEBOY]

Probability! Does FA not come under this heading?

 

[RUDEBOY]

Ducatti. What is the 'probability' that FA is right, and TA is wrong? Don't worry yourself, you can't answer it! Because you could not answer my earlier question, that is how i know you can not answer it! So....stop it, it's silly, isn't it. Rude.

 

[RUDEBOY]

Before you try and twist this one....think about it? I know what you are going to type! Rude.

 

[ducati998]

Soccy.............baby

I wouldn't bother scalping unless I had a seat, why, lets calculate why.

YM contract, $5 a tick.
Roundtrip costs $2

Therefore, buy @ 10,000, and Sell @ 10,001 so one point, two ticks = $10
Your profit margin = 0.0001%
Less expenses of 20% ($10 - $2)

Multiplied by 500 trades in a day = $5000 less $1000 = $4000 net profit
This of course assumes no losses, a 100% win rate.

Therefore, having a seat, and no trading expenses makes a significant difference. $1000 a day

Start adding in losses, and the zero costs bulk even larger.
And of course if your brokerage is higher than $1, the cut is even deeper, brokerages love scalpers though, commissions are their bread and butter.

cheers d998

 

[RUDEBOY]

Ducatti, stop being presumptuous.

 

[marketsurfer]

combining quant, FA and TA

combining the three methods makes some sense, but what does this effectively in an affordable package? i have found www.yourika.com tymora trader to be excellent in this regard. tell me what you think !

surfer

 

[SOCRATES]

Soccy.............baby

I wouldn't bother scalping unless I had a seat, why, lets calculate why.

YM contract, $5 a tick.
Roundtrip costs $2

Therefore, buy @ 10,000, and Sell @ 10,001 so one point, two ticks = $10
Your profit margin = 0.0001%
Less expenses of 20% ($10 - $2)

Multiplied by 500 trades in a day = $5000 less $1000 = $4000 net profit
This of course assumes no losses, a 100% win rate.

Therefore, having a seat, and no trading expenses makes a significant difference. $1000 a day

Start adding in losses, and the zero costs bulk even larger.
And of course if your brokerage is higher than $1, the cut is even deeper, brokerages love scalpers though, commissions are their bread and butter.

cheers d998

You don't need to have a seat. A seat is useful to sit down upon.

You need to have a mind, a market mind.

If you have a market mind you can succeed whether sitting down or standing up or whether as a member of an exchange or not, trading any instrument, under any conditions, in any market, in any location, in any circumstances, at any time.

Kind Regards.

 

[ducati998]

Just returning to this theme.
Can you start to see the correlations.

The shorter the timeframe traded, the smaller the profit margin.
The smaller the profit margin, the more trades you need to execute.

This is increasing your time in the market...............the very antithesis of what daytraders would have you believe.

Their underlying reasoning follows thus.
We can limit our risk by limiting ourtime of exposure in the market.
This is quite patently a fallacy.

As we have defined by calculation, the shorter the timeframe, the smaller the profit margin, and is shown unequivocably in the numbers posted in the thread starter.

70 trades..................2.90% return on capital employed
2 trades.................36.5% return on capital employed

Which brings us to the Risk / Reward ratio and how it interacts with timeframes.
cheers d998

 

[SOCRATES]

Just returning to this theme.
Can you start to see the correlations.

The shorter the timeframe traded, the smaller the profit margin.
The smaller the profit margin, the more trades you need to execute.

This is increasing your time in the market...............the very antithesis of what daytraders would have you believe.

Their underlying reasoning follows thus.
We can limit our risk by limiting ourtime of exposure in the market.
This is quite patently a fallacy.

As we have defined by calculation, the shorter the timeframe, the smaller the profit margin, and is shown unequivocably in the numbers posted in the thread starter.

70 trades..................2.90% return on capital employed
2 trades.................36.5% return on capital employed

Which brings us to the Risk / Reward ratio and how it interacts with timeframes.
cheers d998

ducatti, I concede that you are right, but only when presented from the capability of an unskilled trader. Skilled traders do not do this. Skilled traders do not take every trade that comes along just because it appears. Skilled traders are able to recognise and be selective and act in accordance with these criteria. There is no point in sitting there like a robot and tapping keys all day long for minimal scalpsand just for the sake of tapping away. The skilled trader is not enslaved by timeframes, he uses timeframes as an excercise of choice, not compulsion. And that, is the difference.

 

[ducati998]

Soccy...............baby

ducatti, I concede that you are right, but only when presented from the capability of an unskilled trader. Skilled traders do not do this. Skilled traders do not take every trade that comes along just because it appears. Skilled traders are able to recognise and be selective and act in accordance with these criteria. There is no point in sitting there like a robot and tapping keys all day long for minimal scalpsand just for the sake of tapping away. The skilled trader is not enslaved by timeframes, he uses timeframes as an excercise of choice, not compulsion. And that, is the difference.

Skilled traders do not take every trade that comes along just because it appears. Skilled traders are able to recognise and be selective and act in accordance with these criteria

Principal of selectivity mentioned back on page whatever.

The skilled trader is not enslaved by timeframes, he uses timeframes as an excercise of choice, not compulsion. And that, is the difference

Principal of Continuity again mentioned somewhere...........

Are we actually going to get somewhere?
cheers d998

 

[nine]

No

 

[ducati998]

And here are the public results of a mechanical system based on a type of turtle methodology. Again these are closed trades.

Total # of trades ..................................................................22
Return on capital employed..............................................16.91%

This calculated as follows;
# of losing trades ..................................................................11
# of winning trades................................................................11

A beautiful 50% outcome.

Now this was in a raging bull market (ASX) over the last 3yrs
If I was going to be really cruel, I could annualise the figures, but, hell we'd be back to single digits again.

cheers d998

 

[ducati998]

And just for the sake of fairness, and keeping the hope alive,
From another list of posted public daytrades (all closed trades)

Total # of trades...............................73
Winners.............................................45
Losses..............................................28

Notice that almost 50% correlation between wins and losses..................just keeps sneaking in.

Return on capital employed...........87%

Well, obviously it can be done. There is however a rather interesting twist to this return.
cheers d998