The Secret Edge

[bbmac]

Maybe our edge is being members of this esteemed trading forum.

Lol (yeh right!) The interesting question would be-did anyone find anything here that helped them develop their edge? or indeed do they use an edge/adapted an edge they found here?

G/L

 

[redart]

As mentioned, I voted for option 3, although by secret edge, im certainly not talking about some secret moving average setting or anything like that!
I think there is information/data that the big players have access too that helps make up their edge, and us retail guys will never get to see it.

As for everyone on this forum (that day trades), I think we are all playing the same game. I think that there are simple methods that we all have access too, that work enough for us to make some money over time, assuming that we remain disciplined, alert, practice good money management etc etc. Its not easy though and still requires skill and weeding out the useless stuff!

DT mentions communicating with genuine successful real fulltime traders. I just dont see how that would ever be likely. Why would a 'real' trader ever bother helping someone. Why waste their time? Why charge a few hundred bucks if they should be making a good few thousand per day from trading? How would you know who to trust? That task in itself seems about as difficult as day trading in the first place!

 

[meanreversion]

Lol (yeh right!) The interesting question would be-did anyone find anything here that helped them develop their edge? or indeed do they use an edge/adapted an edge they found here?

G/L

I've gained some snippets from t2w. Sometimes it's one liners that you don't really register at the time, but a few months later, re-play themselves in your head and lead to the "aha" moment.

My trading day would definitely be duller without this forum, so it seves a purpose in that regard.. and it's free! Like a Boris bike, but not nearly as dangerous.

 

[meanreversion]

I think there is information/data that the big players have access too that helps make up their edge, and us retail guys will never get to see it.

Yes of course.. hedge funds make money partly from either arbitraging banks, or trading on rates which are probably off-market. They also get "timely" information from banks which enables them to front-run imminent large transactions. As this doesn't apply to us, I would conclude we have no informational edge whatsoever, and are probably best sticking to trading off price action.

 

[bbmac]

I wonder how many folk reading this have a 'secret' and an 'edge ?' Sorry I've just finished for the day and I was bored.

 

[meanreversion]

Tell me no secrets, tell me some lies. Give me no reasons, give me alibis.

Bit bored as well, time for lunch.

 

[JRP2891]

I've gained some snippets from t2w. Sometimes it's one liners that you don't really register at the time, but a few months later, re-play themselves in your head and lead to the "aha" moment.

My trading day would definitely be duller without this forum, so it seves a purpose in that regard.. and it's free! Like a Boris bike, but not nearly as dangerous.

Dangerous for you maybe not, however potentially fatal for the beginner with no idea of where to start and who to trust. I'd go as far to say, the drawbacks severely outweigh the benefits of joining an internet trading forum, for members yet to develop a strategy with a positive expectation and the ability to execute it consistently. Still...it passes the time.

 

[HowardCohodas]

Dangerous for you maybe not, however potentially fatal for the beginner with no idea of where to start and who to trust. I'd go as far to say, the drawbacks severely outweigh the benefits of joining an internet trading forum, for members yet to develop a strategy with a positive expectation and the ability to execute it consistently. Still...it passes the time.

Anything on the internet is suspect as there is little quality control over its contents. Even our esteemed forum contains some dangerous and wacky ideas.

"Trust, but verify" may be insufficient. "Verify, verify, verity" may be more appropriate.

 

[JRP2891]

Anything on the internet is suspect as there is little quality control over its contents. Even our esteemed forum contains some dangerous and wacky ideas.

"Trust, but verify" may be insufficient. "Verify, verify, verity" may be more appropriate.

I'd say it's more than ironic that you're commenting on my post.

 

[HowardCohodas]

I'd say it's more than ironic that you're commenting on my post.

Perhaps we have different understanding of the word "auditable." To the best of my knowledge, I've said nothing here that cannot be verified. If my recollection is inaccurate, point it out and I'll fix it.

 

[meanreversion]

I'd say it's more than ironic that you're commenting on my post.

He has been successfully trading his system for over three months, I'm fairly certain he knows what he's talking about. Tsk!

 

[JRP2891]

He has been successfully trading his system for over three months, I'm fairly certain he knows what he's talking about. Tsk!

Yes, and i'm the Queen of Sheba.

 

[HowardCohodas]

He has been successfully trading his system for over three months, I'm fairly certain he knows what he's talking about. Tsk!

Then you discount the 60 months of backtesting, and the 5 months of paper trading prior to the serious money track record.

I do not mind that you think my system has insufficient history to meet everyone's definition of success. However, I find it troublesome that you do not tell the whole story when you choose to critique my conclusions. Since I've pointed this out to you before, I no longer dismiss this as laziness.

 

[meanreversion]

Since I've pointed this out to you before, I no longer dismiss this as laziness.

It's taken you a long time to work out that we've been making fun of you, hasn't it..

 

[robster970]

Then you discount the 60 months of backtesting, and the 5 months of paper trading prior to the serious money track record.

I do not mind that you think my system has insufficient history to meet everyone's definition of success. However, I find it troublesome that you do not tell the whole story when you choose to critique my conclusions. Since I've pointed this out to you before, I no longer dismiss this as laziness.

It's like a Football (Soccer) game Howard. Nobody is really interested in how many goals you scored in practise.

Only your results from live trading count and people are judging you on 29 trades over 3 months. Surely you can see why this is the case.

 

[HowardCohodas]

It's like a Football (Soccer) game Howard. Nobody is really interested in how many goals you scored in practise.

Only your results from live trading count and people are judging you on 29 trades over 3 months. Surely you can see why this is the case.

Then you dismiss the concept of due diligence?

Also, I would suggest that your focus on 29 trades and 3 months ignores any statistical tests of significance regarding quality and quantity, even on this small a data set. I'm comfortable with those having that opinion, even if it is mathematically challenged. I do mind when these kinds of statements are considered authoritative, especially by those making them.

 

[meanreversion]

Then you discount the 60 months of backtesting, and the 5 months of paper trading prior to the serious money track record.

Good grief Howard - do you honestly expect people to be impressed that you've found a profitable strategy through backtesting??? Get real! It's child's play to cook up a system and then optimize it so it's profitable over five years.

The hard part is sticking with your strategy through drawdown, do you understand? Your wilful lack of comprehension is in parts frustrating and annoying.

Three months of live trading is not statistically significant ----- if you think it is, you need your head examining, end of chat.

 

[meanreversion]

Then you dismiss the concept of due diligence?

Also, I would suggest that your focus on 29 trades and 3 months ignores any statistical tests of significance regarding quality and quantity, even on this small a data set. I'm comfortable with those having that opinion, even if it is mathematically challenged. I do mind when these kinds of statements are considered authoritative, especially by those making them.

You total numpty.

Have you experienced a serious drawdown yet? If not, you're talking out of your backside (but then we all knew that anyway).

 

[HowardCohodas]

It's taken you a long time to work out that we've been making fun of you, hasn't it..

I'm comfortable with hazing the newbe. It's part of the initiation and I accept it.

However, for some here, the level of aggressiveness and persistence makes me wonder if personality flaws are a better explanation.

 

[meanreversion]

I'm comfortable with hazing the newbe. It's part of the initiation and I accept it.

However, for some here, the level of aggressiveness and persistence makes me wonder if personality flaws are a better explanation.

I really don't know why I bother. In fact this will be my last post to you.

Five years of backtesting, a few months of paper trading and then a few months of live trading does NOT mean you are a successful trader, by any yardstick.

You just go on believing whatever you want.