What did I do today…Whole lot of nothing…I wanted to, but I left my options alone. Looking at cost basis TOST is still in the green, NVDA came back up to around -1.5% and HOOD is down about 3.5%
Added a couple trades off the 1min on MACD might add one more off the 5min today, but I don’t want to watch it much more today. Currently sitting on 25 shares at $38.70 1min TPs are at $38.26 the holdovers TP is $40 something (my screen is cutting it off and I don’t remember off the top of my head. I’d really like to get this sideways and worked back out to have as a proof of concept, until then my back of the napkin guesstimates says its going to work. So i’ll just keep plowing ahead, a Titanic looking of icebergs.
What I really wanted to talk about today, cause I always need something to talk about, is a conversation on a different post. So let me get out my soapbox, and if your just here for my trades you can skip the rest of this entirely. I’ll be back Friday with more trading. Orginally I was going to resize everything and make it look prettier, but…yea, i’m not going to do that.
This is a response to this post on a different person's journal. I am moving my response over here out of respect to the OP of that journal. I don’t want to hijack his thread, and this could go around in circles for awhile. Here’s the original post
Here’s my initial response:
And here’s a picture I borrowed for soapbox rants:
That’s a face for radio if I ever saw one, but a beard on him and glasses and he looks just like me. Anyway, the conversation went sideways after that about Blackrock and what constitutes their performance. Then Steven jumped to the performance of Delta One traders at Goldman and Morgan and asserted they make 2 Million/YR starting salary. I can’t find any data supporting that claim, but it's also irrelevant to the argument. What does the salary of derivatives traders at different companies have to do with Blackrock? And it proves nothing. So let's circle back all the way to the beginning and look at the arguments this post was originally presenting.
1. OP has poor RR profile
2. The risk regime is obvious
3. His risk is intraday
4. Institutions are interested in liquidations
5. His strategy is simple AND would reduce OPs downside
6. Institutions use his method
7. His method has much better success rate
8. OPs strategy is a coin toss
9. Large institutions rarely lose money
And he added some chart examples, but they weren’t trades of his, they were just examples of what his strategy looks for and they were hourly S&P minis I think. While OP is trading a 52 week low strategy on stocks.
I stand by my original post. If you want to compare your strategy to someone elses you should at least make an apples to apples comparison. Otherwise you're just saying “If you would have done something completely different you would have gotten different results” Which is true, but that doesn’t mean anything. Steven replied he wasn’t didn’t want OP or anyone to trade like him, which is weird considering his entire post is about trading like him. I started attacking the assertion that large institutions rarely lose money, and I brought up blackrock and its performance in 2022. I did this because everything is conjecture without data. And if one claim can be disproven all claims should be set aside as false until there is some kind of data to support them. Backwards looking examples can be set aside for the same reason. I have this strategy I’m working on called the Plutus Strategy. Every full moon I take a Ouija board and channel the greek god Plutus and he gives me stocks to buy and hold until the winter solstice. I can give you some charts where this strategy did unbelievably well in the past. I don’t have any forward looking data, but just looking backwards this strategy can be phenomenal when applied to the right stocks. Anyway, I don’t want to trade the Plutus Strategy, that's why I told you about it.
I did wrongly argue Blackrock was negative in 2022. I pulled up something that said Blackrock funds lost and average of 14% in 2022 but that was just AUM. Steven added this article
https://www.thetradenews.com/blackr...-2022-but-still-exceeds-analyst-expectations/
I conceded that I had a poor argument, but my point was the funds themselves. He wasn’t making a case that institutions don’t lose money because they are structured in a way that they make money in all markets through fees. Stevens original assertion is they have strategies much like his and that's why they don’t lose money. So either the argument is they don’t lose money because of business structure, or they don’t lose money because they trade a certain way. Conflating those and say it proves your point.
I added this:
https://www.blackrock.com/ch/profes...asc&dataView=perfCum&style=44341&pageSize=100
It shows from Blackrocks own data they have over 400 actively managed funds that have a negative return since inception. That’s institutions losing money. And I looked at actively managed because someone or something at that institution is directing those trades, it's not a basket that's just following the markets.
That’s when Steven switched to derivative traders in different companies.
So that’s where it's at. I’m not endorsing a 52 week low strategy, it seems really risky to me and would require fundamental analysis of companies, and I’m not about that. I want to see where he takes it though. I’m not against Steven either, I have no idea how good or bad a VWAP strategy is, I've never even put it on a chart before this week. What I am against is asserting your opinions as fact without any data. You have a better strategy? Cool, show me the results. If you're just “trying to help” start where they are, not where you want them to be. I stated the same thing when the Sultan of Saltiness stated my Buy/Writes were inferior to synthetic straddles. Maybe that's true, but if I can’t trade them in my account that information isn’t valuable to me and I’ll just have to make do with my inferior means.
Bottom line, everyone is a Charlatan until there is data. And you shouldn’t listen to anybody who has an aversion to providing data. For funzies I googled " what percentage of stock traders use meth" and I was not disappointed.
Vice TV already found a guy. Who knew? I now have more data suggesting meth is the key to institutional trading success than I do Stevens strategy. Not really, I just wanted an excuse to share that.