Monpere there are trades with certain specifications in the right market conditions and with a certain account size that will have a 90% to 100% chance. You should know this. I wasn't referring to conviction from emotion, I was referring to conviction from experience and back-testing. If you have the eye, technicals, and confidence to string contracts on an exhausted trend and have upwards to 50 contracts at your disposal you can with experience always make a profitable trade on the tail end. This isn't a holy grail proposition, this is the truth. I don't doubt auto-trading entirely from a very advanced algorithm with some human intervention, I just don't know of anyone personally who has made significant money long term from a singular auto system trading everyday. If you have made money from automated trading I'd like to know - If your account is growing geometrically or exponentially or if its unstable growth, how many ticks or money you've made, and how long you've been using this system for.
thanks for the input.
can your automated systems distinguish a time frame for patterns being fresh or used up from 'trader effects' (a pattern losing its form from people expecting the same result and thus entering or exiting early to lock in profits)?
Last edited by sidney7g; June 11th, 2011 at 12:16 AM.
I have a automated system I have been working on for about a year. Yes it is profitable, however, with NT having issues with my broker MBT, specifically rollover of the Euro nightly I don't use it all the time. I get frustrated with it closing out my trades... so I am just sitting on it evaluating my options for a new broker and possible trading platform.
For the record I have posted live trades of my automated system in my journal first Break Even Trader.
The attached graph is backtesting for the past 6 months.
I trade 10,000 lot of forex euro. That equals out to a dollar a tick.
profit target is set for 83 ticks.
nosce te ipsum
Trade what the market is doing; NOT what you think its going to do.
No, I don't know of any trades in any market that have 100% win rate. If you do, I will pay you good money for it... oh wait, it that is the case I think you would not need my money, I think you would be hanging out on your private island, laughing at us saps writing posts on futures.io (formerly BMT)
As I said in my post, I don't have an auto trader, I have not been able to fully automate my method. I have automated most aspects support the method, but not the actual entries themselves because I've never been able to get the machine to pinpoint the entries exactly where they should be, and because I am a scalper, I cannot afford the computer entering a bar early or a bar late.
I do not have a large enough account size at the moment to ensure a 100% trade and they do not come often. If I had something close to 500000- 1000000 it is definitely possible. If a very promising trade goes against you, you can exponentially add contracts at equidistant intervals in length and or at signs of reversals to make up for the loss. I have even tried this system with out technicals and have become profitable. However this system takes into consideration you do not trade during news or crashes.
If you have a simulator I could use, I will show you.
There are various ways to autotrade. Most retail traders do not have HFT algo's. If a retail trader wants to trade an HFT algo, then he would have to lease a co-located machine. To most retail traders, autotrading means taking a system that can be manually traded, and have the computer execute it based on the rules they would use to manually trade it.
I know guys who trade "C" every day from the internet using X-Trader to trade for rebates, no co-location, no HFT's, just a mouse, a fast index finger, and low commissions.
Sure, It has everything to do with having a proper trading concept, and coding it properly. My manual mechanical method is very profitable, but is almost impossible to code, because the concept is based on recognizing indicator patterns, and it is almost impossible to teach a computer to recognize pictures of squiggly lines.
They are not trying to predict future market movements, they are taking advantages of micro market imbalances that last fractions of seconds. They do it because they can make barrels of money doing that. Why would they want to do something else?
Successful trading whether auto or manual is not about predicting the market. It is about playing the odds. None of us have a crystal ball. Winning the game is getting the probabilities in your favor and be right more often then you are wrong, or make more when you are right then you loose when you are wrong. If you think trading is about predicting the market, you will not only loose all your money, you will also have very low self esteem, because the market will prove to you over and over that it is always right, not you.
Last edited by monpere; June 11th, 2011 at 01:07 AM.
The following user says Thank You to monpere for this post:
Predicting by definition is an "estimate that (a specified thing) will happen in the future or will be a consequence of something". In essence 'playing the odds' is predicting if you use specifications(technical/fundamental specifications) based on back-tested odds. sorry to digress and use semantics, but I think Successful trading can be about predicting the market if you use technicals/fundamentals.
I have an automated trading system that is profitable long term, even in these highly volatile market conditions. I trade my capital and a few others capital, with it using an IB financial advisor account.
It is coded with SierraChart, uses IQFeed, and runs on a dedicated windows server in a good data centre. No big investment in technology - monthly costs are less than $300 per month.
I also consult for a few hedge funds that run automated systems which are profitable
Your view that "retail level" automated systems cannot make money is clearly incorrect, as the OP has also demonstrated.
The view of many on this forum that automated trading systems do not work and can not be profitable is laughable and short sighted.
In my experience, the main problem is that retail traders think that automated trading systems have to be complex so they add layer upon layer of complexity that then will not work.
The systems I'm involved with are amazingly simple, including the hedge fund systems. In fact if it isn't based on simple concepts with a minimal number of indicators, I'm not interested.
The following 4 users say Thank You to David for this post:
Actually - no-on has demonstrated anything on here. I have seen claims of profitability alongside the usual reasons for not posting statements to show profitability.
This is going on, on every trading forum, every day of the week, every week of the year.
Of course, everyone and his dog has a profitable automated system on the internet. Just like I have a moon lander in my back yard. Still - I can't show you a photo of my moon lander because someone could easily photoshop a picture of a moonlander onto a pic of their back yard - so it'd be pointless, see?
Please do everyone a favor and leave this thread. Its not for you and its OK.
There are people who don't believe (and its a belief) in automatic trading, as there are people who don't believe in technical analysis. There are people who say that markets are random and they may be correct.
For those who do believe in technical analysis the only way to go is automatic trading.
This is because technical analysis says that some patterns that exist on a chart have X percent chance to evolve in an up/down move. Why? because that what happened X % in the past. How can you have this information? From backtesting.
I read many journals from this forum. They all start with presenting a set of rules. After few losing trades the author changes the rules and gives a very detailed and sophisticated explanation why new rules are much better.
My opinion is that any move in the market can be explained in some way after a fact. Is this the correct explanation or not no one can tell, but an explanation is always very convincing.
Thats why I don't care much about reasons why a move occurred, but only if it has a statistical meaning.
The following 3 users say Thank You to baruchs for this post: