NexusFi: Find Your Edge


Home Menu

 





Taking a Trading System Live


Discussion in Trading Journals

Updated
      Top Posters
    1. looks_one kevinkdog with 260 posts (717 thanks)
    2. looks_two Big Mike with 61 posts (97 thanks)
    3. looks_3 deaddog with 25 posts (24 thanks)
    4. looks_4 swz168 with 20 posts (40 thanks)
      Best Posters
    1. looks_one kevinkdog with 2.8 thanks per post
    2. looks_two swz168 with 2 thanks per post
    3. looks_3 rk142 with 2 thanks per post
    4. looks_4 Big Mike with 1.6 thanks per post
    1. trending_up 96,261 views
    2. thumb_up 1,131 thanks given
    3. group 99 followers
    1. forum 529 posts
    2. attach_file 189 attachments




 
Search this Thread

Taking a Trading System Live

  #31 (permalink)
 
JGSmith's Avatar
 JGSmith 
Lübeck, Germany
 
Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NinjaTrader, MT4
Broker: FXCM, Interactive Brokers, Oanda
Trading: Forex
Posts: 151 since Aug 2013
Thanks Given: 61
Thanks Received: 55

I quite enjoy reading your posts. Very good and very thought out. As you mentioned, you are not saying it is the best way, but at least it is well thought out and therefore, if there is an issues, it should be easy to find where it went wrong based on how you are thinking through things.

Reply With Quote

Can you help answer these questions
from other members on NexusFi?
Are there any eval firms that allow you to sink to your …
Traders Hideout
ZombieSqueeze
Platforms and Indicators
New Micros: Ultra 10-Year & Ultra T-Bond -- Live Now
Treasury Notes and Bonds
Deepmoney LLM
Elite Quantitative GenAI/LLM
The space time continuum and the dynamics of a financial …
Emini and Emicro Index
 
Best Threads (Most Thanked)
in the last 7 days on NexusFi
Get funded firms 2023/2024 - Any recommendations or word …
61 thanks
Funded Trader platforms
39 thanks
NexusFi site changelog and issues/problem reporting
26 thanks
The Program
18 thanks
GFIs1 1 DAX trade per day journal
18 thanks
  #32 (permalink)
 kevinkdog   is a Vendor
 
Posts: 3,645 since Jul 2012
Thanks Given: 1,890
Thanks Received: 7,338


JGSmith View Post
I quite enjoy reading your posts. Very good and very thought out. As you mentioned, you are not saying it is the best way, but at least it is well thought out and therefore, if there is an issues, it should be easy to find where it went wrong based on how you are thinking through things.

Thanks. Of course, if anyone thinks there is a better way for me to do any of us (better position sizing, more reliable and cheaper broker, etc), please feel free to contribute. Such suggestions will make this thread even better, as we test, evaluate and compare the alternatives.

Kevin

Follow me on Twitter Started this thread Reply With Quote
  #33 (permalink)
 kevinkdog   is a Vendor
 
Posts: 3,645 since Jul 2012
Thanks Given: 1,890
Thanks Received: 7,338


Whenever I start a new strategy live, it is always nice to start with a profit.

Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to happen too often for me! Maybe it is just me, or maybe I just remember the down days - I don't know.

Anyhow, 2 trades today, automation worked as expected (I'll go into detail on automation on a later post).

Here's the tracking graph I'll be using (I will show and describe all tools I will be using to track this strategy as time progresses).


Follow me on Twitter Started this thread Reply With Quote
  #34 (permalink)
 kevinkdog   is a Vendor
 
Posts: 3,645 since Jul 2012
Thanks Given: 1,890
Thanks Received: 7,338

In a previous post, I presented some results with fixed fractional position sizing. Basically, the results say that in an "average" year (meaning, 50% of years will be worse, and 50% of years will be better), I expect to make $30,735 profit in that year, and hit a maximum drawdown of 38.1% sometime during the year.

That profit number seems a little too good to be true...and my motto is "if something seems too good to be true, it probably is." And that profit number does seem too good to be true. 362% rate of return in that first year. Seems high...

Remember, though, the actual rate of return could be just about anywhere on the spectrum. It is just that the 362% is the median value.

Below is a histogram of possible returns. It will be interesting to see if the Year 1 results is anywhere close to the median ending equity (black vertical line). If it is, I will be very happy. I'll still be happy if I even hit the 25% mark, which is a final equity of about $21000, which is 147% return for the year. Still in "too good to be true" region.


Follow me on Twitter Started this thread Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
  #35 (permalink)
 
JGSmith's Avatar
 JGSmith 
Lübeck, Germany
 
Experience: Intermediate
Platform: NinjaTrader, MT4
Broker: FXCM, Interactive Brokers, Oanda
Trading: Forex
Posts: 151 since Aug 2013
Thanks Given: 61
Thanks Received: 55

Is that Monte Carlo? If so, then that is not quite what it is saying though it is a similar statement. That technically is saying that 50% of the time, final balance is that amount or less.

Reply With Quote
  #36 (permalink)
 kevinkdog   is a Vendor
 
Posts: 3,645 since Jul 2012
Thanks Given: 1,890
Thanks Received: 7,338


JGSmith View Post
Is that Monte Carlo? If so, then that is not quite what it is saying though it is a similar statement. That technically is saying that 50% of the time, final balance is that amount or less.

Yes, it is based on Monte Carlo. Can you explain the statement "that is not quite what it is saying..." - I am not sure I understand.

Are you referring to my statement: "Basically, the results say that in an "average" year (meaning, 50% of years will be worse, and 50% of years will be better), I expect to make $30,735 profit in that year, and hit a maximum drawdown of 38.1% sometime during the year." I know I am using the term "average" incorrectly in this sentence (hence the quotes around it), as it is really the median value - the true average would be much higher, due to the spike at the far right of the histogram.

Thanks in advance!

Follow me on Twitter Started this thread Reply With Quote
  #37 (permalink)
 Koepisch 
@ Germany
 
Experience: Beginner
Platform: NinjaTrader
Broker: Mirus Futures/Zen-Fire
Trading: FDAX
Posts: 569 since Nov 2011
Thanks Given: 440
Thanks Received: 518

@kevinkdog: I'm an attentive follower of your thread and very appreciate the granularity of your analysis. In another thread we have discussed the measuring of drawdowns und i've wrote my primary style of drawdown analysis here . Recently i've found a term for my Kind of analysis "Start-Trade DrawDown". It's mentioned in Keith Fitschen newest book "Building Reliable Trading Systems" which i can strongly recommend.

With a default monte carlo analysis you ignore the result dependency of subsequent trades. I refer to "Winning strikes" and "Loosing strikes". It could be a huge difference in your money management if you have an strongly trade-to-trade correlated system. In one of my books i have an algorithm to test that. With an "Start-Trade DrawDown" analysis you can see what your largest drawdown would be, if you had started your system at every day in the last x years.

I'm courios to see the difference between both methods.

Koepisch

Edit: "result dependency of subsequent trades" means "serial correlation" - thanks kevinkdog, sometimes it's hard for a non native speaker

Reply With Quote
  #38 (permalink)
 kevinkdog   is a Vendor
 
Posts: 3,645 since Jul 2012
Thanks Given: 1,890
Thanks Received: 7,338


Koepisch View Post
@kevinkdog: I'm an attentive follower of your thread and very appreciate the granularity of your analysis. In another thread we have discussed the measuring of drawdowns und i've wrote my primary style of drawdown analysis here . Recently i've found a term for my Kind of analysis "Start-Trade DrawDown". It's mentioned in Keith Fitschen newest book "Building Reliable Trading Systems" which i can strongly recommend.

With a default monte carlo analysis you ignore the result dependency of subsequent trades. I refer to "Winning strikes" and "Loosing strikes". It could be a huge difference in your money management if you have an strongly trade-to-trade correlated system. In one of my books i have an algorithm to test that. With an "Start-Trade DrawDown" analysis you can see what your largest drawdown would be, if you had started your system at every day in the last x years.

I'm courios to see the difference between both methods.

Koepisch


Yes, I agree with you:

If there is serial correlation in your data (where the result of Trade X is related to the result of Trade X-1), the Monte Carlo analysis is not 100% appropriate.

To test this, I usually use a Durbin-Watson statistic. I find, for most of my systems, they do not have this serial or auto correlation issue.

When I get a chance, I will try to run the "start trade drawdown" - I think it would be useful. If it looks a lot different than the Monte Carlo, then that will be VERY interesting!

Follow me on Twitter Started this thread Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
  #39 (permalink)
 kevinkdog   is a Vendor
 
Posts: 3,645 since Jul 2012
Thanks Given: 1,890
Thanks Received: 7,338


Koepisch View Post
@kevinkdog: I'm an attentive follower of your thread and very appreciate the granularity of your analysis. In another thread we have discussed the measuring of drawdowns und i've wrote my primary style of drawdown analysis here . Recently i've found a term for my Kind of analysis "Start-Trade DrawDown". It's mentioned in Keith Fitschen newest book "Building Reliable Trading Systems" which i can strongly recommend.

With a default monte carlo analysis you ignore the result dependency of subsequent trades. I refer to "Winning strikes" and "Loosing strikes". It could be a huge difference in your money management if you have an strongly trade-to-trade correlated system. In one of my books i have an algorithm to test that. With an "Start-Trade DrawDown" analysis you can see what your largest drawdown would be, if you had started your system at every day in the last x years.

I'm courios to see the difference between both methods.

Koepisch

Edit: "result dependency of subsequent trades" means "serial correlation" - thanks kevinkdog, sometimes it's hard for a non native speaker


NOTE: This post scratches the surface of a complicated issue...proceed at your own risk...


OK, I ran the analysis. For everyone reading this, the issue is that, depending on your trade data, Monte Carlo analysis is not always a correct tool to use.

So, to first test this (is Monte Carlo OK to use?), I run something called the Durvin-Watson statistic. It checks for positive and negative autocorrelation. I think you can google search to find this for an Excel spreadsheet, what it means, etc. I'm no mathematician, so I will defer from getting into detail on this calculation.


Suffice it to say, for my NGEC system, the analysis says there is no autocorrelation issue, so I can use Monte Carlo analysis.


So to answer Koepisch's excellent question - how does Monte Carlo analysis compare with the "Start Trade Drawdown" analysis he mentions a couple of posts ago?


Again, without getting into too much detail, here are the results:




With the uncertainty of this whole analysis, it says that the 2 methods give very similar values for drawdown. The Monte Carlo gives more "worst case" scenarios - higher drawdowns than the Start Trade method, and this shows up as a greater standard deviation.


Thanks, Koepisch, for helping me add to the analysis here. The "Start Trade Drawdown" approach is verty interesting and useful.

Follow me on Twitter Started this thread Reply With Quote
Thanked by:
  #40 (permalink)
 Koepisch 
@ Germany
 
Experience: Beginner
Platform: NinjaTrader
Broker: Mirus Futures/Zen-Fire
Trading: FDAX
Posts: 569 since Nov 2011
Thanks Given: 440
Thanks Received: 518



kevinkdog View Post
NOTE: This post scratches the surface of a complicated issue...proceed at your own risk...


...

With the uncertainty of this whole analysis, it says that the 2 methods give very similar values for drawdown. The Monte Carlo gives more "worst case" scenarios - higher drawdowns than the Start Trade method, and this shows up as a greater standard deviation.

Thanks, Koepisch, for helping me add to the analysis here. The "Start Trade Drawdown" approach is verty interesting and useful.

Excellent and fast analysis, great @kevinkdog! Due to the similarity of the results i would trust even more in the system. Furthermore you can trust your monte carlo analysis related money managment decisions - because it's BACKED with practical "What-if" "Start Trade Drawdown" analysis.

Reply With Quote
Thanked by:




Last Updated on January 6, 2016


© 2024 NexusFi™, s.a., All Rights Reserved.
Av Ricardo J. Alfaro, Century Tower, Panama City, Panama, Ph: +507 833-9432 (Panama and Intl), +1 888-312-3001 (USA and Canada)
All information is for educational use only and is not investment advice. There is a substantial risk of loss in trading commodity futures, stocks, options and foreign exchange products. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
About Us - Contact Us - Site Rules, Acceptable Use, and Terms and Conditions - Privacy Policy - Downloads - Top
no new posts