NexusFi: Find Your Edge


Home Menu

 





Conflicting information


Discussion in Traders Hideout

Updated
      Top Posters
    1. looks_one Grantx with 8 posts (4 thanks)
    2. looks_two Johno1 with 5 posts (5 thanks)
    3. looks_3 tpredictor with 4 posts (5 thanks)
    4. looks_4 rassi with 1 posts (1 thanks)
      Best Posters
    1. looks_one rleplae with 2 thanks per post
    2. looks_two tpredictor with 1.3 thanks per post
    3. looks_3 Johno1 with 1 thanks per post
    4. looks_4 Grantx with 0.5 thanks per post
    1. trending_up 9,959 views
    2. thumb_up 21 thanks given
    3. group 6 followers
    1. forum 21 posts
    2. attach_file 2 attachments




 
Search this Thread

Conflicting information

  #21 (permalink)
 tpredictor 
North Carolina
 
Experience: Beginner
Platform: NinjaTrader, Tradestation
Trading: es
Posts: 644 since Nov 2011

Some more food for thought...

What types of jobs pay the most? Simple repetitive jobs or jobs that involve complexity, nuance, and difference. The jobs that repetitive and simple do not pay as much as the complex jobs.

Traders talk about consistency. But, does consistency arise from doing things consistently or from constantly adapting to changing markets? If a consistent set of actions produces a consistent set of results, the work is generally thought of as simple. But, if a different set of actions are required to produce a consistent set of results then the work is thought of as difficult. Rationally, discretionary trading should not be as consistent as systems trading but should be more robust. But, what do most discretionary traders desire the most? Consistency. Anything a human trader can do consistently then a computer can do more consistently.

Should patterns exist in the market? Think about why any pattern could exist: a group of traders are acting in a consistent way that causes them to lose. If any group of traders consistently lose then they won't be in business. Where is the edge suppose to come from -- from trading then? New blood? But retailers aren't trading. Why would a group of any traders act in a consistent way? The source probably historically came from three sources (1) Non rational/emotional investors, (2) technical traders, and (3) large traders who were sloppy with their orders or who due to informational asymmetries could not be an expert in all matters. Today, there aren't many retail traders and large traders have access to advanced order routing. What group is left? In futures, possibly only CTA's and systematic traders who do not have access to advanced order routing. But, the fourth source is simply risk exchange.

I have an idea for a while and the idea is that most small traders are actually more skilled then most larger traders. But, why do most larger traders win then when we know that most small traders lose? The reason is that most small traders employ min risk/max skill/max leverage combination while most large traders employ max risk/min leverage/min skill strategies. Max risk will always be rewarded provided you do not blow out because it offers an intrinsic source of profit, risk.

All edge is based on proposition of asymmetrical advantage. But, when large traders can trade tons of strategies automated strategies, the proposition of asymmetrical advantage should be questioned. There are few asymmetrical advantages. Also, do not expect to find edge in low liquidity or other such products either because there is no barrier to entry for large funds.

What's the cap implied for a trader today? One possibility is to look at what firms pay their quantitative analyst and traders and if you looked at the job sites: it isn't that much! Glass door suggest anywhere from 50k to 120k while we might imagine the firm must make more to pay the trader, the firms also have benefits of scale. What does this suggest? It suggest you must accept a lower return if you want to find less competition in any trading product and you must still overcome your lack of scale disadvantage.

The entire financial industry is built around the middle man. Nobody wants to trade because trading requires betting on an uncertain future. Finally, what is the true source of profits in the markets, imo? Market cognition. As for conflicting information, conflicting information must be considered carefully. Generally, you will need new information to resolve conflict.

As for trends, I think it was Michael Harris from PriceActionLab who explained it quite well. To profit from trends, it is not enough that trends exist in the market but the profit that you capture from the trends must exceed your losses from the chop. If markets have prolonged flat periods then trend following strategies will break down. Even if one accepts trends may exist in the market, the resulting supposition that they can be captured in a systematic way that outweighs their losses can still be questioned.

Reply With Quote

Can you help answer these questions
from other members on NexusFi?
Exit Strategy
NinjaTrader
Deepmoney LLM
Elite Quantitative GenAI/LLM
The space time continuum and the dynamics of a financial …
Emini and Emicro Index
New Micros: Ultra 10-Year & Ultra T-Bond -- Live Now
Treasury Notes and Bonds
Ninja Mobile Trader VPS (ninjamobiletrader.com)
Trading Reviews and Vendors
 
Best Threads (Most Thanked)
in the last 7 days on NexusFi
Get funded firms 2023/2024 - Any recommendations or word …
60 thanks
Funded Trader platforms
37 thanks
NexusFi site changelog and issues/problem reporting
24 thanks
GFIs1 1 DAX trade per day journal
22 thanks
The Program
19 thanks
  #22 (permalink)
Johno1
Geelong Victoria
 
Posts: 113 since Jan 2015
Thanks Given: 45
Thanks Received: 92


tpredictor View Post
Some more food for thought...

What types of jobs pay the most? Simple repetitive jobs or jobs that involve complexity, nuance, and difference. The jobs that repetitive and simple do not pay as much as the complex jobs.

Traders talk about consistency. But, does consistency arise from doing things consistently or from constantly adapting to changing markets? If a consistent set of actions produces a consistent set of results, the work is generally thought of as simple. But, if a different set of actions are required to produce a consistent set of results then the work is thought of as difficult. Rationally, discretionary trading should not be as consistent as systems trading but should be more robust. But, what do most discretionary traders desire the most? Consistency. Anything a human trader can do consistently then a computer can do more consistently.

Should patterns exist in the market? Think about why any pattern could exist: a group of traders are acting in a consistent way that causes them to lose. If any group of traders consistently lose then they won't be in business. Where is the edge suppose to come from -- from trading then? New blood? But retailers aren't trading. Why would a group of any traders act in a consistent way? The source probably historically came from three sources (1) Non rational/emotional investors, (2) technical traders, and (3) large traders who were sloppy with their orders or who due to informational asymmetries could not be an expert in all matters. Today, there aren't many retail traders and large traders have access to advanced order routing. What group is left? In futures, possibly only CTA's and systematic traders who do not have access to advanced order routing. But, the fourth source is simply risk exchange.

I have an idea for a while and the idea is that most small traders are actually more skilled then most larger traders. But, why do most larger traders win then when we know that most small traders lose? The reason is that most small traders employ min risk/max skill/max leverage combination while most large traders employ max risk/min leverage/min skill strategies. Max risk will always be rewarded provided you do not blow out because it offers an intrinsic source of profit, risk.

All edge is based on proposition of asymmetrical advantage. But, when large traders can trade tons of strategies automated strategies, the proposition of asymmetrical advantage should be questioned. There are few asymmetrical advantages. Also, do not expect to find edge in low liquidity or other such products either because there is no barrier to entry for large funds.

What's the cap implied for a trader today? One possibility is to look at what firms pay their quantitative analyst and traders and if you looked at the job sites: it isn't that much! Glass door suggest anywhere from 50k to 120k while we might imagine the firm must make more to pay the trader, the firms also have benefits of scale. What does this suggest? It suggest you must accept a lower return if you want to find less competition in any trading product and you must still overcome your lack of scale disadvantage.

The entire financial industry is built around the middle man. Nobody wants to trade because trading requires betting on an uncertain future. Finally, what is the true source of profits in the markets, imo? Market cognition. As for conflicting information, conflicting information must be considered carefully. Generally, you will need new information to resolve conflict.

As for trends, I think it was Michael Harris from PriceActionLab who explained it quite well. To profit from trends, it is not enough that trends exist in the market but the profit that you capture from the trends must exceed your losses from the chop. If markets have prolonged flat periods then trend following strategies will break down. Even if one accepts trends may exist in the market, the resulting supposition that they can be captured in a systematic way that outweighs their losses can still be questioned.

You keep bringing them the bad news, it is pretty accurate but no doubt it will be vehermently challenged all the same.

Cheers John

Reply With Quote
Thanked by:




Last Updated on August 3, 2017


© 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