Welcome to NexusFi: the best trading community on the planet, with over 150,000 members Sign Up Now for Free
Genuine reviews from real traders, not fake reviews from stealth vendors
Quality education from leading professional traders
We are a friendly, helpful, and positive community
We do not tolerate rude behavior, trolling, or vendors advertising in posts
We are here to help, just let us know what you need
You'll need to register in order to view the content of the threads and start contributing to our community. It's free for basic access, or support us by becoming an Elite Member -- see if you qualify for a discount below.
-- Big Mike, Site Administrator
(If you already have an account, login at the top of the page)
The title says it all mostly. I've passed one tst combine on each system. One is short term orderflow and the other is slightly longer term with more focus on targeting. Both of them created positive statistics and profitable accounts. Both can be scaled for system 1 I'd go from UB to ZB to ZN. For system 2 I would accumulate positions over a few bars. Commission isn't a worry because my goal is to get a seat once passed ftp. I think I like them both generally as much, but system 1 is more active whereas system 2 is more sit and wait. I think I kinda like the feeling of doing something while trading, but the only way I make system 2 work is by leaving the computer after a trade is on or I'll ruin the trade. Which one is more profitable ? Well idk ultimately that's a matter of leverage and I control risk on both. I guess system 1 may have more potential in a slow market. I trade treasuries btw and have experience in them. However I noticed system 2 works very well with crude oil too. I'm genuinely at a loss right now because I tried to blur them but it just has me thinking more order flowwhen I should be picking exact targets. The win rate for about one month was about 83% taking ~ 30 trades per day with a profit/loss ratio of 1.3/1 per trade (this is a lot of trades per day and there were a couple combine days where I paid $600 in commission) the initial risk reward is about 1.5:1 but the actual risk reward works out to be 1:1 on average.
system 2 is 3-5 trades per day win rate of 70% with a profit loss ratio of 1:1 averaged out per trade over second combine. But the difference here is that the initial risk reward may be 1:1 however the actual risk reward usually ends up being 1:4
I want to hone in on one of these strategies but they both are viable and can make money which I've seen myself. Trying to blend them is incredibly difficult ... thanks
Btw system 1 is less tested as the combine only lasted 10 days. There are a solid number of scratches trades in the system which ninja counts as wins if u don't calculate commission
Not sure if my assumptions are wrong, but both are paper trading systems, correct(?)
In that case I would choose the one that has less trades: In frequently traded systems we tend to over estimate the limit orders filled and ond/or slippage.
Thanks,
Matt Z
Optimus Futures
There is a substantial risk of loss in futures trading. Past performance is not indicative of future results.
Trading futures and options involves substantial risk of loss and is not suitable for all investors. Past performance is not necessarily indicative of future results. You may lose more than your initial investment. All posts are opinions and do not claim to be facts. Please conduct your own due diligence. Use only Risk capital when trading Futures.
1 800 771 6748 local 561 367 8686 email [email protected]
The following 3 users say Thank You to mattz for this post:
Have you done historical back testing/ out of sample testing/ walk forward testing/ Monte Carlo? And have you included slippage and commission in all of your testing?
If a good backtesting process has been followed then, Trade both.
"Free markets work because they allow people to be lucky, thanks to aggressive trial and error, not by giving rewards or incentives for skill. The strategy is, then, to tinker as much as possible and try to collect as many Black Swan opportunities as you can"
The following 3 users say Thank You to Neo1 for this post:
Well yes I've done backwards testing and just intraday trading both strategies. They're not automated systems if that's what it came across as but discretionary. For commission both got through tst combines which use 3.68 commission and I'm trading bonds which with a seat + tradeovate can be less than $1 commission. Slippage in ZN isn't a worry.
Both work yes, but I'd rather become fantastic with one rather than good with both
Don't let a small data sample drive your decision. 10 days is nowhere near enough. One or both of the strategies might have done well due to random good luck.
Keep trading both until you really have sufficient live, real money results to make a decision.
The following 3 users say Thank You to kevinkdog for this post:
Two things; you could post the rules and setups for both systems and let some of the traders here try and recreate your results to give you larger sample size to choose from as far as which system to focus on. Secondly, and please don't take this the wrong way, as I wish you nothing but success in trading. I have yet to meet a long term, consistently profitable "funded" trader utilizing TopStep as the backer, given their platform/data/commissions not to mention their cut of the profits. I have spoken to nearly a dozen that went live for a very brief period of time until the reality and the math set in. You may want to simply save up and find yourself long term you are much better off.
Well my goal is to save up 30k+ from the combination of oneup and topstep to start my own account. It's always been my goal to go my own way with trading. The commission structure does worry me a bit, but leasing a seat makes the venture much more economical. As for data fees, $85 hopefully isn't make or break in ones trading. My platforming is as cheap as I could make it too. I've literally been through the numbers a dozen times even tho I'm not even funded. To me topstep seems decently fair so idk... I don't risk that much and in turn don't expect too much from my trading I only target consistency. As for testing the strategies, I'm pretty sure I'm going to go with strategy 1 as I often enter on the market and just feel more comfortable with trading that way and I prefer the tight control of my risk + higher win rate. Although Assuming I choose to go all in with strategy 1 i may give the other to my best friend whose a trader. But currently I'm using the former strategy in the funded trader prep and I'll use the secondary in a oneuptrader combine. Idk just about the experience using it on sim then live I guess.
Btw I've heard what you said about tst from a number of guys and it's sort of worry as it's my only option because I'm underfunded. Tst seems like a genuine company to me I don't get why people fail on the live account. I do believe the rules about trading news and the contract limit are crap. It'd suck to accidentally trade one to many then have tst tell you to go screw yourself. Also for news, there is more than enough two sided trading in ZN during some banned news events to get out of need be. Also I have automated news strategies that I'd never even be able to attempt on 1 contract
If you have two good systems - make for both a longest possible track record:
So trade with both parallel.
Then optimize both by watching good / bad results especially on
• weekday
• volumes on every hour/half hour
• days before and after holidays
• special announcement days
Result
You will get hard RULES when NOT to trade.
If you still have time then build your 3rd or more good system.
GFIs1
The following 2 users say Thank You to GFIs1 for this post: