IMHO, most competitions are useless because they have survivorship bias and are only focused on profit gained without the consideration for the risk taken. See below, the IBs and brokers want to encourage trading so that they will earn on the commissions; thus, most competitions' results are based on luck and not trading edge.
Haha. Yes, sadly that response is par for the course. .
Step 1: Create 15 sim accounts, place different strategies to trade on each
Step 2: Choose the best 2 or 3 to show to the world to prove your trading prowess
Step 3: Profit
I was actually so disheartened by my post and the responses therein, that I, ironically, shelved my own web site I'd created. . . indefinitely, quite probably permanently.
I had high hopes of a lively competition, and proving what can be done via systematic trading, with discipline and effort and listening intently to proper mentors (such as yourself). . . but after learning how vendors are viewed by the community at large, and justifiably so, I don't know that I want to enter that fray, esp as the profits would be minimal relative to trading.
Also, Fiverr, you make an excellent point, in regards to luck/randomness/market-chaos being a massive factor in many of these competitions. This is why I specifically asked that the competitions require X amount of trades. . . with a large enough data pool, the chances of your success (or failure!) being attributed to luck and chance are greatly minimized.
I'm still more than open to any sort of competition along those lines, I'd absolutely love it. . but I have yet to met a single vendor confident enough in their end result products to engage in said competition, and from the sounds of it, I likely won't. If this changes, or if anyone can round up even one or two vendors who are willing to engage in some friendly competition, I'd be thrilled to do so.
I still tend to think it'd be a great learning experience for the community, especially those traveling down the same path of systematic/automated trading, and especially especially those that are fairly new to this path.
A while back I started the post below to challenge some of the members here. I believe that it was a baby step just to compare each other performance report. Unfortunately, the discussion did not have a lot of takers. My thoughts were very simple. Lets compare and push each other to develop the best systematic solution possible without any aggressive/compounding money management. Once we have a handful of systems, we can trade them with SIM accounts. Once we have more members involved, we can start a pool/fund to trade the system live.
Howdy Fiverr. . . I will take a look when I'm home and able in a few hours. .
I'm actually trading over 60 systematic strats live on a daily basis, and have been for about half a year now. . ran well over 150 in sim mode for nearly a year before that. . . so I'm not sure how I'd fit in there, but I am intrigued, and promise to take a closer look, I always like the idea of mutually beneficial collab, when/where it can happen. Also, I always love to see people willing to test their mettle on this daunting path, and even more so to see consistent success. . .
My ultimate goal is a bit diff in that I'm attempting to create a system to create systems, as opposed to just a few winning systems. . and my god is it tricky. : )
That being said, I'm enjoying every minute. Well, most minutes. . heh.
Sadly I think you're right. . but perhaps they could be convinced otherwise if the atmosphere were encouraging enough. I, for one, would give a company/vendor immense credit solely for being willing to test their mettle in such an open and transparent manner, for all to see. . it'd also provide an outlet for them to discuss the logic behind their means and methods (not necessarily specifics, more broad-level details), to perhaps prove to the community at large that their approach has some merit.
As important as 'live' results are, as pointed out several times in this thread and others, they're only extremely valid over a large enough data pool, or a long enough stretch of time, or ideally both. . so if they knew that they wouldn't be written off if they happened to face a small stretch of bad luck during the competition (and perhaps this could be solved with a semi-permanent, ongoing competition?), this might help encourage participation. . .
I'm still giving this all some thought. I *do* still think its possible. . if anyone can rustle up even a single vendor willing to compete, its a start, and I'd immediately be much more optimistic about our chances
Actual broker statements checked against a live Dom in a video room, over many months are the only valid indicator of vendor truth.
It's why almost none will supply.
I just wasted a few hours in kongzana room which had neither.
The following user says Thank You to Forexoil for this post:
I would love the idea of a competition! I think competition is very healthy indeed!
On the SIM note, I think you could make it as close to the real thing as it gets (not sure how to work it out as a 95% percentage or else as such but still), or totally irrelevant. I have tested many strategies, trialed some platforms, Brokers and so on, on a SIM basis, and ignoring the queue issue, I always tried to do exactly what I would with one of my real accounts, as it otherwise is a fairly pointless exercise.
On the performance/statements side, and without getting into the question of whether or not one might be able to fake such things, I am not convinced it mirrors very well the worthiness of a training course or Trading room, but while negative results will not attract followers (why would you follow someone who looses when you can do that yourself!?), I am not sure positive ones are a guarantee of success for trainees/learners: Experience can not be taught, and this is very much so the quintessential part of success, assuming one works with a sensible method (I have trained many people and have always shown results and live trading to those who want to see the way I work in action, but those who make the effort to work hard are unvariably the ones who succeed, and those who don't fail, regardless of my performance, which are very much linked to the knowledge of the markers and instruments I trade, experience, trading capital, etc).
Having said all that I am working on a screen sharing room, where many traders can come and share their screens, to show live trading on live accounts, as I think this is a very good learning process, and a very good addition to theory, but I can't think of a reason, why so many rooms or training courses, most often fail to show live trading, and I have been scratching my head wondering why so few people offer that..?
The following user says Thank You to dom64 for this post: