>>I don't buy that (i.e., "both right, but not at the same time").<<
In our current context, let me rephrase what you are disagreeing with: Prices can breakout at S/R or reverse at S/R, just not at the same time. >>When used properly price levels (e.g., S&R, Fibonacci, Gann, etc.) and momentum provide distinctly different information and are not duplicative.<< While I agree with what you said in principle, I make a very clear distinction between S/R and Fibonacci, Gann, Floor Trader Pivots, PTT, etc. S/R occur because of specific trader behaviors. The others are "magic" calculated numbers that are very crude (and I do mean very crude) measures of prices being O/B or O/S. Bill --- In [email protected], "wavemechanic" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I don't buy that (i.e., "both right, but not at the same time"). When used properly price levels (e.g., S&R, Fibonacci, Gann, etc.) and momentum provide distinctly different information and are not duplicative. As a result, there is no reason not to use them together and I for one always do. > > Bill > ----- Original Message ----- > From: brian_z111 > To: [email protected] > Sent: Thursday, May 08, 2008 7:54 PM > Subject: [amibroker] Re: Jake Bernstein Momentum formula > > > As Yuki said, "they are both right, but not at the same time". > > The company, and dicussion, around the coffee table is good but as > Ralph Vince said "trading is not an intellectual exercise, it is more > like a street fight". > > Forget right or wrong - get in there and beat the heck out of every > opponent (mean reversion, trend trading, Hurst, S/R) what ever comes > along. > > (that means work them over with backtesting - what is the most you > can squeeze out of that style e.g. a reversion to mean trade - can > you do better if you change it up a bit - when you reach exhaustion > point with that trade then you know exactly what its limits are - be > honest with yourself - have you really squeezed all of the juice out > of that style - after a while you start to see that sometimes the > same opponent returns in another outfit and you can't be bothered > beating up on the same old foe over and over). > > When they are all defeated keep your eyes peeled and your nerves > steeled for any new challengers who are coming along and give them a > hiding too. > > P.S. anyone can see my trading biases but they can also see I am > thinking about, and paying respect to, trading styles that don't come > naturally to me. > > brian_z > > > --- In [email protected], "Louis Préfontaine" > <rockprog80@> wrote: > > > > Thanks Brian. Indeed, that looks like prehistoric stuff... > > > > BTW, what is your opinion about the S/R breakout vs reversion to > mean > > debate? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Louis > > > > 2008/5/8 brian_z111 <brian_z111@>: > > > > > If your trading system rules are based on things like "buy when > the > > > short term moving ave crosses the long term moving ave". > > > > > > The MA is looking back so many periods to make its calculation > e.g. MA > > > (C,15) is looking back 15 periods. > > > > > > If you test a range of MA periods, to select your best MA > crossover > > > system, then you are optimising the lookback period (at least > that is > > > what I mean). > > > > > > brian_z > > > > > > --- In [email protected] <amibroker% > 40yahoogroups.com>, "Louis > > > Préfontaine" > > > <rockprog80@> wrote: > > > > > > > > Hi Brian and everyone, > > > > > > > > What exactly do you mean by "optimisation of lookback period"? > > > > > > > > I had a lot of fun reading this thread. I wonder what is better: > > > > support/resistance breakout or reversion to mean. Worked with > > > both; don't > > > > know yet what works better. I've seen people been sure of their > > > opinions, > > > > but I'd like to read some arguments... > > > > > > > > Louis > > > > > > > > 2008/5/8 brian_z111 <brian_z111@>: > > > > > > > > > It's just an opinion, but it is based on observation. > > > > > > > > > > I'm referring to systems designed by optimising lookback > periods. > > > > > > > > > > I'm happy to be proved wrong ...so you are saying we can > achieve > > > > > better than 30-40%PA, on long term average (through various > market > > > > > cycles) using 'optimisation of lookback period' techniques? > (EOD, > > > no > > > > > leveraging). > > > > > > > > > > brian_z > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] <amibroker% > 40yahoogroups.com><amibroker% > > > 40yahoogroups.com>, > > > > > > > > "bilbo0211" <bilbod@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > "I will stick to my prediction that around 30%PA EOD > trading is > > > a > > > > > > limit for indicators that use lookback periods and that to > > > achieve > > > > > > more than this requires a different approach (as I say you > are > > > both > > > > > > correct except I believe that Steve is talking about >30%PA > > > > > returns)." > > > > > > > > > > > > Is this just your opinion or do you have something that > > > approaches > > > > > > 'scientific proof' of this allegation? > > > > > > > > > > > > In "The Profit Magic of Stock Transaction Timing" by J M > Hurst, > > > the > > > > > > author claims the theoretical maximum annual ROI for stock > > > trading > > > > > is > > > > > > 2400%. ROI is directly related to the holding period for > each > > > trade > > > > > > and being fully invested at all times (the 'Magic' is in the > > > power > > > > > of > > > > > > compounding). > > > > > > > > > > > > Hurst recorded the results of a 6 week real time trading > > > experiment > > > > > in > > > > > > which his performance trading high beta stocks approached > his > > > > > > theoretical maximum annual ROI. > > > > > > > > > > > > Hurst waited until the dominant cycles in his trading > instrument > > > > > were > > > > > > in alignment before trading (this is also called multiple > time > > > frame > > > > > > or multiple fractal alignment). He primarily used daily and > > > weekly > > > > > charts. > > > > > > > > > > > > The theoretical maximum ROI is actually much higher than > 2400% > > > if > > > > > you > > > > > > use intraday charts and leveraged trading instruments. > > > > > > > > > > > > If you look in the Amibroker Trading System Yahoo group, you > > > will > > > > > find > > > > > > a poll of results of people's mechanical trading systems. > IIRC, > > > the > > > > > > best ones listed returned over 400% per year. > > > > > > > > > > > > Bill > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] <amibroker% > 40yahoogroups.com><amibroker% > > > 40yahoogroups.com>, > > > > > "brian_z111" <brian_z111@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > 20 - (- 9.3_ == approx delta 30% PA in my books. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thanks Yuki for confirming this. > > > > > > > Now I don't have to post a 30% system (as I promised > Louis) to > > > > > prove > > > > > > > my benchmark is correct. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Actually I agree with both you and Steve (the real > problem is > > > > > > > semantics since IMO close analysis would show that most > of us > > > are > > > > > > > moementum traders and also that most of us are using a > kind of > > > > > S/R in > > > > > > > some way - the difference is how we perceive and define > these > > > > > things). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I will stick to my prediction that around 30%PA EOD > trading > > > is a > > > > > > > limit for indicators that use lookback periods and that to > > > > > achieve > > > > > > > more than this requires a different approach (as I say > you are > > > > > both > > > > > > > correct except I believe that Steve is talking about >30% > PA > > > > > returns). > > > > > > > > > > > > > > (Steve - care to confirm?) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > brian_z > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > --- In [email protected] <amibroker% > 40yahoogroups.com><amibroker% > > > 40yahoogroups.com>, Yuki > > > > > > > > Taga <yukitaga@> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Gee, then I guess I should give back my ~20 percent a > year > > > that > > > > > is > > > > > > > > largely based on short-term momentum swings, yes? (I'm > > > sitting > > > > > plus > > > > > > > > 13 percent YTD this year already, as of yesterday, > versus - > > > 9.3 > > > > > > > > percent for my Nikkei 225 benchmark.) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > You do have to be agile however. And you cannot overstay > > > your > > > > > > > > welcome. But the money is there for momentum systems if > > > > > designed > > > > > > > > and tested properly. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > "Support" exists, but everyone knows where it is. > Exactly > > > > > where it > > > > > > > > is. And somebody (I'll leave it to you to guess who) is > > > going > > > > > to > > > > > > > > ring the bell and tell you that (resistance failed) or > > > (support > > > > > > > > failed). What are you going to do, then? You're going to > > > stop > > > > > > > > yourself out of course. With a loser. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Which is likely to be more profitable, and for a longer > > > period > > > > > of > > > > > > > > time? Systems that compel you to do the psychologically > > > > > difficult, > > > > > > > > or systems that suggest that you do the patently > obvious? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Is there anyone beyond 7th grade that doesn't know where > > > > > support and > > > > > > > > resistance is? Are there great systems that rely on > widely > > > > > known > > > > > > > > community knowledge? > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Look for a system that has good metrics, but a system > that > > > also > > > > > > > > suggests that what you need to do will be > psychologically > > > > > difficult > > > > > > > > for you to do, in spite of having back-tested results > > > > > indicating > > > > > > > that > > > > > > > > you are foolish if you *don't* do it. Then you are good > to > > > go, > > > > > as > > > > > > > > they say. Good to go as long as you do it, of course. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > If your system is easy to follow (by that, I mean that > it's > > > > > > > > psychologically easy for you to make the trades), it's > > > probably > > > > > a > > > > > > > > loser. And vice-versa. The best systems have good > metrics, > > > yet > > > > > > > > despite that they almost defy the trader > (psychologically) > > > to > > > > > make > > > > > > > > the trades. There is no free lunch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yuki > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thursday, May 8, 2008, 11:50:01 AM, you wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s> Anthony, > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s> Do yourself a big favor. Don't waste your precious > time > > > on > > > > > this > > > > > > > > s> earth with this kind of drivel. Chasing price with > > > > > momentum > > > > > > > > s> indicators is not going to get you where you want to > be. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s> Coming up with a support/resistance system is all you > > > need > > > > > to > > > > > > > make > > > > > > > > s> whatever you want from the markets. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s> I've seen hundreds of traders get wiped out trying > to go > > > on > > > > > the > > > > > > > path > > > > > > > > s> you're following and all of the successful traders > I've > > > been > > > > > > > around > > > > > > > > s> in the e-mini futures have used S/R as the > foundation of > > > > > their > > > > > > > > s> trading methodology. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s> And, above all, embrace your emotions in trading > because > > > > > they > > > > > > > teach > > > > > > > > s> you what you should and shouldn't do going forward. > > > > > Computers > > > > > > > learn > > > > > > > > s> nothing while you learn from every win and loss you > make. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s> Finding an edge in trading is easy. It's only hard if > > > > > you're > > > > > > > using a > > > > > > > > s> computer to find a needle in a haystack because you > > > didn't > > > > > make > > > > > > > a > > > > > > > > s> good enough investment in real-time observations of > the > > > > > markets > > > > > > > while > > > > > > > > s> researching an edge you'd like to trade.. That makes > all > > > > > the > > > > > > > > s> difference in the world for knowing what works and > what > > > > > doesn't. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s> You'll come up with 10 edges to trade if you put the > > > time in > > > > > to > > > > > > > > s> experience a live market on a regular basis without > > > trying > > > > > so > > > > > > > hard. > > > > > > > > s> It will bring out your imagination and creativity to > find > > > > > what > > > > > > > you're > > > > > > > > s> looking for. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s> I wish someone had told me that 4.5 years ago when I > > > started > > > > > > > trading > > > > > > > > s> the ER2 e-mini. It would have saved me a lot of time > > > > > chasing > > > > > > > > s> nonsense. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > s> --- In [email protected]<amibroker% > 40yahoogroups.com><amibroker% > > > 40yahoogroups.com>, > > > > > > > > "ihsaham" <ihsaham@> wrote: > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Hai Tomasz, > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> This is simple Jake Bernstein Momentum Formula for > chart > > > and > > > > > > > > s> scanner. > > > > > > > > >> Please help me give arrow buy and sell. Buy arrow is > > > Green > > > > > > > colour > > > > > > > > s> and > > > > > > > > >> Sell Arrow is Red Colour. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> I really appreciate and thanks for you in advance. > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Best Regards, > > > > > > > > >> Anthony Idic > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> _SECTION_BEGIN(" $ Momentum "); > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> /* Bernstein Momentum Indicator */ > > > > > > > > >> /* Set Scaling to Automatic, Show dates On, Percent > On, > > > > > Middle > > > > > > > On */ > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Title = "Bernstein MOM Close - Ref(Close,-7)"; > > > > > > > > >> GraphXSpace = 5; > > > > > > > > >> Graph0 = MA(Close - Ref(Close,-7),1); > > > > > > > > >> Graph0Style = 5; > > > > > > > > >> Graph0Color = 29; > > > > > > > > >> Graph1 = MA(Graph0,5); > > > > > > > > >> Graph1Style = 1; > > > > > > > > >> Graph1Color = 32; > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> DaysAgo =Optimize("DaysAgo",-28,-40,-16,4); > > > > > > > > >> Fast = Optimize("Fast", 1, 1,5,1); > > > > > > > > >> Slow = Optimize("Slow",28,16,40,4); > > > > > > > > >> /* Note: It is merely a coincidence that DaysAgo and > Slow > > > > > use > > > > > > > the > > > > > > > > >> same parameter set. */ > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Buy = Cross( MA(Close - Ref(Close,DaysAgo),Fast), > > > > > > > > >> MA(Close - Ref(Close,DaysAgo),Slow) ); > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Sell = Cross( MA(Close - Ref(Close,DaysAgo),Slow), > > > > > > > > >> MA(Close - Ref(Close,DaysAgo),Fast) ); > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Short = Cross( MA(Close - Ref(Close,DaysAgo),Slow), > > > > > > > > >> MA(Close - Ref(Close,DaysAgo),Fast) ); > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > >> Cover = Cross( MA(Close - Ref(Close,DaysAgo),Fast), > > > > > > > > >> MA(Close - Ref(Close,DaysAgo),Slow) ); > > > > > > > > >> _SECTION_END(); > > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Please note that this group is for discussion between users only. > > To get support from AmiBroker please send an e-mail directly to > SUPPORT {at} amibroker.com > > For NEW RELEASE ANNOUNCEMENTS and other news always check DEVLOG: > http://www.amibroker.com/devlog/ > > For other support material please check also: > http://www.amibroker.com/support.html > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG. > Version: 7.5.524 / Virus Database: 269.23.11/1422 - Release Date: 5/8/2008 5:24 PM >
